# Question about Stanley Grenz



## Marrow Man (Jul 31, 2008)

I'm having to read Stanley Grenz's systematic theology (_Theology for the Community of God_) for a class at a local (non-Reformed) school of theology. I'm about 2/3 of the way through it. My question, and this would be especially be directed to the Baptist brethren (since Grenz was a Baptist): what do you know about the man and his theology? He seems very much driven by a postmodern understanding of many things (hence, "community" in the title). I wonder how well he sat within the Baptist tradition prior to his death.

My own comparison of Grenz is that he is kind of like a drunk driver theologically. He keeps swerving back and forth, but just when you think he's going to completely run off the road and crash, he jerks the car back between the lines. Then he begins to drift away again...


----------



## Robbie Schmidtberger (Jul 31, 2008)

You are right on the money in your thoughts on him. In the little that I know of him he was the leading theologian of the Emergent Village. He co-authored a book with John Franke and with his passing, passed the baton to Franke to lead the theological development of the EV. He is similar to Brian McLaren in many aspects. 

While he is very knowledgeable about theology and subsequent debates, he is far too open with Open Theism and other trends.


----------



## DMcFadden (Jul 31, 2008)

I confess that when the Lord called him home, I felt grief for his family and relieved for the evangellical world. He had way more prestige in the broader evangelical world than his heterodox views deserved. And, I see him as one of the primary persons bolstering the McLaren nonsense. Several of his former students are friends of mine and it grieves me to see how they have drunk the koolaid rather than critically examining what they heard in class. 

Part of the problem was that he was by all accounts a very humble man, with great teaching gifts, and superior people skills. Grrrrrr. I'm sure Pelagius was a heck of a nice guy too.


----------



## Marrow Man (Jul 31, 2008)

Robbie Schmidtberger said:


> While he is very knowledgeable about theology and subsequent debates, he is far too open with Open Theism and other trends.



I noticed this as well. He quotes quite frequently from Clark Pinnock in the book (in addition to Wolfhart Pannenberg, whom I had not encountered prior to my readings). Pinnock even wrote one of the recommendations on the cover.


----------



## Marrow Man (Jul 31, 2008)

DMcFadden said:


> I
> 
> Part of the problem was that he was by all accounts a very humble man, with great teaching gifts, and superior people skills. Grrrrrr. I'm sure Pelagius was a heck of a nice guy too.



He does typically do a decent job when giving a synthesis of historical development of particular doctrines. But he only seems to do this when he is going to land on the orthodox side (e.g., in coming to a Chalcedonian understanding of the natures of Christ). If he's going to be suspect, he spends virtually no time at all in stating his beliefs in that area.


----------



## timmopussycat (Jul 31, 2008)

Marrow Man said:


> I'm having to read Stanley Grenz's systematic theology (_Theology for the Community of God_) for a class at a local (non-Reformed) school of theology. I'm about 2/3 of the way through it. My question, and this would be especially be directed to the Baptist brethren (since Grenz was a Baptist): what do you know about the man and his theology? He seems very much driven by a postmodern understanding of many things (hence, "community" in the title). I wonder how well he sat within the Baptist tradition prior to his death.



Although I was a fellow member of the same church for the last decade of his life, I did not read any of Stan's later and controversial theological writings before his death. (Nor have I had time to do so since.) The wider Baptist community knew of his great intellect and teaching skills, but tends to see him in two phases, first: early Grenz workmanlike and orthodox; then, after he became interested in postmodernism, he is seen somewhere between not as othodox to heterodox. Don Carson apparently critiqued his work somewhere; to which the essence of Stan's reply was that he had been misunderstood. 
If you can find that interchange, you will get probably the best sense of how Stan stood among Baptists.


----------



## timmopussycat (Jul 31, 2008)

DMcFadden said:


> Part of the problem was that he was by all accounts a very humble man, with great teaching gifts, and superior people skills. Grrrrrr. I'm sure Pelagius was a heck of a nice guy too.



