Abstract
Many works have enriched the historical body of Christ by advancing the need for Christians to become better theologians so that they may, in turn, disciple others unto maturity. While Bible studies are crucial for Christian growth, Christians must employ systematic doctrines of the Scripture to learn to think theologically. This article introduces the Theological Concept Formation model, which can help mature Christians better understand how to connect different concepts in the Scriptures to disciple others and educate them toward maturity in Christ. The proposed model is based on the Vygotskian concept formation model, which provides a suitable framework for Christian scholars and educators to teach theological cognition using theological concepts. Firstly, this article proposes that Scripture is the purposive language of the imago Dei. Secondly, Scripture purports an analogous association with human development and Christian maturity.
As the Sunday morning sun's rays radiate a kaleidoscope reflection from the stained-glass windows throughout the Victorian church, the preacher reverently opens his Bible and looks out to his congregation. “As this is the divine revelation of our Lord, please stand with me as we read of the preeminence of Jesus Christ this Lord's Day from Colossians 1:15–20.” Consider for a moment a fictional narrative of two parishioners listening to the preacher read through such a passage. Having received his first Bible only days earlier, the parishioner Charles recently came unto Christ upon hearing the gospel preached. The second parishioner, Perry, a professor of systematic theology at the local Bible College and a familiar figure behind the lectern, has walked with the Lord for many decades.
Upon hearing the spoken words of the pastor's recitation of Colossians, the professor instinctually conjures many theological concepts, each representing a profound and deeper theological meaning. Perhaps, upon hearing of Christ's preeminence, the professor considers the following concepts: the omnipotence and omniscience of Christ, the incarnate Son, the propitiation, the penal substitutionary atonement, the second Adam, hypostatic union, or Christ's eternal reign over creation. Though unfamiliar with many of the theological concepts in Colossians, the new believer considers the gift of grace that his Savior has bestowed to save him from his sins. Each of the men joyfully listens and worships the Lord while the Spirit moves their hearts more unto the likeness of Christ. The mature Christian possesses the necessary concepts to categorically think through the various theological implications of such a passage, while the new believer struggles to comprehend the theological implications. This theoretical scenario reveals a maturity spectrum concerning Charles and Perry's conceptual understanding of the Scriptures.
Many works have enriched the historical body of Christ by advancing the need for Christians to become better theologians so that they may, in turn, disciple others unto maturity. While Bible studies are crucial for Christian growth, Christians must employ systematic doctrines of the Scripture to learn to think theologically. Because Scripture provides the language of Creation, Christian educators must teach its fluency so that Christians can grow in spiritual maturity. A model of theological cognition would aid a mature Christian to comprehend how to better instill conceptual interconnectedness of the Scriptures to assist in discipling and educating others unto maturity in Christ.
Introduction
This article introduces the Theological Concept Formation (TCF) model, which can help mature Christians better understand how to connect different concepts in the Scriptures to disciple others and educate them toward maturity in Christ. The proposed model is based on the Vygotskian concept formation model, which provides a suitable framework for Christian scholars and educators to teach theological cognition using theological concepts. Firstly, this article proposes that Scripture is the purposive language of the imago Dei. Secondly, Scripture purports an analogous association with human development and Christian maturity.
Three sections comprise this article. The “Vygotsky in Context” section provides a contextual background concerning the life and relevant work of Lev Vygotsky, followed by a thorough explanation concerning Vygotsky's proposed paradigm of cognitive thought development during language formation. The “Theological Concept Formation (TCF) Model” section establishes the ontological foundation for TCF. Finally, the “Conclusion” section introduces TCF as an appropriated theological language acquisition model, followed by the TCF model's implications for Christian education and spiritual formation.
Vygotsky in Context
A developmental psychologist, Lev Semenovich Vygotsky (1896–1934), left behind a life story of mostly inkless pages and few memoirs when he died young (Vygotsky, 2012, sec. Vygotsky in Context (2012)). Although Vygotsky made foundational contributions as a psychologist within the Soviet Union, his work did not gain notable recognition in the Western world until the late twentieth century, following the dissolution of the Soviet Union—a successor state to the former Russian Empire. It was then that his theories began to attract broader international attention. Though Vygotsky sought to “approach the study of the mind having learned the whole of Marx's method” and determine how its “basic methodological principles might contribute to theory-building in psychology,” (Vygotsky, 1978, pp. 6–8) he rejected “dogmatic Marxism” (Daniels et al., 2007, p. 64). Vygotsky conducted his research during a time when openly criticizing Marxism could lead to severe political and personal consequences. “Soviet psychologists were expected to derive psychological categories directly from the works of Marx, Engels, and Lenin” (Vygotsky, 2012, p. lviii).
