# Thoughts on Wayne Grudem



## jjraby

What are thoughts on Systematic Theology: An Introduction to Biblical Doctrine 
By Wayne A. Grudem?
I've used it and i liked it. Just looking for some thoughts.


----------



## jogri17

Best systematic theology except for : Church gov't, baptism, gifts of the spirit.


----------



## jjraby

Are his thoughts wrong or just badly written?


----------



## Notthemama1984

Just wrong. He is a baptist who believes in the continuation of the gifts.


----------



## MLCOPE2

jogri17 said:


> Best systematic theology except for : Church gov't, baptism, gifts of the spirit.



He also holds to a historic premil eschatology.


----------



## CharlieJ

Clear discussions, easy format, exegetical basis, good bibliography, helpful discussion questions. Not much in the way of prolegomena. Not much (that I remember) in terms of historical theology. So, pair Grudem and Horton, and you have a great set from Zondervan.


----------



## JML

Chaplainintraining said:


> He is a baptist



What's wrong about being a Baptist?


----------



## E Nomine

Several years ago, the pastor at my former (non-denominational "baptist") church taught through this entire book and I was richly blessed by the experience. I've since grown in discernment--especially regarding eschatology--but I still refer to Grudem's book and find it very clear, comprehensive and well-organized.


----------



## Jack K

He disagrees with historic Reformed teaching on the points mentioned. If you can get beyond those, the rest of the volume can be enormously helpful. It is well-written and easy to follow. And again and again, there's a Bible-based thoroughness in listing the several things Scripture has to say on a given topic, and in anticipating the questions contemporary believers will have.

I read him side by side with Berkhof, and feel I pretty much have the bases covered.


----------



## lynnie

The main lack is that he leaves out the subject of the sabbath. I would have liked to see something detailing Calvin's position, the various confessions, positions today in Reformed denominations, etc. Seems like a big subject to leave out, but maybe in another edition....

His position on gifts appears no substantially different than Vern Poythress, a prof at WTS who is in the OPC:

( http://www.frame-poythress.org/Poythress_books/NPoythressSpiritualGiftsFinal.pdf) 

ie, there is no new canonical authoritative revelation, but there can be "words of knowledge" and fallible "prophecy" so forth.


----------



## SolaScriptura

In terms of readability, Grudem is my favorite. He is a good writer and I find it enjoyable to read his material. I also appreciate the layout and flow of his text. While I disagree with his position on church government, baptism, signs gifts, and the millennium, I appreciate that he at least interacts charitably with those whom he disagrees. 

One thing: He is careful to point out that he rejects the immutability of God. (Or at least one way of understanding the immutability of God.)

Reactions: Sad 1


----------



## Iconoclast

I would not recommend it to anyone.These "errors' are not slight but major,and dangerous.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## jjraby

Too bad reformed people can't write a Systematic Theology that isn't difficult to read... or is there one that i don't know of? I have Berkhof but it can be a a little dense..


----------



## jayce475

MLCOPE2 said:


> jogri17 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Best systematic theology except for : Church gov't, baptism, gifts of the spirit.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He also holds to a historic premil eschatology.
Click to expand...

 
What's wrong with being premil? Anyway, why Grudem when there are other systematics out there with sounder doctrines? I wouldn't recommend it to anyone at all lest they turn into a neo-Calvinist with their charismatic position on sign gifts and disdain towards specific forms of reverent worship.


----------



## Stephen L Smith

Martyn Lloyd-Jones "Basic Doctrines of the Bible" is better - more covenantal, not premill, a more consistent Reformed theological framework. Also he is very pastoral and easy to read.


----------



## jogri17

I'm just curious, is their a reason why the admin. have not commented about your signature (or the lack thereof?).

---------- Post added at 09:31 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:30 PM ----------




Iconoclast said:


> I would not recommend it to anyone.These "errors' are not slight but major,and dangerous.



I totally agree... adult only baptism and promotional of pure congregationalism is a major and dangerous error.  

Come on brother. you walked right into that one.


----------



## Notthemama1984

Who are you asking about? Everyone here has a signature.


----------



## Grillsy

I think he means the one who made the original post.


----------



## Notthemama1984

Post 13 has his signature. I have no clue why not in his first two posts.


----------



## Backwoods Presbyterian

jjraby said:


> Too bad reformed people can't write a Systematic Theology that isn't difficult to read... or is there one that i don't know of? I have Berkhof but it can be a a little dense..


 

Charles Hodge and R.L.Dabney's are easy to read. Hodge, I have discovered, surprisingly has some good wit. I am currently in Vol. II and have found it to be good reading.


----------



## Jesus is my friend

jjraby said:


> Too bad reformed people can't write a Systematic Theology that isn't difficult to read... or is there one that i don't know of? I have Berkhof but it can be a a little dense..



