Stephen the Deacon, or Why study systematic and historical theology?
Today, Jan 10, 2013, as we are having at AIIAS Seminary our First Historical-Theological department Fellowship dinner, I'll preach one of my shortest sermons, or even sermonets, based on the longest sermon recorded in the Bible.
This long sermon is found in the book of Acts ch. 7 - it's the sermon preached by Stephen, who approaches the Scriptures from the perspective of systematic and historical theology. It is interesting that the 70 weeks prophecy doesn't end up with the cross - it ends up three and a half years later, with the death of the outstanding systematic and historical theology.
In his sermon Stephen gives a brief overview to the entire history of the Israelites. At the closing section of his speech he talks of the tabernacle (v. 44) that the Lord instructed Moses to build, and of the magnificent temple built by Solomon (v. 47). Then, as a true historical theologian observing both prophecies and times, he turns to the real Temple which is in heaven: v. 49. It is in this context that he rebukes the Jews for unbelief, for persecuting the prophets, for breaking the law as they rebelled against God and His prophets.
Finally, in v. 55 he shares a vision of the current status of the Heavenly Sanctuary: the Son of Man standing by the right side of God, and he repeats it in v. 56. At this point the Jews could not keep their stones any longer - they rushed to kill him.
Stephen is certainly a biblical theologian, a true OT scholar. But he's also a systematic theologian. As he systematically analyzes the biblical patterns, he arrives to the conclusion that the rejection and the death of the Messiah was foretold in the Bible. He's also a historical theologian - he approaches the Bible as the narrative that develops in history.
Being systematic and historical theologian helps Stephan to see in the Bible what others failed to see: the gradual building of the entire history toward the coming of the Son of Man. He's talking to the experts in the OT - who were nevertheless blind, as they refused to see the big picture of the Bible that an honest systematician Stephen displays. But not only that - he's not just talking about some idea that the biblical scholars have overlooked - he's saying that those events have taken place historically, just before their eyes - and they didn't recognize it. Being great OT theologians they failed to be diligent students of historical theology. They didn't learn from their history, neither did they learn of its dynamic character, failing to notice the significance of the times they were privileged to live in.
Being a good systematic and historical theologian Stephen, no doubt, knew that Jesus Christ was now ministering at the Heavenly Sanctuary. But it is not this knowledge but the experiential vision of Jesus Christ standing at the right hand of God that crowns the theological presentation of Stephen. It is experiencing Jesus Christ in the Heavenly Sanctuary that gives Stephen both courage and strength to finish his theological discussion with the arguments that utterly infuriated the Jews. It is this vision of the living Christ watching over his, Stephen's life, and death, that made Stephen the most outstanding systematic and historical theologian.
To conclude: Why systematic theology? Why historical theology? Why study those?
First, it opens up the profound messages otherwise unseen in the Bible: it is a systematic approach that allowed Stephan to come to his conclusions that were bigger and more precious than life itself.
Second, historical theology opened his eyes on what otherwise remained hidden to other theologians: the Great Controversy. There are many mysteries in the history, and we can only see those in their true light as we approach them from the perspective of the Great Controversy - in other words from the perspective of the historical theology.
Finally, the true systematic and historical theologian is to seek for the personal encounter, personal relationship, personal vision of the Lord Jesus Christ. It is not enough for the historical theologian to be an academician - he/she must also be a visionary, a person of prayer, looking up to the Heavenly Sanctuary not just for the sake of the doctrine, but for the sake of the vision of living and loving Christ.
Being a Seminary instructor for many years I have seen too many times how students who grow academically fail to grow spiritually. Often it ends up very sadly for them and for the Church that supported them. Seminary is not just a place of an academic integrity, academic excellence, academic development: Pharisees and Sadducees mastered this area, but it profited them little. Seminary is a place where we are to develop spiritually, a place where we seek the presence and the power of God just as much - and even more eagerly - as we are seeking an academic excellence. Each student is to decide for himself - what he/she has to do in order to balance his academic life with the spiritual pursuit.