Although Vygotsky's considerable works were instrumental in understanding human development, they were not fully distinguished as such until their translation into English and dissemination in 1978. Vygotsky's views and contributions continue to impact our understanding of human development as more of his work becomes available. Along with his contemporary Jean Piaget (1896–1980), Vygotsky contributed to the “Soviet perspective” of developmental psychology, which emphasized the “growth of children's cognitive and verbal abilities” (Thomas, 2000, p. 243).
Scholarly works regarding Vygotsky have begun to fill the digital archives and library shelves in the last half-century as more scholars value his contribution to human cognitive development. Many of these works emphasize Vygotsky's theory concerning the Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD). According to scholar James Riley Estep Jr., ZPD “best captures and represents Vygotsky's contribution to developmental theory” (Estep, 2002, pp. 152–153). Vygotsky defines ZPD as “the distance between the actual developmental level as determined by independent problem solving and the level of potential development as determined through problem solving under adult guidance or in collaboration with more capable peers” (Vygotsky, 1978, p. 86).
Vygotsky's lesser-explored theory of conceptual thought development has attracted the attention of scholars due to its thematic assertion of the gradual maturity in the development of individuals. In stressing the importance of the Vygotskian analysis of cognitive thought, Paul Crawford states that educators “need a reliable framework for understanding” the development of an individual's gradual maturing of conceptual thinking as one learns “to live within their environments” (Crawford, 2001, p. 113).
The Vygotskian Systematic Concept
Essential to Vygotsky's theory of concept formation is the necessity of a systematic concept. For Vygotsky, “any real concept must be taken only together with its system of relations that determine its measure of generality” (Vygotsky, 2012, p. 183). Vygotsky continues, “A concept is like a living cell that must be viewed only together with its offshoots penetrating into surrounding tissue.” By utilizing the word “flower,” Vygotsky demonstrates such a theory. A child learns the word flower, and shortly afterwards the word rose; for a long time the concept’ flower,’ though more widely applicable than “rose,” cannot be said to be more general for the child. It does not include and subordinate “rose”—the two are interchangeable and juxtaposed. When “flower” becomes generalized, the relation of “flower” and “rose,” as well as of “flower” and other subordinate concepts, also changes in the child's mind. A system is taking shape (Vygotsky, 2012, pp. 183–184).
For Vygotsky, an interrelated hierarchy of concepts––superordinate concepts to subordinate concepts––establishes a concept system (Vygotsky, 2012, p. 181). Such an interrelated hierarchy demands the logical ordering of generalities (superordinate) to specificalities (subordinate). Thor Engen describes this generalization as “the establishment of relations between elements based on similarity” (Engen, 2018, p. 32). The generalization of a concept allows the adult to communicate with a child regarding a flower. Both the child and adult can enjoy the beauty of the flower, yet both approach the concept of a flower on different terms. A child only possesses a pseudoconcept (resembling a true concept) (Vygotsky, 2012, p. 127) of a flower; the child does not know the biological parts of the flower, a flower's purpose, or other related angiosperms. Conversely, an adult can conceptually think of flowers and the related subordinate categories. The child will blissfully enjoy the flower without a likely concern for the inevitability of bees; such a relation does not yet exist for the child. An adult knows to be watchful for the presence of bees and to avoid flowers that might have characteristics harmful to humans.
The Vygotskian Purpose of Language
For Vygotsky, children learn conceptual thinking through the medium of language. Vygotsky viewed the individual words of a language as signs; words fulfill a critical “function in the various stages of thinking in complexes” (Vygotsky, 2012, p. 148). Vygotsky continues, The role played by the word in complex thinking by no means coincides with its role in conceptual thinking. On the contrary, the very difference between the complex and the concept lies in the different functional uses of the word. The word is a sign, and as such it may be used in different ways depending on what kind of intellectual operation it is involved in. From this difference in the intellectual operations with the word springs the difference between complex thinking and conceptual thinking (Vygotsky, 2012, p. 149).
In Vygotsky's Thought and Language—posthumously published in 1934—he further explores the purpose of language during the stages of speech development. This article only emphasizes the importance of language and conceptual thought germane from Vygotsky's analysis of conceptual thought development while not emphasizing the development of language itself. According to Thomas, Vygotsky believed “that children's informal and formal education” influences “the level of conceptual thinking they reach.” If the language climate within which children grow up (direct speech, mass communication media) is dominated by simplistic or ‘primitive’ language, then the children will think only simplistically or primitively. But if the language environment contains varied and complex concepts, then children will learn to think in varied and complex ways, given that their initial biological equipment (sense organs, central nervous system) is not impaired (Thomas, 2000, p. 297).
