Which is a better approach to theology: being a spet — an expert in one field, like “Soteriology” — OR being a Jack of all Trades, reading widely and learning broadly about all aspects of theology?
You know what they say, “Jack of all Trades – Master of None” but is this really bad in theology?
Let me ask it another way, I believe that theological ideas interlock with one another. It is kind of like an Excel Spreadsheet: If you make an adjustment in one field, numerous other changes result throughout the entire table. Theology is like that. So can we really trust the theology of someone who is an expert in one category of theology, but relatively ignorant of others?
I agree. The term theology is vague enough to be a jack of all trades type subject.
A person cannot master theology. The only master of theology is God…haha
I have never though of this. Loved the post.
Swanny I like what you about mastering theology. Can anyone really master it? I say probably not. We can interpret the scriptures in lots of different ways. We will only find the true meaning once we are with God in Heaven.
New subscriber!
Adam,
Thanks for commenting, and thanks for subscribing. As I usually do with those who comment, I am also adding you to my Google Reader. Looking forward to what you have to say!
Is theology our Asherah pole (http://goo.gl/uu6EA)?
Do we understand Jesus through our belief system or do we gain a better understanding of Jesus through relating to Him? Or, do we argue that relating to Jesus IS our theology? I hate circle dancing…
My take: it is the theology, doctrine, and religious practices of Christianity that have become the offending hand.
These are fantastic questions. I do think that sometimes both the Bible and our theology become idols and substitutes for actual an relationship with Jesus.
But we can’t simply dump theology, can we, for that in itself is a theological move.
This is an interesting discussion. I know there has been a move (by some theologians) recently to broaden their perspective. It’s called being a generalist. I tend to see myself as a generalist.
I don’t think it’s bad to be a spet. The problem with being a spet today is the fractured nature of the church. If someone is a spet in conversation/community with other spets, it could be very beneficial. But, since Americans tend to be very independent, this benefit is often lost.
-Alan
Alan,
I like the idea of being a spet in a community, but today, it seems we call it “seminary.” I don’t know what your experience is at SEBTS, but it seems that the community of spets found in some seminaries are missing some essential elements to truly connect with the world and mission. I’m not sure how to get this into a seminary setting though. Any ideas?
Jeremy,
The seminary setting (for all the good that seminary education can provide) is an artificial community. I do not think that a seminary can provide the type of “community of spets” that the church needs. The only way (as I see it) that a “community of spets” can help the church is when they are part of a community that is learning from one another (including from those who are not seen as “spets”), serving others together with one another, and proclaiming the good news together with one another. Typically, “spets” (or “generalists” for that matter) tend to congregate with other educated theologians. So, unfortunately, most theologians (spets or generalists) speak from and into a context that does not include most Christians. (By the way, this is true of many pastors also. Their context is different from many of the people listening to their teaching/sermons, which makes their teaching/sermons less affective.)
-Alan
Alan,
Have you ever seen a community of spets such as the one you describe? I do not think I have.
There are a few “spets” among the brothers and sisters that I hang out with. But, no, I’ve never seen a community of spets like I described.
-Alan