Throwaway Theology (PhD Edit)

Facebook

From my PhD this is section four from Methodology of Practical Theology: Methodology: Pattison and Woodward

Other twice updated post, from other blog. HTML linking is not working..again.

Four, it is unsystematic, throwaway theology that constantly needs to reinvent its tasks and methods.[1]  In my mind, this can work with certain strands of traditional theology, which Pattison and Woodward state are unchangeable and unchallengeable.[2]  This is so, since although for example, Reformed and Roman Catholic theological systems[3] have certain dogmas that make them what they are, human reaction to these systems will often vary.  Therefore, as a moderately conservative, Reformed theologian, even though I reason there are certain theological essentials[4] that I bring into my theodicy, the human reaction to these doctrines shall not always be the same,[5] and at the same time how the theology is understood and expressed may not be identical in different eras[6] even though the essential doctrines remain the same.  Calvinist, Millard J. Erickson (1994) comments that doctrines need not be maintained precisely with the same form of expression that they were in Biblical times.[7]  Erickson also points out that not all other sources of knowledge and truth need to be excluded from Christian teaching.[8]   Scriptural truth revealed from God remains the same, but practical and empirical findings can alter how certain theological dogma are implemented with a particular society, group, or individual.[9]  Jerry W. McCant (1991) provides the idea that New Testament doctrines were definitely presupposed within,[10] but the doctrines are not systematic or fully developed.[11]  I reason there are at times clearly defined Biblical doctrines,[12] but McCant is correct that the systemizing of these doctrines did not take place.[13]  This systemization[14] would be a task of systematic theology and philosophy of religion.  Practical and empirical theology can provide opportunities to evaluate practically systematic theology and philosophy of religion in regard to the problem of evil.[15]

---

[1] Pattison and Woodward (2000)(2007: 14).

[2] Pattison and Woodward (2000)(2007: 14).

[3] And Eastern Orthodox as well.

[4] Reformed methodology which be discussed in Chapter 3.

[5] Nor will be the various experiences of persons be the same.  Therefore these differing experiences need to be theological considered, as Cartledge points out.  Cartledge (2003: 249). 

[6] Erickson (1994: 37).

[7] Erickson (1994: 37).

[8] Erickson (1994: 37).  Including studies in science and medicine.

[9] Pattison and Woodward (2000)(2007: 14).

[10] McCant (1991: 471).

[11] McCant (1991: 471).

[12] McCant (1991: 471). 

[13] McCant (1991: 471).

[14] McCant (1991: 471).

[15] Pattison and Woodward (2000)(2007: 14).

CARTLEDGE, MARK J. (2002) Charismatic Glossolalia, Hants, England,

Ashgate Publishing Company.

CARTLEDGE, MARK J. (2003) Practical Theology, Carlisle, Cumbria, England, Paternoster Press.

ERICKSON, MILLARD (1994) Christian Theology, Grand Rapids, Baker Book House. 

ERICKSON, MILLARD (2003) What Does God Know and When Does He Know It?, Grand Rapids, Zondervan. 

MCCANT, JERRY W. (1991) ‘The Development of Doctrine in the New Testament’, in David Alan Black and David S. Dockery (eds.), New Testament Criticism and Interpretation, Grand Rapids, Zondervan Publishing House.

WOODWARD, JAMES AND STEPHEN PATTISON (2000)(2007)(eds.), The Blackwell Reader in Pastoral and Practical Theology, Oxford, Blackwell Publishing.