The Truth About God The Father
Part 03 Theology Proper The Study of God the Father

Theology proper should begin with some proper Scriptures.

That all the people of the earth may know that the LORD is God, and that there is none else. 1Kings 8:60

Who is like unto the LORD our God, who dwelleth on high, Who humbleth himself to behold the things that are in heaven, and in the earth!
Psalm 113:5-6

O taste and see that the LORD is good: blessed is the man that trusteth in him. Psalm 34:8

Unto thee it was shewed, that thou mightest know that the LORD he is God; there is none else beside him.... Know therefore this day, and consider it in thine heart, that the LORD he is God in heaven above, and upon the earth beneath: there is none else.
Deuteronomy 4:35,39

I am the LORD, and there is none else, there is no God beside me: I girded thee, though thou hast not known me:... That they may know from the rising of the sun, and from the west, that there is none beside me. I am the LORD, and there is none else. Isaiah 45:5-6

Theology Proper is designated 'Proper' to distinguish this study from the larger use of the word Theology. It is thus narrowed to just the study of Theos. literally the study of God, but such is not by any means narrow. Again, the second part of the term, ology comes from the word logos, and means a “word, a discourse, a doctrine, a teaching, a matter under discussion, a thing spoken of or talked about, also the mental faculty of thinking, meditating, or reasoning about” Again, the English word science, cannot capture the depth of ology in Theology, nor can the English word study. Ergo, Theology Proper shall be genuine Theology and it shall be thorough.
A legitimate beginning of such a topic might be framed in a question.
Where did God come from?
In a creation debate of years gone by Kent Hovind answered the question “Where did God come from?” with great finesse as follows:

The question where did God come from assumes, obviously it displays, that you are thinking of the wrong God, because the God of the Bible is not effected by time, space, or matter. If he is effected by time, space, and matter, then obviously he is not God. Time, space, and matter is what we call a continuum; all of them have to come into existence in the same instant. Because if there were matter and no space, where would you put it? If there were matter and space and no time, when would you put it?
You cannot have time, space, and matter independently, they have to come into existence simultaneously. The Bible answers that in ten words, “In the beginning..” there is time, “God. Created the heaven...” there is space, “and the earth,” there is matter. So there you have time, space, and matter, created. It is a trinity of trinities, because you know time is past, present, future, space has length, width, and height, and matter has solid, liquid and gas. You have a trinity of trinities created instantaneously, and the God who created them has to be outside of them.
If he is limited by time, he is not God. The god who created this computer is not inside the computer, he is not running around in there changing the numbers on the screen. The God who created this universe is outside of the universe. He is above it, outside it, beyond it, through it...he is unaffected by it. So in the concept that a spiritual force cannot have any effect on a material body... well then I guess you would have to explain to me things like emotions, and love, and hatred, and envy, and jealousy, and rationality.
I mean if your brain is just a random collection of chemicals that formed by chance over billions of years, how on earth can you trust your own reasoning processes and the thoughts that you think? (Applause) Your question, “Where did God come from?” is assuming a limited God, and that is your problem. The God that I worship is not limited by time, space, or matter. If I could fit the infinite God into my three pound brain, he would not be worth worshiping, that is for certain. So that is the God I worship, Thank you.1