Without formal language, one cannot conceptually organize abstractions or phenomena within one's environment.
The Vygotskian Theory of Concept Formation
Vygotsky observed that cognition occurs in three primary stages (see Table 1) (Vygotsky, 2012, p. 117). The first stage, syncretic thinking, involves “thinking in unorganized congeries or heaps” (Thomas, 2000, p. 301). Vygotsky states that the heap consists of “disparate objects grouped together without any basis” and reveals “that there is an undirected extension of the meaning of the sign (artificial word) to inherently unrelated objects linked by chance in the child's perception” (Vygotsky, 2012, pp. 117–118). Vygotsky continues, a “vague syncretic conglomeration of individual objects that have somehow or other coalesced into an image” forms a word's meaning in the child's mind. “Because of its syncretic origin, that image is highly unstable.” The second stage, thinking in complexities (Engen, 2018, p. 31), involves uniting individual objects through “subjective impressions” and “bonds that actually exist among the objects” (Thomas, 2000, p. 302). In this stage, according to Vygotsky, cognition “brings about complexes that have a functional equivalence with real concepts” (Vygotsky, 2012, p. 120). Vygotsky signifies five subphases that further the development of complexities during the second stage (associative, collection, chain, diffuse, and pseudoconcept complexities). The final subphase, pseudoconcept, is such an instrumental subphase that it frequently becomes included as a separate primary stage. Therefore, it is necessary to discuss this subphase in further detail. Thomas states, “pseudoconceptual thinking represents a transition from thinking in complexities to thinking in true concepts” (Thomas, 2000, p. 302). Unlike the final stage of true conceptual thinking, the grouping of prior complexities is based upon a concept; however, one is “unable to rationalize the grouping condition adequately” if the grouping is challenged. Furthermore, the distinction between a true concept and a pseudoconcept is the spontaneous grouping based upon, as Thompson describes, “abstract characteristics that” are perceived “and not simply apply ready-made labels” that have “been taught.” The final stage, thinking in concepts (Engen, 2018, p. 31), is the convergence of two independent thought processes––the “synthesizing and the analyzing” of prior complexities (Thomas, 2000, p. 303). Vygotsky asserts that “to practice conceptual thinking is to ‘operate in concepts’” (Engen, 2018, p. 132).
Vygotskian stages in conceptual thought development.
Establishing the Relevancy to Spiritual Formation
Vygotsky unequivocally embraced the axioms of Marxism; however, he employed the human faculties bestowed to him by God, provided through the imago Dei, to perform a metacognitive analysis of the developmental growth of his fellow image-bearers. Vygotsky's social outworking and conclusions can be charitably discarded while considering the observed phenomenological truths inherent to the created order. Early twentieth-century cultural anthropologist Ruth Benedict states, “No man ever looks at the world with pristine eyes. He sees it edited by a definite set of customs and institutions and ways of thinking” (Benedict, 2005, pp. 2–3). Benedict continues, “The life history of the individual is first and foremost an accommodation to the patterns and standards traditionally handed down in his community” (Benedict, 2005, pp. 2–3). Vygotsky was a product of his time and culture—a political alignment to Marxism within the historical context of his culture, life, and work. The axioms and practices of Marxism are incompatible with Christianity and are insignificant to Vygotsky's observations of human conceptual thinking. Estep concurs that Vygotsky “did not address spiritual formation or spirituality, however, his theory does raise a new perspective that can lead the Christian educator toward a new approach to spiritual formation and the provision of a suitable ecology in which to advance it” (Estep, 2002, p. 160). Estep perceptively concludes that a Christian educator can appropriate the Vygotskian developmental framework to establish that spiritual formation: (1) begins outside the individual, (2) is not a linear or unidirectional process, (3) requires the community of faith, and (4) occurs when faith is mediated between individuals (Estep, 2002, pp. 159–162).
Similarly, Nathan H. Gunter and Jeffrey M. Horner assert, “Christian believers can learn from Scripture, though the process may be slow, uneven, or difficult. Ultimately, Christian believers can come to a fuller understanding of what God wants his people to know about both himself and also his creation” (Gunter & Horner, 2018, p. 82). Gunter and Horner rightly state that “God models pedagogy throughout Scripture,” which they conclude is “an iterative, unfolding, and mediated process” for believers (Gunter & Horner, 2018, p. 82). Vygotsky's phenomenological observations highlight the developmental process of humanity's language acquisition. These observations align with Estep, Gunter, and Horner's assertions about God's creative order; this order is evident in the common grace given to humanity, which fosters developmental pedagogy.