I didn't know Pelagius, but you have accuately described Stan. Humble, nice guy, great teacher and superior people skills.


----------



## DMcFadden (Jul 31, 2008)

Tim,

Like our friends in the FV, there will always be some of us with a penchant for crying foul and suggesting that our interlocutors did not understand us. In the case of Grenz, that may be true. However, considering some of the things he said in print, I suspect it is more likely that he will be judged more harshly than he might expect. The man was on a theological trajectory during his life. Most likely he wanted to be judged as he probably saw himself -- in terms of the whole of it. Unfortunately, like the sausage maker's mantra: what you put in the grinder _last _will flavor the whole. 

Pinnock is another one who *was* a stalwart defender of all things evangelical at one time. Hey, Moody Press even published his book defending inerrancy, _Biblical Revelation_, back when I graduated from high school (1971)!!! However, with his strong defense of Open Theism these days, I doubt that any inerrancy-affirming publisher would touch him today. Is it fair to judge Pinnock as a defector from orthodox understandings because of where he ended up or should we average the entire corpus of his professional career and ministry? 

Regrettably, if you are going to kick off the traces, shift significantly to the left or right, or commit some heinous deed, you will be judged negatively because of it. All of the Moody Press copies of _Biblical Revelation_ must bring Dr. Pinnock incredible embarrassemnt at this stage of his understanding. Similarly, while Dr. Grenz doubtless felt misunderstood in light of the total impact of his life over decades of ministry, where he went and what he affirmed in the last ten years will not, in my opinion, permit him to remain in the hall of evangelical heroes.


----------



## Marrow Man (Jul 31, 2008)

DMc,

I have on good authority that someone significant within SBC circles said virtually the same thing you have about Grenz (the whole trajectory thing). Although he would not name Grenz (this is after SG's passing), his comment was along the lines that he believed that God, in His mercy, had called his friend home before he descended into utter apostasy.

I might be exaggerating the comment a bit, but that's the gist of it.


----------



## timmopussycat (Aug 1, 2008)

Marrow Man said:


> DMc,
> 
> I have on good authority that someone significant within SBC circles said virtually the same thing you have about Grenz (the whole trajectory thing). Although he would not name Grenz (this is after SG's passing), his comment was along the lines that he believed that God, in His mercy, had called his friend home before he descended into utter apostasy.
> 
> I might be exaggerating the comment a bit, but that's the gist of it.



I believe the man who said that could have been David Dockery. His article "When Piety is Not Enough" reveiwing Stan's theological trajectory came out shortly after Stan's death.


----------



## DMcFadden (Aug 1, 2008)

I had not read Dockery. However, with several of these guys, the term seemed to fit. Grenz, Jewett, Pinnock, et. al. ended up in places significantly "different" (in my opinion worse) than where they started.

Plus, there are those who just "went squishy" in their mature years (e.g., Packer on numerous subjects, Stott on hell).

Keeping a mind open to the voice of the Lord in the text is an admirable trait. Some of us accepted exegetical conclusions for pretty lame reasons in our youth. As we mature and continue studying the Word, we might expect some things to change. However, it always concerns me when someone "discovers" a view that is either more politically correct or more permissive than their former one.


----------



## RamistThomist (Aug 1, 2008)

I have become more sympathetic to what he was trying to say, even if the end result wasnt always good. I understand why he would want to critique foundationalism and why he advocated community. Non-foundationalism and community _are_ important and we shouldn't throw the baby out with the bath water. I just think he and McLaren did a bad job of it. And I think JI Packer recommended his books, too.


----------



## Robbie Schmidtberger (Aug 1, 2008)

Packer did recommend his books, at least Grenz and Olson's Contemporary Theology. To defend the guy though, they taught together. 

Packer recommends any book these days, not out of agreement, but where a book is the exemplar of a theological paradigm he encourages readers to understand the paradigm from going to the source. First and foremost he is a teacher.


----------