Dr. Hovind certainly adds some sound ology to this topic but a more formal consideration of Theology Proper is in good order here.
A Proper Theology Proper
A systematic theology section titled “Theology Proper” is want to be written. One which captures all the organization of Charles Hodge and all the detail of Augustus Strong, while avoiding, yeah even exposing all the error of Westminster decrees and other foreign sources they cited. One which instead uses the Holy Bible as its sole source and final authority. One which sidesteps the overriding bearing of Hodge's reformed theology. One which exposes Strong's evolutionary blunder and glorifies the LORD God in detailing his wondrous work of creation. A systematic theology needs to have Holy Scripture as its sole authority and expose the vain philosophies of man and dogma's of the Romans. Such a work is want to be made, and its draft is presently before you.
Excellently organized works of theology have gone before. Charles Hodge, known as the Father of Printed Systematic Theologies, is best organized, and Augustus Strong is most detailed. Both outlines are shown below and they should, in reality, be merged into one work for completeness in a thorough and sound work. Such merging would need sound and careful attention because neither Hodge, nor Strong used the Holy Bible as their sole source. Indeed, neither did Thiessen, Chafer, or Geisler. Previous systematic theologies all attempt to compile “everything that was ever believed about God,” whether that be philosophers or Roman theologians. This work strives to document everything revealed about God, and revelation comes only from the Holy inspired, inerrant, infallible, preserved words of God.
Charles Hodge organized his Theology Proper thus: 1) Origin of the idea of God, 2) Theism, 3) Anti-Theistic theories, 4) knowledge of God, 5) The Nature of God and His Attributes, 6) the Trinity, 7) The Divinity of Christ, 8) The Holy Spirit, 9) The Decrees of God, 10) Creation, 11) Providence, and 12) Miracles.
Augustus Strong had a more detailed and slightly variant organization of his theology proper. It is shown below:
Chapter I. The Attributes of God, 243-303
I. Definition of the term Attributes, 244
II. Relation of the Divine Attributes to the Divine Essence, 244-246
III. Methods of Determining the Divine Attributes, 246-247
IV. Classification of the Attributes, 247-249
V. Absolute or Immanent Attributes, 249-275
First Division. Spirituality, and Attributes therein involved, 249-254
1. Life, 251-252
2. Personality, 252-254
Second Division. Infinity, and Attributes therein involved, 254-260
1. Self-existence, 256-257
2. Immutability, 257-259
3. Unity, 259-260
Third Division. Perfection, and Attributes therein involved, 260-275
1. Truth, 260-262
2. Love, 263-268
3. Holiness, 268-275
VI. Relative or Transitive Attributes, 275-295
First Division. Attributes having relation to Time and Space, 275-279
1. Eternity, 275-278
2. Immensity, 278-279
Second Division. Attributes having relation to Creation 279-288
1. Omnipresence, 279-282
2. Omniscience, 282-286
3. Omnipotence, 286-288
Third Division. Attributes having relation to Moral Beings, 288-295
1. Veracity and Faithfulness, or Transitive Truth, 288-289
2. Mercy and Goodness, or Transitive Love, . . 289-290
3. Justice and Righteousness, or Transitive Holiness, 290-295
VII. Rank and Relations of the several Attributes, 295-303
1. Holiness the Fundamental Attribute in God, 296-298
2. The Holiness of God the Ground of Moral Obligation, 298-303
Chapter II. Doctrine op the Trinity, 304-352
I. In Scripture there are Three who are recognized as God, 305-322
1. Proofs from the New Testament, 305-317
A. The Father is recognized as God, 305
B. Jesus Christ is recognized as God, 305-315
C. The Holy Spirit is recognized as God, 315-317
2. Intimations of the Old Testament, 317-322
A. Passages which seem to teach Plurality of some sort in the Godhead, 317-819
B. Passages relating to the Angel of Jehovah, . . . 319-320
C. Descriptions of the Divine Wisdom and Word, 320-321
D. Descriptions of the Messiah, 321-322
II. These Three are so described in Scripture, that we are compelled to conceive them as distinct Persons, 322-326
1. The Father and the Son are Persons distinct from each other, 322
2. The Father and the Son are Persons distinct from the Spirit, 322-323
3. The Holy Spirit is a Person, 323 326
III. This Tri-personality of the Divine Nature is not merely economic and temporal, but is immanent and eternal, 326-330
1. Scripture Proof that these distinctions of Pesonality are eternal, 326
2. Errors refuted by the Scripture Passages, . . . 327-330
A. The Sabellian, 827-328
B. The Arian, 328-330
VI While there are three Persons, there is but one Essence, 330-334
V. These three Persons are Equal, 334-343
1. These Titles belong to the Persons, 834-336
2. Qualified Sense of these Titles, 335-340
3. Generation and Procession consistent with Equality, 340-343
VI. The Doctrine of the Trinity inscrutable, yet not self contradictory, but the Key to all other Doctrines, 344-352
1. The Mode of this Triune Existence is inscrutable, 344-345
2. The Doctrine of the Trinity is not self-contradictory, 345-347
3. The Doctrine of the Trinity has important relations to other Doctrines, 347-352
Chapter III The Decrees of God, 353-370
I. Definition of Decrees, 353-355
II. Proof of the Doctrine of Decrees, 355-359
1. From Scripture, 355-356
2. From Beason, 356-359
A. From the Divine Foreknowledge, 356-358
B. From the Divine Wisdom, 358
C. From the Divine Immutability, 358-559
D. From the Divine Benevolence, 359
III. Objections to the Doctrine of Decrees, 359-368
1. That they are inconsistent with the Free Agency of Man, , 359-362
2. That they take away all Motive for Human Exertion, 363-364
3. That they make God the Author of Sin, 365-368
IV. Concluding Remarks, 368-370
1. Practical Uses of the Doctrine of Decrees, 368-369
2. True Method of Preaching the Doctrine 369-370 2

