Theology 2.0 – Part 3

Today we looked at our professors prolegomena. Stated simply, a prolegomena is just the presuppositions of a theologian. They are typically set out at the beginning so that the reader knows ahead of time from which perspective to expect the following theology will come. His prolegomena is as follows:

A. Triune God

B. As revealed in Scripture

C. As conveyed in a heritage

D. As made real in experience

1. Corporate

2. Individual

Now this does not represent what would be my prolegomena were I setting one forth, but that isn’t really the point. The question I have is about the nature of a prolegomena, the act of laying out one’s presuppositions. Do you think it is necessary for anyone speaking about religious topics to first lay out their presuppositions? Why or why not?

And then if you would like to share what your prolegomena would look like. I am very interested in seeing where my readers are. Your prolegomena does not have to follow the above format and can include whatever you would like it to. What are your basic assumptions when you begin thinking about or talking about religious topics, especially theology?

Sound off in the comments.

NOTE: If you have not already you can read Part 1 and Part 2 in this series.


Leave a Comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s