Is Propositional Theology PassÉ?

task which is foreign to biblical thought. While the argument comes in different guises, Grenz is typical. He refers to the project of PT as a preoccupation with “biblical summarization” and he views this approach as a consequence of the influence of early modernity on evangelical theologians.²⁰ He also argues that during the Enlightenment there was a strong emphasis on the natural sciences, and this in turn influenced theological methodology. The theologian’s role was viewed in a fashion analogous to that of the scientist, and this led to an overemphasis on theological propositions.²¹

Now, this third criticism makes some interesting observations that to some extent, at least, are not entirely off base. Frame, for example, points out that Hodge made too much of the parallel between theology and the natural sciences.²² But despite these legitimate insights, the argument as stated is not very convincing, for the simple reason that it confuses the truthfulness or legitimacy of a particular approach with its historical origin. One could agree, for the sake of argument, that the project of PT arose during the modern period and still maintain that it is an important part of the task of systematic theology because of its emphasis on the organization and systematization of truth claims found in Scripture.

In summary, I have looked at three common arguments against PT and have maintained that none of them entail giving up this approach to theology. In some cases legitimate concerns have been raised, but these can be accommodated within a propositional approach. But responding to criticism is not enough; can anything be said in favor of PT?

In Support of Propositional Theology

I want to suggest three points that highlight the importance of the propositional approach to theology. First, PT is sustained by the conviction that God’s revelation includes the communication of cognitive truths. Again, I am not saying that cognitive truth is the only thing that the Scriptures communicate, but at the very least, as Ronald Nash states, “some revelation conveys cognitive information.”²³ Because the Christian revelation does include the communication of truths, it follows that such truths can be propositionally formulated, even if somewhat imperfectly.

Second, I would argue that the reflective activities associated with PT, such as summarization and coherence, follow from the Scriptures themselves. For example, Anthony Thiselton points out that 1 Corinthians 15:3-5 reflects a tradition or an early creed “which declares the absolute fundamentals of Christian faith and on which Christian identity … is built.” He points out that such passages make a truth claim concerning the gospel, but also emphasize the dimension of “confession or self-involvement.”²⁴

There is no dichotomy between personal faith and propositional truth. Another example of a summary type statement is 1 Timothy 1:15, one of the “faithful” or “trustworthy” sayings. These summary type statements indicate that the propositionalizing and summarizing activity associated with PT is consistent with the emphasis found in the Scriptures themselves.

Third, and last, it could be argued that the tendency towards abstraction and systematization, which is characteristic of PT, is a result of systematic theology being a normative rather than just a descriptive type of discourse. Descriptive discourse concerns itself with elucidating the practices and beliefs (including the propositional contents) of a given community. Normative discourse, however, tends to be more abstract and systematic because it is concerned with judgments and truth, and has a universal scope. The move towards the more abstract, normative kind of discourse is a phenomenon not just found in Western cultures but is characteristic of many cultures, including the East. Such a move plays a “vital part” when communities seek to establish “non-community specific truths.”²⁵

In conclusion, I have offered reasons why the project of PT is a very important task of systematic theology, and responded to representative criticisms of it. The project of PT maintains that God has spoken, that he has spoken truthfully and in a unified way and that we, as his image bearers, can apprehend and communicate that truth adequately. Consequently, those contemporary movements and theologians (many associated with the “Emerging Church” movement) who are skeptical about or reject PT are, consciously or not, departing from the mainstream of both biblical and evangelical thought, and their pronouncements that PT is passé should themselves be received with a good dose of healthy skepticism.

Josué Pérez (MDiv, Trinity Evangelical Divinity School; PhD, Drew University), Assistant Professor of Biblical Studies and Theology, has been at Talbot since 2004. He is passionate about the importance of sound theology for Christian discipleship and service to the Church and the world. Born in Cuba, Josué has served as pastor of Spanish-speaking congregations, and has published several articles in academic journals.