These two outlines need to be absolutely stripped of their Presbyterian - “Doctrine of Decrees” and then molded into one Theology Proper section in a new 21st century Systematic Theology work. Alternatively, this work relies on Dr. Cambron's thorough and Biblically accurate Bible Doctrines book's address of Theology Proper.
A Proper Naturalistic Theism
What does man know about God with no exposure to the Scriptures wherein God reveals himself? The study and analysis of that question is called naturalistic theism because man by his nature knows of the existence of God. In times past otherwise genius theologians have left their Biblical mooring and ventured into rationalistic thinking and philosophical journals and made naturalistic theism some sort of traditional proof of the existence of God. A wise theologian assembling a valid systematic theology must be ever vigilant and circumspect to stay secured in his Biblical moorings and answer naturalistic theism by analyzing, “What does the Bible say about mans natural and intrinsic knowledge of God?” That analysis will always be all sufficient for a Biblical systematic theology.
In that other works of systematic theology have invested great effort in a rationalistic approach to naturalistic theism, their arguments are herein introduced, found baseless and philosophical and then a valid naturalistic theism is found more adequately answered in Scripture. It is caprice, i.e. a sudden unaccountable change of behavior, that any theologian would spend effort analyzing an ontological argument for the existence of God. But that they did, Hodge, pg 204-207, Chafer, pg. 158-168, and unfortunately even Baptist theologians, Strong, pg 85-89, and Thiessen, pg. 55-63. Ontology is the branch of philosophy, or metaphysics,which deals with the nature of being and the existence of reality. When Moses was nervous about the existence of God, God said to Moses, “I AM THAT I AM: and he said, Thus shall thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you” (Exod 3:14). God spends no time, effort, or word in proving the existence of His being or the existence of reality, and it is, thus, capricious for a theologian to pursue the vain philosophies of man down the vein of ontology.
It is equally vain to incorporate a teleological philosophy lecture in a systematic theology. Supposing that “an ultimate purpose and design” proves the existence of God is trite. God does not use their verbose volumes but presents His teleological argument in four redundant questions: “He that planted the ear, shall he not hear? he that formed the eye, shall he not see? He that chastiseth the heathen, shall not he correct? he that teacheth man knowledge, shall not he know?” (Psalm 94:9-10). This, God's profound acknowledgment of their whole teleological argument, is not given to the seeking saint or inquisitive theologian, it is given to the brutish and the fool! The verses preceding says “Yet they say, The LORD shall not see, neither shall the God of Jacob regard it. Understand, ye brutish among the people: and ye fools, when will ye be wise?” (vr. 7-8). For the systematic theologian to set aside his task of systematizing truth, and pursue a proof of the existence of God to a group of unregenerate vain philosophers is worse than vain, it is unadulterated foolishness.
The whole point of this teleological proof text (i.e. Psalm 94:7-11) is the “The LORD knoweth the thought of man, that they are vanity.” (vr. 11) Ergo the theologian has no business wandering in the corridors of vain philosophy, nor attempting the proof of God's existence. If God himself dos not dabble in the proof, neither will the wise theologian. One need not spend a good chapter developing such trite philosophy when God has already expressed it in a succinct thirty six words. Just give the infidel, agnostic or atheist God's words; they are quick and powerful, while philosophy is vain and conceited.
This teleological proof text (Psalm 94:7-11) rests in this context; “Blessed is the man whom thou chastenest, O LORD, and teachest him out of thy law; That thou mayest give him rest from the days of adversity, until the pit be digged for the wicked.” (Psa 94:12-13) God's law, our pure source text for theology “is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness” (2Tim 3:16-17), and the brutish philosophers have only the itching ear, the wanting eye, ergo they need God's chastisement and the teaching of knowledge (cf Psa 94:9-10). The parallels are not coincidental and the theologian should stay in his own camp, using Scripture as his sole authority.
Hodge, Strong, and Chafer also appeal to an anthropological argument and a cosmological argument in their effort to provide the vain, brutish philosopher a proof of the existence of God. Indeed analyzing the constitution of man may reveal some characteristics of God, for man is, after all, made in His image; and analyzing the constitution of the universe will reveal the glory of God and can reveal his handiwork, exactly as Psalm 19 points out; however, again, the theologian that uses these entities to make a proof for the existence of God is not wise, and is not following a Biblical systematic theology. Just as Psalm 94 points the wise theologian to the perfect law of the LORD for his source of truth, so to does Psalm 19. It opens with a profound cosmological argument, but it has for its theme:

