Can you point me in the right direction?

[Jon_]

I've heard a lot about systematic theology...I mean people bringing this subject up a lot. I would love to learn about it. Is the book that you recommended pretty deep? In other words, is it geared for the fellow new to the theology?

I recommend Dr. Robert L. Reymond's A New Systematic Theology of the Christian Faith. It's about as light as a systematic gets: 1000 pages.

Also, I have been interested in presuppositionalism lately. This looks like a great apologetic system. Have any of you heard of it?

That's heavy reading if you plan to get into apologetics. And it requires a really solid theology first. I tried to study apologetics before I had a solid understanding of theology and it really ties you in knots. I would spend some time studying theology first. After that, read A Christian View of Men and Things, Christian Philosophy, Language and Theology, The Philosophy of Science and the Belief in God, God's Hammer, and Historiography: Secular and Religious. Clark is the presuppositionalist. Don't bother with Van Til, Frame, Bahsen, or any of their contemporary followers. Those guys are parapresuppositionalists. You might also consider Vincent Cheung, but just ignore his stuff on occasionalism and "biblical invectives."

Soli Deo Gloria

Jon

 

[heymikey80]

Somewhere on-web I remembered: "Fire and Ice -- The Puritans"

http://www.puritansermons.com

If you want to go deeper in thought and structure, the Puritans have a large grasp there.

Also, there's a book with a rather Reformed view that may benefit ya. It has a small glitch that caused a big row long ago ... don't count it out, though. The problem is more subtle, and our problems seem to be much more serious in theology today:

The Marrow of Modern Divinity: http://www.mountzion.org/text/marrow/marrow.html

 

[SOTK]

Thanks again, everybody! I have loads of sites and books to look at now! That should keep me busy for quite some time!

 

[rmwilliamsll]

Don't bother with Van Til, Frame, Bahsen, or any of their contemporary followers. Those guys are parapresuppositionalists

this really bothers me.
for instance, Frame's set on the knowledge of God is extraordinary. why is it that to build up someone, we often find it reasonable and expedient to tear down someone else?
curious human trait.

 

[Jon_]

this really bothers me.
for instance, Frame's set on the knowledge of God is extraordinary. why is it that to build up someone, we often find it reasonable and expedient to tear down someone else?
curious human trait.

I own and have read Frame's Apologetics to the Glory of God, Doctrine of the Knowledge of God, and Doctrine of God, and find them all to be littered with errors, hence my comment.

Soli Deo Gloria

Jon