I would like to conclude this all-too-brief introduction to the nature, methods and types of systematic theology by alerting the reader to the unique problems that theology has as regards the language it uses. Like all other disciplines it must communicate its ideas through language. And like all other disciplines it has its own array of technical terms. But no matter how much one refines even technical terminology, there is a major problem confronting theological language that is unique to theology. In a nutshell, the problem is this: how does one describe the infinite, transcendent God? No other discipline claims to describe what is truly infinite in all respects, what by definition transcends anything we can conceive.

One way is by metaphors – for example to refer to God as a lion, a judge, a king, a father, a mother. We know that God, strictly speaking, is none of these things. And yet there is something about each of these that helps us understand something about God's nature. Another way of getting around the problem is through the use of anthropomorphism – for example speaking of God's hands, talking about God seeing us, hearing us. God does not have hands, has no physical eyes and lacks an ear-drum. Yet clearly the Christian faith teaches that God is able to do things and be in communication with us.

The more abstract terms that we use for God such as beauty, goodness, love, infinitude and justice go beyond metaphors and anthropomorphism. At least they go beyond that on the surface. But the problem is that the content we put into terms such as ‘beauty’, ‘goodness’ and ‘love’ is the content derived pretty much from our own experience of these terms. What do these terms really mean when applied to God? What is ‘infinite’, ‘transcendent’ beauty really like?

When one reflects on the problematic character of the language theology uses of God (and remember that all theological language is theological only to the extent that it relates something to God), one can begin to understand why the question can be asked whether theological language has any meaning at all. Do theological terms convey any information about God to us at all? Or are they simply pictures we build up about the way we imagine God to be, pictures that do not convey any accurate information about God?