# Non-systematic theology Following Jesus is *not* intellectually demanding, and Jesus places a straightforward and easy path for us ([Matthew 11:28-30](https://biblehub.com/matthew/11.htm)). - Theology, however, is simply a branch of "[applied philosophy](philosophy.md)" toward knowing God. - The higher the theological thought, the closer the study compares to raw philosophy. - Many theologians don't agree that their views are philosophical in nature, but that's because their definition of "philosophy" is often different from the formal definition. We all need *some* form of theology. - Without the [logical reasoning](logic.md) of philosophy, we'd have nothing but [sentiment](mind-feelings.md). - [Personality](people-personality.md) and [culture](people-culture.md) will make each theology a little different, but God takes care of His people ([Matthew 18:12-14](https://biblehub.com/matthew/18.htm)). - "Theology", as a word, has two possible perspectives, which profoundly affects *how* far we'll need it: 1. Self-defined [understanding](understanding.md) of God, as we perceive and conclude it in our minds. 2. God-given understanding, since we have at least a limited ability to come to understanding of God's wisdom ourselves ([2 Timothy 2:7](https://biblehub.com/2_timothy/2-7.htm)). - Often, without extra thought, we often neglect any deeper thought and permit theological ideals that sit within worship music: - [Time and chronological sequence](standards-datetime.md) doesn't exist in eternity. - [God](theology-god.md) never changes. - God will heal all [pain](hardship.md) in this life. Most Christians who go to [college](education.md) must read very dense books called "systematic theology" by intelligent people. - These books are in the spirit of the ancient Greek tradition and imitations of books such as Aristotle's "Metaphysics". - A writer's systematic theology will unpack absolutely *every* domain of Christian [understanding](understanding.md) possible on a subject. Unless someone [legitimately enjoys](philosophy.md) the deep exploration of thought, a systematic theology is an utter waste of time. - Within a few minutes of an illiterate person's soul leaving their body, they'll have vastly more accuracy about this life and the next than the wisest possible theologian could ever hope to discover. ## Theology's risks There is a subtle risk to philosophical inquiry. [Philosophy does have its uses](philosophy.md), but philosophy is the exercise of the mind. Within the [mind](understanding.md), [logic](logic.md) is inherently exclusive (i.e., divides things out, separates for a purpose), while our [emotions](mind-feelings.md) tend to unite unrelated elements. - Emotions can definitely be exclusive, but they are the primary thing that makes connections across seemingly unrelated elements. - For example, we use the language "cold-hearted" as an association with the temperature of cold, but that is a strictly [patterned](symbols.md) association across feelings. - Logic *can* merge ideas across a larger domain, but it does it at the exclusion of other aspects. - For example, saying, "the man is in a windowless room, so he is not outside, meaning he can't see the sun right now" is also indicating "a man can only be in one place at a time", "a room is not outside", "the sun only shines through rooms with windows", and so on. This can often omit edge cases (e.g., if the room had a gaping hole in it). Excessive use of a rational discipline like philosophy risks dividing something that shouldn't be divided, or should have been divided differently. - Beyond falsehood, there is a *much* greater risk for the Christian of their analysis and reasoning coming at the cost of [unloving](people-love.md) behavior. Typically, philosophers have to use many words to get their extremely in-depth thoughts across, and many of them don't demarcate (or don't communicate) whether their conclusions are clear facts or experimentation they're only partly [certain](understanding-certainty.md) about. This risk becomes proportionally more likely as the words increase. Philosophers and theologians are seeking mysteries (and often finding them), but can't prove whether those mysteries are precisely true, since there's no real way to [scientifically](science.md) test spiritual beings or God Himself. Intellectual understanding doesn't define the fullness of what we can understand, and finding wisdom in all the talk requires combining both logic (which separates) and feelings (which unite). - This needs someone to possess a [well-lived life](people-goodlife.md), then trusting their "gut". - Experiencing a fulfilling life takes decades, involves living a lifestyle that *doesn't* involve sitting quietly for long periods, and will frequently *not* guarantee full [certainty](understanding-certainty.md) on anything. Therefore, the smartest people in the world have difficulties with holistically knowing things. - Their quest for truth is often the quest for [meaning](meaning.md) through [thorough understanding](understanding.md) until they find certainty. ## Conventional (secular) branches These are the broad branches that most philosophers articulate. - [Since the 19th century](philosophy.md), philosophy has [deconstructively trended](people-trends.md) to where the branches themselves become subjected to endless debate. Our minds are framed on [stories](stories-why.md), meaning that *any* basis of understanding