This article will now embark on a new perspective of Vygotsky. Rather than utilizing Vygotsky's metanarrative of the development of language and thought, this analysis emphasizes the foundational axioms of Vygotsky's metacognition of conceptual thinking, that is, language and systematic conceptual thought. The following perspective and forthcoming appropriation of Vygotsky's constructs a paradigm that Vygotsky would not have recognized. Christians can employ Vygotsky's underlying premise that the meanings of cognitive concepts are found through complex relationships of more specific concepts. Furthermore, a Christian's appropriation of Vygotsky's phenomenological reasoning does not imply approval of his Marxist axioms. Still, it affirms the cognitive faculties inherent to humanity through God's common grace. The following section will show how Scripture is the ontological language and foundation for all Christian cognition.
Scripture as the Ontological Language of the Imago Dei
The following section will establish the theological and epistemological foundation necessary to allow for an appropriation of Vygotsky's metacognitive analysis of conceptual thought. Pierce Tylor Hibbs states, “If we wish to understand being, we must account for divine purpose, and we cannot account for divine purpose aside from the verbal revelation of the trinitarian God” (Hibbs, 2017, p. 20). Question three of the Westminster Shorter Catechism asks, “What do the scriptures principally teach?” (Westminster Assembly, 1851, p. 388). The corresponding answer states that “the scriptures principally teach what man is to believe concerning God, and what duty God requires of man.” Therefore, Scripture establishes the epistemological foundation for the meaning of theological language.
The Nature and Meaning of “Word”
Since language is the medium for cognitive thought, one must necessarily define the ontological nature of language. To define the nature of language, one must establish the epistemology of the system for which the language functions. What, then, is language? For Vygotsky, language is a sign (i.e., a functional tool) that conveys meaning; “A word without meaning is an empty sound; meaning, therefore, is a criterion of ‘word,’ its [sic] indispensable component”(Vygotsky, 2012, p. 225). Vygotsky's definition of language should cause no consternation to a Christian as he correctly defines its economic purpose, nor is it incongruent with Scripture. Vygotsky asserts that action (i.e., “deed”) presupposes “word.” In interpreting John 1:1, Vygotsky states, “In the beginning was the deed.” Vygotsky continues, “The word was not the beginning—action was there first; it is the end of development, crowning the deed” (Vygotsky, 2012, p. 270). Vygotsky depends on an anthropocentric paradigm to supply meaning to a word; the word's meaning becomes defined by a phenomenological experience within creation (i.e., natural revelation). If Vygotsky rightly observed language's economical nature, could there be a more complex meaning when an epistemological foundation is provided through the special revelation of Scripture?
Scripture's epistemological foundation enables the Christian to comprehend the nature of a Word as a more complex theological concept beyond what Vygotsky's epistemology could allow. For a Christian, the economy of language is the same as the Vygotskian view; however, in contrast to Vygotsky, language is supplied through the eternal preeminence of Christ. John 1:1 proclaims that Christ is the Word (λόγος), through which “all things were created” (Col 1:16). Christ, therefore, supplies the paradigm through which words receive meaning; humanity depends on Christ to define their mere existence. As Pierce Taylor Hibbs states, “God spoke. That is the ontological grounds for all existence and the foundation of all the coherence in our experience” (Hibbs, 2017, p. 345). Though Vygotsky may not have recognized the Christian theological appropriation of his metacognitive analysis of conceptual thinking, Christians may fairly appropriate Vygotsky's underlying analysis and thus appropriate using a different epistemological perspective.
Scripture as Language
According to Hibbs, language is “communicative behavior” in that “its purpose is the expression of one person towards another”; and “it presupposes community” (Hibbs, 2017, pp. 346–347). Those who are in Christ, “the firstborn of all creation” (Col 1:15), are themselves “a new creation” (1Cor 5:17). The existence of the new creation in Christ presupposes a communitive relation amongst the ontological reality of the new humanity. The language of the new humanity is Christ; however, even the ontological exitance of this language is grounded in the communal attributes of the triune Godhead. “All of our communicative behavior represents on a finite, analogical scale the communicative behavior of the trinity” (Hibbs, 2017, p. 354). Hibbs further states that “If we wish to understand being, we must account for divine purpose, and we cannot account for divine purpose aside from the verbal revelation of the trinitarian God” (Hibbs, 2017, p. 20).
The triune God chose to communicate himself to humanity through the inspired (θεόπνευστος) Scriptures. Therefore, Scripture is the language in which Christians must become fluent so that they may worship Christ “in spirit and truth” (John 4:24). Michael Horton states that “by questioning and testing our interpretation of God's Word, we come to know what we believe and why we believe it, so that the grammar of faith becomes our own language of worship through which we interpret all of reality and live in the world” (Horton, 2011, p. 22). Since Scripture is the language of imago Dei, Christians can apply systematic categories to Scripture to enable categorical thinking. Horton affirms such a notion by stating, To dismiss the importance of a systematic understanding of the faith is to deny, at least by implication, that the Bible is a canon—that is, a collection of varied texts that are united by their divine source (the Father's speaking), their content (the Son's work of redemption), and their power to generate the world of which they speak (the Spirit's work of inspiration, illumination, and regeneration) (Horton, 2011, p. 27).
