God's Existence in Systematic Theology.

God's Existence in Systematic Theology

A. Existence of God

Works on categorical or systematic theology mainly begin accompanying the doctrine of Deity.

The prevailing belief has always recognized this as the ultimate logical process and still points in

the same direction. Generally, even those whose fundamental principles would seem to demand

another arrangement, persist in the traditional practice.

Skilled are good reasons for starting with the doctrine of Almighty if we proceed on the

arrogance that theology is the systematized information of God, of whom, through whom, and to

whom, are all things. Instead of being startled that Dogmatics should start with the principle of

God, we might well wish it to be a study of Demon throughout all its ramifications, fresh to the

end. Really, that is accurately what it is destined to be, though only the first locus handles God

straightforwardly, while the succeeding ones treat of Him more obliquely.

We start the study of theology with two presuppositions:

1. That God lies, and

2. That He has revealed Himself in His divine Word.

And for that reason, it is not impossible for us at the beginning of the study of God. We can

count on His telling, in order to determine what He has revealed concerning Himself and His

connection to His creations.

Attempts have been made in the course of time to distribute the material of Dogmatics in this

manner as to exhibit clearly that it is, not merely in one position, but in its whole, a study of God.

This was approved by the application of the trinitarian method, which organizes the subject

matter of Dogmatics under the three headings of:

1. The Father,

2. The Son, and

3. The Holy Ghost.

That method was used in some of the earlier orderly works, was revived to favor by Hegel, and

can still be seen in Martensen’s "Righteous Dogmatics." A similar attempt was made by

Breckenridge when he divided the subject matter of Dogmatics into:

1. The Knowledge of Deity Objectively Considered, and

2. The Knowledge of Deity Subjectively Considered.

Neither of these can be named very successful. Until the beginning of the nineteenth century, the

practice was almost general to start the study of Dogmatics with the principle of God; but a

change came about under the influence of Schleiermacher, who sought to safeguard the

controlled character of doctrine by the introduction of a new method. The religious knowledge of

man was substituted for the Bible as the source of belief. Faith in Scripture as a valid revelation

of Daemon was discredited, and human intuition based on man’s own emotional or rational fear

became the standard of conscientious thought. Mythology gradually took the place of Divinity as

the object of theology. Man ceased to perceive the knowledge of God as something that was

given in Doctrine and began to pride himself on being a seeker after God. In the course of time,

it became quite common to speak of man’s finding God, as if man always discovered Him; and

all discovery that was made in the process was dignified with the name of “disclosure.” God

appeared at the end of a logic, or as the last link in a chain of reasoning, or as the capstone of a

building of human thought. Under these circumstances, it was but natural that some should

regard it as absurd to begin Dogmatics with the study of God. It is rather surprising that so many,

despite their subjectivism, continued the traditional arrangement.

Some, however, sensed the discrepancy and struck out in a different way. Schleiermacher’s

principal work is devoted to a study and analysis of the religious knowledge and of the doctrines

therein implicit. He does not deal with the doctrine of God as a unit, but only in fragments, and

concludes his work with a discussion of the Trinity.

His starting point is anthropological rather than theological. Some of the intermediary

theologians were influenced to such an extent by Schleiermacher that they naturally began their

dogmatic treatises with the study of man. Even in the present day, this method is occasionally

followed. A striking example of it is seen in the work of O. A. Curtis on "The Christian Faith."

This starts with the doctrine of man and concludes with the doctrine of God. Ritschlian theology

might seem to call for still another starting point since it finds the objective revelation of God,

not in the Bible as the divinely inspired Word, but in Christ as the Founder of the Kingdom, and

considers the idea of the Kingdom of God as the central and all-dominating concept of theology.

However, Ritschlian dogmaticians, such as Herrmann, Haering, and Kaftan, follow, at least in an

official way, the usual order. Though there are various theologians who in their everything begin

the discussion of dogmatics proper with the doctrine of Christ or of His redemptive work. T. B.

Strong differentiates between theology and Christian dogma, defines the latter as “the expression

and analysis of the Revelation of Jesus Christ,” and makes the incarnation the controlling

concept throughout his Manual of Theology.