Alongside the monthly posting of drafts of pieces that are scheduled for publication I hope in future to begin a series of short discussions on themes and topics on which, it seems to me, philosophy can be of some assistance to theology. These will be headed ‘Analysis’, after the philosophy journal of that name, which is devoted to publishing short discussions.
The first three or four (perhaps more) will be on the general theme:
Systematic Theology: Since It Isn’t Broken, We Ought Not To Try To Fix It.
One increasingly meets basic misunderstandings about Reformed systematic theology: of what it is, what it attempts to do, what its limits are, and where its abiding value lies. Proposals that are made for developing new methods in systematic theology would often amount to changing its entire character while retaining the name. These brief discussions will attempt to highlight misunderstandings and to allay some fears. So this is how I hope it’ll go:
Analysis 1, ‘What definitions do and don’t do’, now posted.
Analysis 2, ‘Propositions and Speech Acts’, now posted.
Analysis 3, ‘Biblical and Systematic Theology’, now posted.Papers that have been accepted for publication but have not yet been published will continue be posted on this site each month.
The next Analysis, to be posted in July, will be on Bishop N.T. Wright's account of the ordo salutis, and the next paper will on Samuel Rutherford and Toleration.