Theological Concept Formation (TCF) Model
The following section will introduce the TCF model. The biblical framework and taxonomy will be provided using Hebrews as the underlying biblical text. Each stage of the model will then be introduced and explained by utilizing the associated descriptive categorizations. Lastly, the implications for spiritual formation and education will be discussed further.
Establishing the Biblical Framework
Hebrews 5:11–6:3 establishes the biblical foundation for TCF, as the author of Hebrews metaphorically presents an analogical journey to spiritual maturity through human development. The author establishes both the state of maturity and the evidentiary attributes coinciding with maturity. The author uses “infant” to represent a state of spiritual immaturity and “unskilled” in the Scriptures to establish evidence of immaturity. Conversely, the author ascribes the adjective of “mature” to those who have been “trained” to “distinguish good from evil.” Secondly, the author establishes that spiritually immature people will encounter difficulty comprehending categorical theological concepts beyond the “basic principles” of God. Thirdly, the author provides the enablement for growth––“solid food” from the Word of God. The solidity of spiritual food corresponds to how one handles the Word of God. Lastly, the author establishes the function of a spiritually mature believer by expecting that the spiritually mature should be “teachers.” Conversely, by implication, those who are immature are unable to teach and are to be taught by those who are mature. While the author establishes an analogical journey to spiritual maturity through human development, he correctly acknowledges that spiritual maturity will only occur if “God permits.”
Introducing the Theological Concept Formation Model
TCF aims to supply Christian educators and ministers with a descriptive framework to aid in assessing the formative stages of one's theological cognitive development. Each of the five stages in the TCF model provides a descriptive category of theological maturity (see Table 2). The Vygotskian model for cognitive development provides a general framework through which the TCF model is appropriated. Both models emphasize cognitive development in the established relationships between generalized (superordinate) and specific (subordinate) concepts. Unlike the Vygotskian model, TCF is more than a mere meta-analysis; however, it is not less than that. TCF is a meta-analysis that seeks to aid in a purposeful journey to a cognitive state––a spiritually mature Christian who can interpret daily life through a Christocentric paradigm of conceptual thought. Stages I and II represent immaturity in theological thought. Evidence of maturity begins to emerge in the third stage. Stages IV and V represent degrees of theological maturity. As TCF will show, theological conceptual cogitation necessitates the confluence of the Gospel of Christ, biblical theology, and systematic theology.
Appropriated Vygotskian foundation for theological concept formation.
Stage I: Theological Immaturity
The first stage of TCF borrows from the infant taxonomy of Hebrews 5:13, which describes one who is theologically immature (see Table 3). The first stage of TCF emphasizes syncretic theological thought––the default and primitive theological understanding. Crawford, referencing the first appropriated Vygotskian stage, states that the formed syncretic “relationships do not correspond with objects in a factual way” (Crawford, 2001, p. 115). The first step in this conceptual journey is amalgamating “vague or random perceptual factors” (Crawford, 2001, p. 114).
Theological concept formation: Stage I “Theological Immaturity.”
Gospel
At this stage, one is required to have a creditable profession of faith in Christ; thereby having a regenerated heart (Ezekiel 36:26) and having been made receptive to being “taught by God” (John 6:45). A profession of faith necessitates that one must verbalize the elementary principles concerning the Gospel of Christ; however, a lack of theological precision is expected at this stage. Theological cognition is limited to an elementary understanding of repentance, faith in Christ, baptism, and faith in Christ's coming judgment and salvation (i.e., the elementary doctrines of Christ) (Schreiner, 2015, p. 177).
Biblical Theology
At this stage, the overarching theological metanarrative of God's redemptive-historical plan for humanity (i.e., biblical theology) has not been firmly established as a foundation through which all subordinate categories are interpreted. In stressing the importance of biblical theology as a theological foundation, Graeme Goldsworthy states that biblical theology “provides the basis for interpretation of any part of the Bible as God's word to us” (Goldsworthy, 2002, p. 25). Peter Gentry and Stephen Wellum state that without proper comprehension of “creation, fall, redemption, and new creation,” one will not have the necessary framework “to ground ethics in the norm of creation”(Gentry & Wellum, 2018, p. 792). The framework for theological conceptual thought, established through biblical theology, is as necessary for spiritual maturity as a canvas is to a painter.