The law of the LORD is perfect, converting the soul: the testimony of the LORD is sure, making wise the simple. The statutes of the LORD are right, rejoicing the heart: the commandment of the LORD is pure, enlightening the eyes. The fear of the LORD is clean, enduring for ever: the judgments of the LORD are true and righteous altogether. More to be desired are they than gold, yea, than much fine gold: sweeter also than honey and the honeycomb. Moreover by them is thy servant warned: and in keeping of them there is great reward.

To determine what natural man knows about God naturally the theologian should set aside all his philosophy books and look only into the perfect, sure, right, and pure sole source of theology: God's plenary, verbally inspired, infallible, inerrant Word.
Naturalistic Theism, what man knows about God naturally, what man intrinsically understands about God, is spelled out in God's Word. God's Word was previously categorically declared, even by these theologians, to be the sole authority of all faith and practice, ergo it is the supreme source for our naturalistic theism. It says...

For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek. For therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith: as it is written, The just shall live by faith. For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;
Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them. For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse: Romans 1:16-20

It says his Light lighteth every man that cometh into the world...

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made. In him was life; and the life was the light of men.
And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not. ... He (John) was not that Light, but was sent to bear witness of that Light. That was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world. John 1:1-5,8,9

It says God tries the reins of every man...

I the LORD search the heart, I try the reins, even to give every man according to his ways, and according to the fruit of his doings.... But, O LORD of hosts, that triest the righteous, and seest the reins and the heart, let me see thy vengeance on them: for unto thee have I opened my cause. Jeremiah 17:10, 20:12

And again...

And I will kill her children with death; and all the churches shall know that I am he which searcheth the reins and hearts: and I will give unto every one of you according to your works. Revelation 2:23

And, God continues his letter to the Romans, man knew God...

Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things. Romans 1:21-23

One needs no further philosophy of man to understand a naturalistic theology. God has adequately revealed mans 'natural' knowledge of God, and even that is not natural, it is supernatural.
(Psalm 19:7-11)
1Kent Hovind, Creation vs Evolution Debate, transcribed by the author from a VHS tape, Kent Hovind has done hundreds of debates, this was in one of them, they may be viewed at and purchased at [After Dr. Kent Hovind's wrongful imprisonment he emerged with some foreign doctrines of eschatology which this author does not endorse.]
2Augustus Strong, “Systematic Theology,” Philadelphia, 1907, Table of Contents, iv. 
To Continue in this series click the link below
Theology Proper in Bible Doctrine 10
. . . Cambron's Chapter I THEOLOGY - The Doctrine of God 11

The Systematic Theology for the 21st Century Part 3 Theollogy Proper - The Study of God the Father
Series Complete Table of Contents