The Value of Historical Theology

The Positive Benefits of HT: Running with the Big (Theological) Dogs

Until now our consideration of the use of HT has been mostly negative, in the sense of deflecting false claims. But I believe that continuing study of HT benefits all Christians—and especially pastors—positively in at least two ways. The first occurs by toning up our theological muscles through working out with the most intellectually powerful thinkers that the Christian tradition has to offer. The second way is through the development of a salutary historical method itself, which I believe pays rich dividends for the thoughtful minister of the Gospel.

Pumping Some Intellectual Iron

As I mentioned earlier, one of the great joys of studying HT is the intellectual stimulation of hanging out with the brightest and best of the Christian tradition. This is not only fun but helps us to develop ways of thinking and approaches to problems that we otherwise probably would not.

We can benefit enormously when we read the great debates between the heretics and the orthodox of yesteryear, for it is often true that these struggles were carried out between intellectual titans on both sides of the issue, the likes of whom we do not often see today. Just being in the company of such thinkers cannot but raise our own level of thinking. We can spar vicariously with adversaries tougher than the ones we face in our day–to–day ministries. Now, we rightly laud the brilliance of Augustine and Athanasius and Calvin, but we sometimes do not stop to think about how formidable their opponents often were. They simply do not make heretics like they used to!

For example, if one wants to see a really high–level denial of some of the cardinal doctrines of orthodoxy, one can scarcely find a more worthy opponent than Faustus Socinus (1539–1604). Here we encounter a mind well versed in the biblical languages, classical literature, logic, philosophy, exegesis, and theology, all pressed into the service of overturning the historic doctrines of the faith! If one can deal with Socinus’s arguments against the Trinity, the deity of Christ, penal substitution, or God’s foreknowledge of future contingents (our future free choices), then one can lay waste to the ruminations of the Watchtower or of “Open Theism” (the teaching that God does not know with certainty everything that will happen in the future) without shifting out of first gear.

There is also a sense in which intellectual honesty would have us deal with the arguments against the faith in their strongest form. And we should not fear to do so, because orthodoxy is sufficiently robust to stand against the worst that heterodoxy can dish out.

So, then, if we are to learn to think with such acuity that we can deal with the most formidable attacks against the faith, we must run with the big dogs—we must face those attacks squarely in the writings of the more intellectually nimble heretics of a bygone age. And we must also study carefully the impressive and formidable productions of the orthodox in countermanding them. Socinus may indeed have been brilliant, but John Owen was at least his equal and had the added advantage of arguing for the truth!

The writings of some of these theological greats may be tough going; one does not bench press five hundred pounds on the first trip to the gym. But given a consistent workout regimen of reading and carefully studying the writings of these powerhouses, one will soon enough be able to heft arguments of considerable intellectual weight. Such intellectual weightlifting should be a part of every pastor’s ongoing theological training program. After all, fitness for ministry consists more in theological and spiritual growth than in programming or management trends.