Systematic Theology
Theological immaturity describes the categorical deficiencies that prevent theological conceptual maturity. At this stage, one does not possess the “words” of the theological language. The emphasis is not merely on the words describing the theological topics, although it is not less than that; the focus is on establishing the categories that will ultimately become concepts. For Vygotsky, a child learned that a “flower” was a superordinate concept. Gentry and Wellum state that systematic theology “seeks to make sense of the ontological presuppositions of the Bible's storyline and to draw out theological judgments for today, consistent with the Bible's worldview and teaching across the entire canon”(Gentry & Wellum, 2018, p. 48). These theological judgments become categorical doctrinal topics (e.g., scriptural inerrancy, triune-Godhead, Christology, and the doctrine of God). For example, suppose one does not have the superordinate category of the Trinity. In that case, one cannot establish subordinate categories such as the ontological foundation for relationships, the triune work of creation, or the distinct economy of each of the triune persons in the divine Godhead.
Theological immaturity also describes the inability to articulate or defend personal positions on primary theological subjects. Christianity has established theological absolutes (doctrines) necessary for orthodox faith. Albert Mohler describes these absolutes as primary “first-order” doctrines, including “the full deity and humanity of Christ, the doctrine of the Trinity, the doctrine of atonement, and essentials such as justification by faith alone” (Mohler, 2014, pp. 725–726). Though they may be familiar with some generalized ideas of primary doctrines, one who is theologically immature cannot articulate or defend these doctrines.
Stage II: Formative Theological Cognition
The second stage of TCF emphasizes the development of complex theological thought, which appropriates Vygotsky's second stage (see Table 4). This stage states that the formed established categorical relationships “lack logical unity” (Vygotsky, 2012, p. 120). Those developing in theological cognition build upon their competencies formed in the previous developmental stage and begin to form the theological foundation for theological conceptual cognition.
Theological concept formation: Stage II “Formative Theological Cognition.”
Gospel
At this stage, one can verbalize the elementary principles (doctrines) concerning the Gospel of Christ with adequate theological precision. What was formerly challenging to comprehend and articulate becomes a developing competency. Moreover, theological cognition develops into a formative understanding of repentance, faith in Christ, baptism, and Christ's coming judgment and salvation. The relationships between the doctrines could lack logical unity; however, each category is understood in autonomous complexities.
Biblical Theology
At this stage, articulating the overarching theological metanarrative of God's redemptive-historical plan for humanity has become a developing competency. As with the developing understanding of the gospel, one can now describe the overarching narrative of Scripture with adequate theological precision; however, one cannot yet supply exegetical scriptural proofs, nor can one interpret the Scriptures through the developing foundation.
Systematic Theology
At this stage, one begins to possess an elementary vocabulary of theological language. Superordinate, general theological categories develop. These overarching hierarchical doctrinal categories might include God the Father, the Word of God, the Holy Spirit, Christ, and sin; however, the developing complex thought is not with theological precision. The most significant aspect of this stage is the likely conflation of many if not all, theological topics as having equivalency in absolute primacy. While the previous stage began developing competencies in primary theological absolutes, this stage introduces categorical topics that are not primary for orthodoxy. One at this stage does not yet possess the appropriate categorical relationships or theological competencies to triage the categories appropriately. Concerning the non-primary doctrines, Mohler states that “second-order doctrines are those that are essential to church life and necessary for the ordering of the local church but that, in themselves, do not define the gospel” (Mohler, 2014, p. 726). Such doctrines could include the philosophy of baptism, church polity, eschatological conclusions, or the existence of the charismata.
Stage III: Typical Theological Cognition
The third stage of TCF emphasizes the development of typical theological thought, which appropriates Vygotsky's fifth subcategory of the second stage, pseudoconcepts (see Table 5). Those developing in theological cognition build upon their competencies formed in the previous developmental stage and begin to think in theological concepts; however, the subordinate underlying relationships among the concepts are not yet fully established. Evidence of practical spiritual maturing begins to emerge from the conceptual theological maturing in this stage.
Theological concept formation: Stage III “Typical Theological Cognition.”
Gospel
At this stage, one can verbalize the elementary principles (doctrines) concerning the Gospel of Christ with theological precision and accuracy. What was formerly abstract becomes a developed competency. Moreover, theological cognition has developed into a comprehensive understanding of repentance, faith in Christ, baptism, and Christ's coming judgment and salvation. The relationships between each of the doctrines begin to form a logical unity.
Biblical Theology
At this stage, articulating the overarching theological metanarrative of God's redemptive-historical plan for humanity is a developed competency; one now interprets Scriptures using this narrative with precision and supplies exegetical scriptural proofs.