becomes the foundation for all the rest of the branches: - For example, someone who defines [beauty](values-quality.md) as the purpose of all existence will then form the rest as subordinate to beauty. - Metaphysics is an inherently beautiful thing. - Ethical things are that which is beautiful, and unethical things are ugly. - Epistemology is our understanding of the beautiful. - As another example, someone who defines [order or math](math.md) as the purpose of all existence will form the rest as a type of order. - Metaphysics is an inherently ordered system. - Ethics is that which enhances order, and it is wrong to increase chaos. - Epistemology is our understanding to the degree it is ordered. - In this case, the framing is built solely on the belief that God designed man and the universe for the express purpose of having a relationship with man. - Metaphysics is created for man, with God's involvement being part of it. - Ethics is what God desires, and sin is anything that moves against what God desires. - Epistemology is our understanding as it pertains to what God has made. ### [Metaphysics](reality.md) God's purpose for the universe is to have a relationship with man, so the entire scope of metaphysics is encapsulated under Teleology (see below) ### [Epistemology](values.md) and [logic](logic.md) God designed [values and order](values.md) in our minds as an intentional discrepancy to [nature itself](reality.md). - Within [our essence](humanity.md), we have a beautifully-constructed design that fits itself into a series of "[layers](https://gainedin.site/layers/)", traveling upward as a [network](https://gainedin.site/networks/) from subconscious animal reaction all the way to advanced, higher-order thinking. - Within nature, then, we create a desire to "[fix](https://adequate.life/fix/)" the inherent chaos that always floats within nature, and it represents as [creativity](mind-creativity.md). - Since God designed us, He directly [speaks](language.md) to us through [stories](stories-why.md) (including [bias](mind-bias.md)), held together by [symbolic associations](symbols.md). This entire design was made by God, and is an implementation of how He Himself creates that allows us to see a microcosm of Him through our actions. - God Himself is complete order, and He created nature as a chaos-developing entity that needs "pruning", and He built us to [do the same](creations.md) (i.e., tending to His Garden). - From our point of view, though, God lives in the [Unknown](unknown.md), since most of His qualities are hidden from us, for a wide variety of reasons. All aspects of order can be defined by [logic](logic.md) (and [math](math.md), when more articulately constructed), but there are always components that God designed that surpass the constraints of [language](language.md). - Even seemingly "fixed" domains like [justice](morality-justice.md) and [scientific inquiry](science.md) are bound to presumptions of God's order and predefined [rules](people-rules.md). - Often, we can only use [our feelings](mind-feelings.md) to even remotely examine the periphery of our [understanding](understanding.md). The above-stated values, including [feelings](mind-feelings.md), exist only in our minds, but that in no way diminishes its significance when a relationship with God is the ultimate purpose for our existence. - However, by removing the Creator and only defining its structure, our inherently social characteristics will make our mind-based values less significant. - Any diminution of these values in a community is a consequence of sin (see Harmatiology). ### [Aesthetics](art.md) Our understanding of [art](art.md) and [beauty](values-quality.md) is a secondary byproduct of God's design for us to have a relationship with Him. - We are, therefore, perpetually bound to specific [universal characteristics](humanity-universals.md) of [quality](values-quality.md), no matter how far we remove Him from the equation. - Any effort to remove from the standards established by God will invariably [trend](people-trends.md) toward deconstruction in each person's mind. - However, to conform to those standards will mean a person's trend will stop at its apex and change into a dialectically superior form with the later convergence of a second trend. ### [Ethics](morality.md) The entire scope of [morality](morality.md) is encapsulated *much* more in detail through the conventionally-labeled branch of Theology, but more particularly Harmatiology, Soteriology, and Orthopraxy (see below). As a consequence of Christ, though, [all other religions](religion.md) are insufficient by comparison, all "[stock wisdom](values-stock.md)" is inferior to God's, and [all philosophies](glossary-philosophy.md) that don't acknowledge or conform to the God of the Bible is a waste of time. ## Conventional (Christian) branches (i.e., "theology") Finally, these are the formal groups defined in most systematic theologies, subcategorized by how they most appropriately fit: - [Christology, Paterology, and Pneumatology](theology-god.md) - [Theological anthropology](theology-godandman.md) - [Bibliology](theology-bible.md) - [Harmatiology](theology-sins.md) - [Soteriology](theology-salvation.md) - [Teleology](theology-completion.md) - [Eschatology](theology-end.md) - [Demonology and Angelology](theology-angels.md) - [Ecclesiology](theology-church.) - [Mariology](theology-mary.md) - [Missiology](spiritual-exercises-evangelism.md)