What are the best books i need to read if i want to understand theology?
>inb4 the bible
aside from that
>>7863285
the catechism
>>7863285
Theology for Beginners is good, reading that right now (assuming you're primarily interested in Catholic theology, which I am)
Augustine is a good option. Confessions and/or City of God.
if you want to understand Catholic/Christian theology more in depth, here is what I'd recommend, just based on what I've encountered as a novice
Plato, Aristotle, Augustine, Aquinas
if you want to get into Protestant theology then John Calvin is the big guy, he builds on Augustine
Christian existensialism, Kierkegaard
a basic primer for general Christianity is Lewis
but what about plotinus? and are there any avalible texts of his aside from the penguin annotated enneads?
>>7863285
The Quran, brother.
>>7863285
The Bible, The Book of Mormon, Pearl of Great Price and Doctrine & Covenants are everything you will ever need.
>>7863285
Get a book on historical theology (I like McGrath's) so you can understand how the various doctrines developed from the Church Fathers through the millenia. This will also help you to understand the schisms and divisions that occured throughout.
>>7863285
>What are the best books i need to read if i want to understand theology?
Depends whose of course.
>aside from that
You don't even need to read it entirely to go to theology assuming you know the basics, unless for specific questions. All of New Testament, Genesis, Job, Exodus, Elijah, Ezekiel.
Frank Sheed is fantastic. To Know Christ Jesus is another of his books you should check out.
Also, you need philosophy. Anything by Ed Feser is a good place to start.
>>7863285
You don't
Treatise on the gods by Mencken
>>7863285
So you just want Christian theology?
>>7863726
Tell me more about him. I trust your good taste based on Feser.
Also I'll update my Catholic reading list chart one of these days, Feser and Belloc deserve getting on it.
Summa theologica
Summa contra genitiles
>>7863869
Oh and The Church History by Eusebius and On Christianity and Culture by Eliot
>>7863285
Those self-help books on how to make a lot of money
>>7863338
I can't get back to Lewis after even much better introductory texts. His arguments just aren't convincing if you know a bit about philosophy. I liked him in high school.
This.
Read Kierkegaard. But start with the greeks. Kiekegaard makes use of Kant, Schelling, and Hegel.
K. OP, many of these authors are well established and brilliant theologians. But if you have never delved into the world of theology, and want something that actually explains what theology is and not get absolutley lost, try Grudem's Systematic Theology. We used in my seminary class, and it's concise, separates thought very well, and is written in modern, clear language. I love most of the other works, but damn reading archaic language is taxing on the attention sometimes.
>>7864530
We have priests here?
Is it some Kung/Rahner heresy tier?
>>7863285
Kierkegaard, if I spelled that right, is very good at Christian theology
is theology taken seriously in academia?
>>7864530
He asked about theology in general, not just systematic. And with it being bigger than not only the Bible itself, but many of these other works put together, I'm not sure if it's a beginner's work. Decent writing and crucial for "endgame" theological understanding, but start with >>7863332 or>>7863338 before going for textbooks.
>>7864560
I'm a religion major, but no. We basically just talk about how Muslims didndunuthin
>>7864563
Seriously?
>>7864556
pic related is pinnacle of modern protestant thought. Catholic, orthodox, and mormons 100% BTFO
>>7864560
depends, I have four stem professors who attend my church and they are all brilliant. On the world-scale and in more international stem communities no it is not
>bill nye
>black science retard
>>7864530
>not wanting to increase your literary stamina by reading entire volumes in a sitting
wtf are plebs doing in seminary
>>7864610
I'm so disappointed that I never felt a calling for priesthood.
I basically already live like a monk, reading and studying. It's a massively fulfilling life. I'll settle for law or like my now famous godfather become a priest at the age of 35.
>>7864640
whys he famous?
>>7864626
nigga I don't know, the text doesn't examine philosophy as an entity, it "systematizes" what we understand about God. In that sense, it creates its own answers to some philosophical questions, but i'm not well read enough on greek thought to answer what you asked
>>7864661
Students flock to his mass, he leads the association of young Catholics. So pilgrimages, mass, theology of the body and such.
>>7864670
The problem with theology without the Aristotelian framework is that it doesn't connect reality and God and always makes it more or less fideist.
Aristotle is the link between faith and reason you otherwise don't have.
>>7864640
if you join a good sized local congregation, go for a while, and express interest in going to seminary, they might help pay if you enlist as an intern. Ministerial aid is literally everywhere, just gotta not be autistic in your interviews
>>7864687
I'm not American and I'm not a protestant.
I'll connect theology, philosophy and law (student atm) when the time comes in my book about ethical questions, human rights and Aristotle.
Also if there's no actual call, going to a seminary is just bad faith.
>>7864685
dunno, just looked up fideism, a lot of what we believe is only because of faith, so if the argument you are making is that we need something else, I'm not sure how solid your understanding of the Christian faith is. We as humans like reconciliation of ideas, and our means of propagating salvation by helping bridge the gaps for unbelievers is good, but ultimately faith is the last link for the things we as humans will not ever understand.I do agree philosophy is necessary in the sense of what we and develop in terms of human thought, but theology is really just the language created by us to understand the underlying figure that is the attributes of God. THEOlogy is just that, studying god, and deriving doctrine from that, philosophy can help us connect ideas, but in no way is it wholly required for the primary purpose of what theology sets out to accomplish
>>7864712
>dunno, just looked up fideism, a lot of what we believe is only because of faith, so if the argument you are making is that we need something else, I'm not sure how solid your understanding of the Christian faith is.
It's pretty good. I've been reading about it for 4 years now in various intensity and my dad has a theology degree amongst other things. But faith isn't absolute in the way that you believe just because you do. There's at least indications or a coherent system with it.
>We as humans like reconciliation of ideas, and our means of propagating salvation by helping bridge the gaps for unbelievers is good, but ultimately faith is the last link for the things we as humans will not ever understand.
It is the last link, but the chain is longer than the end of it. Everything makes sense with Christianity, but Christianity doesn't make sense without some other concepts that point to it and explain the world in Christian terms. For example without it you can't get out of materialism. So mathematical platonism, monads, teleology, virtue ethics, immaterial solutions to mind body problem and so on.
>I do agree philosophy is necessary in the sense of what we and develop in terms of human thought, but theology is really just the language created by us to understand the underlying figure that is the attributes of God.
God can be thought of outside of theology, hence why the exploration brings you to theology.
>THEOlogy is just that, studying god, and deriving doctrine from that, philosophy can help us connect ideas, but in no way is it wholly required for the primary purpose of what theology sets out to accomplish
I think you can't have a coherent theological system without philosophy. So you can have both mysticism and teleology working together.
>>7864721
It may be a very non denominational book, but I'm just careful with theology because a small wrong can lead to a massive one.
>>7863285
Bart Ehrman's Introduction to the New Testament is pretty good.
>>7864795
what makes it good?
>>7864836
Its comprehensive, well sourced, and representative of modern scholarship.
>>7864889
Does it mean it's from the Christian perspective?
>>7865255
Bart Ehrman is a chair at UNC. He is unfortunately an atheistic agnostic (the story of his unconversion is rather sad as it resulted from his attempt to write a paper explaining evil in the world and failing utterly). That said he was raised in a very religious background and offers a very deep understanding of the new testament and gospel of thomas. Some people have (rightfully) criticized him of writing pop religious books, but this is purely an advanced undergraduate primer on scholarship re: the new testament
>>7865255
http://www.amazon.com/The-New-Testament-Historical-Introduction/dp/0199757534
http://bookzz.org/dl/1106739/4e273e
>>7864889
do you have any other recs?