Systematic Theology
At this stage, one begins to possess an intermediate vocabulary of theological language. Superordinate, general theological categories have developed, while subordinate categories are developing competencies. These subordinate hierarchical doctrinal categories might include the Trinity, scriptural inerrancy, hypostatic union, or penal substitutionary atonement. The most significant aspect of this stage is articulating and defending personal positions on primary theological subjects. These primary doctrines can be accurately defended with scriptural proof; however, one conflates secondary and tertiary theological issues as secondary theological concerns. Tertiary issues, according to Mohler, are “third-order doctrines” that “may be the ground for fruitful theological discussion and debate but do not threaten the fellowship of the local congregation or the denomination” (Mohler, 2014, p. 726). The proper relationship between these complex categories is a developing competency identifying basic systematic “ologies.” Such general categories might include Christology, theology proper, phenomenology, and soteriology.
Stage IV: Conceptual Theological Cognition
The fourth stage of TCF is the first stage, where one has developed the competency of thinking in theological concepts (see Table 6). This stage corresponds to Vygotsky's final stage of conceptual thought. At this stage, Christians have begun to become theologically mature which should cultivate spiritual maturity.
Theological concept formation: Stage VI “Conceptual Theological Cognition.”
The Confluence of Theology and Cognition
At this stage, one has left the elementary doctrines of Christ and entered theological maturity (Heb 6:1). The gospel has become the established foundation for all theological cogitation. Biblical theology has provided the narrative of Scripture, and systematic theology has established theological categories. Both superordinate and subordinate theological categories have become a developed competency. The subordinate hierarchical doctrinal categories have established complex relationships with other categories. For example, the relationship between the functional economy of the Trinity, creation, salvation, and the gospel has become a unifying concept when one thinks about the Trinity. A significant aspect of this stage is articulating and defending personal positions on primary and secondary theological subjects with scriptural proof. At this stage, tertiary issues are rightly categorized as non-primary or secondary issues; however, these tertiary issues have not been fully considered, and one's position is not yet formed.
Stage V: Theological Teacher
The fifth and final stage of TCF is the first stage borrowed from the mature taxonomy of Hebrews 5:12, which describes one who is a theological “teacher” whose discernment has been “trained by constant practice” (see Table 7). Though there is little distinction between stage IV and stage V, this stage is necessary as it represents one who has walked in spiritual maturity and conceptual theological cogitation for many years. The Scriptures can read as simple as a children's book for a mature believer, yet this believer can comprehend the depths of underlying theological concepts. There is a scriptural expectation that men and women disciple others into spiritual maturity at this stage.
Theological concept formation: Stage V “Theological Teacher.”
Implications for Christian Education and Spiritual Formation
This article began by asking, “Is there a construct that can aid a mature Christian to comprehend better how to instill conceptual interconnectedness of the Scriptures to assist in discipling and educating others unto maturity in Christ?” TCF aims to supply Christian educators and ministers with such a descriptive framework to aid in assessing the formative stages of one's theological cognitive development. TCF is not a theological system (e.g., Calvinism, Arminian, Wesleyanism, or Traditionalism), and the descriptors are left purposefully vague, apart from the Gospel of Christ. The descriptive framework allows Christian educators the elasticity to incorporate into their orthodox theological convictions. Christian educators can use TCF to determine how to best disciple a fellow Christian unto spiritual maturity. TCF establishes a framework and scaffolding for curricula and an assessment framework that aids a mature Christian in discipling others.
Pedagogical Implications Within Christian Ministry
Theological education within a church context is a carefully designed pedagogical approach. It focuses on guiding learners toward personal and communal growth, aiming for a Christ-like transformation of both mind and heart. Within this congregational setting, the emphasis is placed on understanding doctrinal and theological concepts. The purpose of TCF is to establish scaffolding to the pedagogical curricula, which is not just instilling knowledge but emphasizes the spiritual maturity evolving from conceptual understandings of doctrine.
Need for Further Research
Academic studies such as Estep, Gunter, and Horner have contributed to exploring Vygotsky's contributions to contemporary philosophical and social sciences from differing perspectives. This article seeks to join the dialogue by exploring Vygotsky's analysis of human language acquisition and development by demonstrating a parallel to theological language development in Christian formation through the TCF model. Future studies should explore not only the nuances of theological language acquisition but also the potential implications that can be deduced from implementing TCF in pedogeological development and discipleship practices. A deeper comprehension and articulation of TCF can enable educators, leaders, and Christians to develop methods to cultivate theological concepts and spiritual maturity in the body of Christ.
A Fictional Illustration
This article returns to the two parishioners to illustrate best how an educator can employ TCF in discipleship philosophy. The following example provides an analysis of the necessary theological language conceptualization required for theologically mature thinking. Upon hearing the name “Jesus Christ,” Charles’ cognitions concerning Christ are elementary; however, he knows of Jesus Christ from his preconceptions. All Charles might understand at the theological immaturity stage is that Jesus is Lord and Savior; the theological complexities are not formed and are objectively unrelated. Perhaps, even his imagination conjures a visual representation of Jesus from cinematic depictions. Charles is likely unfamiliar with theological terms, and if familiar, probably has unproven definitions or understandings. At this juncture, Perry must determine how to best disciple his fellow brother. By using TCF, Perry understands that Charles likely does not have a foundational understanding of the overarching theological narrative of Scripture. Perry first must teach Charles the narrative of Scripture and emphasize the foundational aspects of the gospel. In so doing, Perry knows that Charles does not yet have the theological categories to comprehend why his favorite book, Joel Osteen's Your Best Life Now, is not an edifying book for Christian formation.
After much discipleship, Charles has now developed an adequate understanding of the gospel; he can distinguish the orthodox Gospel of Christ from the professed false gospels of Mormonism or the Jehovah's Witnesses. With Perry's instruction, Charles can provide an elementary understanding of Scripture's metanarrative (creation, fall, redemption, and restoration). In his zeal for Christ and the gospel, Perry has observed that Charles has begun engaging in theological discussions on social media whose opinions differ from his; these discussions involve an overgeneralized and undiscerning condemnation of valid issues within the orthodox Christian liberty spectrum. As an educator, Perry must now help Charles distinguish primary issues from all other doctrines of the faith. And on the story goes.
Conclusion
Charles H. Spurgeon, speaking to his congregation, said that “in walking together, we do not lift up our feet, [sic] and put them down in the same place, but we proceed nearer to our journey's end; and he that hath true communion with Christ is making progress” (Spurgeon, 1900, p. 145). The Christian life demands a journey of discipleship. Along the journey, the Spirit of Christ wipes away the tarnish of sin a little more each day, one day revealing the finished work of Christ. The joy of the Christian journey and discipleship does not end at salvation, but rather from there, it begins a life joined by a great cloud of witnesses helping one another along the way to glory. The apostle of Hebrews implores the sojourner to travel from theological immaturity to theological maturity. The proposed TCF model is merely an aid for a mature Christian to comprehend better how to instill the Scriptures’ conceptual interconnectedness when discipling and educating others unto maturity in Christ.
Footnotes
Theological Concept Formation Model.
| TCF stage | Stage indicator—developing competencies | Stage indicator—deficiencies |
|---|---|---|
| Theological Immaturity | Gospel
Provides a credible profession of faith. Can verbalize the elementary principles concerning the Gospel of Christ without theological precision. |
Biblical Theology
Cannot articulate the overarching theological metanarrative of Scripture. Cannot articulate superordinate theological categories. Cannot articulate or defend primary theological doctrines. |
| Formative Theological Cognition | Gospel
Can verbalize the elementary principles (doctrines) concerning the Gospel of Christ with adequate theological precision. Can articulate the redemptive-historical narrative of Scripture with adequate theological precision. |
Systematic Theology
Conflating primary, secondary, and tertiary theological issues as primary “gospel” theological concerns. Cannot articulate or defend personal positions on primary, secondary, or tertiary theological subjects. |
| Typical Theological Cognition | Gospel
Can verbalize the elementary principles (doctrines) concerning the Gospel of Christ with theological precision. Can articulate the redemptive-historical narrative of Scripture with theological precision. Can articulate and defend personal positions on primary theological subjects. Can identify basic systematic “ologies.” |
Systematic Theology
Conflating secondary and tertiary theological issues as secondary theological concerns. Cannot articulate or defend personal positions on secondary or tertiary theological subjects. Cannot identify complex systematic “ologies.” |
| Conceptual Theological Cognition | Gospel
Can verbalize the complex principles concerning the Gospel of Christ with theological precision. Can articulate the redemptive-historical narrative of Scripture with theological precision. Can articulate and defend personal positions on primary and secondary theological subjects. Can defend basic systematic “ologies.” Can identify complex systematic “ologies.” |
Systematic Theology
Cannot defend complex systematic “ologies.” Cannot articulate or defend personal positions tertiary theological subjects. |
| Theological Teacher | Gospel
Can teach and defend the complex principles concerning the Gospel of Christ with theological precision. Can teach and defend the redemptive-historical narrative of Scripture with theological precision. Can teach and defend personal positions on primary, secondary, and tertiary theological subjects with theological precision. Can teach and defend complex systematic “ologies” with theological precision. |