Well said!,Grudem's is just fantastic,the issues with some of the gifts I agree with,as was pointed out he is Baptist and historic premill. which is fine with me,just very easy to read and use,I ask,is that a bad thing?

And it's great that we can listen to all the mp3 lectures that this book was produced from.
Monergism :: Scottsdale Bible Church - Systematic Theology Class


----------



## FenderPriest

I think it's helpful to remember that Grudem's _Systematic_ is a beginner's guide and introduction to the entire field of systematic theology. And on that note, he's done an excellent job of edifying thousands upon thousands of Christ's people to know their Bible's better. I think it would be a great loss for people to refuse recommending it simply because they disagree with secondary issues contained therein. His exposition of each doctrine is helpful, clear, and practical with the devotional at the end of each chapter. I also appreciate that he intentionally wrote it to: 1) Have Scripture _quoted_ instead of cited (Grudem takes the point of Scripture's authority and use by the Spirit very seriously in this easily overlooked editorial note - a point many Reformed people need to take notice of.) 2) Each chapter is self-contained, not requiring the previous chapters for comprehension making it easily dropped in to.

I appreciate Grudem's _Systematic_ on many fronts. Are their better systematics? It depends on what "better" you're looking for. As some have noted, to the regular layman, Grudem's going to be the most accessible systematic out there (that I've read). The fact is, many systematics (Reformed or not) are hard to read and in many cases unwilling to meet the regular churchman where he is. Grudem writes so that truck drivers can understand the Bible better, and I appreciate that about him. Are their more thorough systematics out there? Sure (Bavinck and Calvin for starters), but again, his work is an introduction to the whole field, with an excellent bibliography for further reading (as noted) that I think serves as a great gateway systematic to walk along side people in knowing God. On the whole, much like _Knowing God_, I think Grudem's _Systematic_ will go down as one of the most positively influential, popular books of our generation for the glory of Christ.


----------



## jayce475

FenderPriest said:


> I think it's helpful to remember that Grudem's _Systematic_ is a beginner's guide and introduction to the entire field of systematic theology. And on that note, he's done an excellent job of edifying thousands upon thousands of Christ's people to know their Bible's better. I think it would be a great loss for people to refuse recommending it simply because they disagree with secondary issues contained therein. His exposition of each doctrine is helpful, clear, and practical with the devotional at the end of each chapter. I also appreciate that he intentionally wrote it to: 1) Have Scripture _quoted_ instead of cited (Grudem takes the point of Scripture's authority and use by the Spirit very seriously in this easily overlooked editorial note - a point many Reformed people need to take notice of.) 2) Each chapter is self-contained, not requiring the previous chapters for comprehension making it easily dropped in to.
> 
> I appreciate Grudem's _Systematic_ on many fronts. Are their better systematics? It depends on what "better" you're looking for. As some have noted, to the regular layman, Grudem's going to be the most accessible systematic out there (that I've read). The fact is, many systematics (Reformed or not) are hard to read and in many cases unwilling to meet the regular churchman where he is. Grudem writes so that truck drivers can understand the Bible better, and I appreciate that about him. Are their more thorough systematics out there? Sure (Bavinck and Calvin for starters), but again, his work is an introduction to the whole field, with an excellent bibliography for further reading (as noted) that I think serves as a great gateway systematic to walk along side people in knowing God. On the whole, much like _Knowing God_, I think Grudem's _Systematic_ will go down as one of the most positively influential, popular books of our generation for the glory of Christ.


 
It is precisely because it is an entry-level systematic that we ought not to recommend it as it will contribute to the formation of a younger believer's theology and a lot of work will need to be done to explain to such a one that many doctrines within the book are in error, serious or otherwise. If a brother's mature enough to pick out the bones from Barth, then sure, he will have not issues with picking them out from Grudem. Then again, it may not help him very much if he is already relatively mature. Yes, the book has helped bring many charismatics or new believers to a better understanding of proper soteriology, but that does not mean that we ought to actively recommend it.


----------



## raekwon

I received one of the final "pushes" I needed on my way to becoming a Calvinist when reading Grudem's systematic in a hotel room on one of my first ever out-of-town trips for work, about 10 years ago.


----------



## Bern

I think its very good on the DOG, the attributes of God etc. The main reason is that it is not too complicated. There is a tendency within the reformed camp to be far too "intellectual", while many of us here have no problem with that, there are lots of people who are put off the Reformed position because they see this behaviour as proud, or elitist. I think its good that a more simple systematic theology book has been produced. Having said all that, I would recommend it only if I was able to point out the parts I disagree with, such as his eschatalogical position and his standing on gifts.


----------



## Gage Browning

Horton's Covenantal books, not so readable, but his Systematic Work is fairly readable. I wouldn't say as readable as Grudem, but close.


----------



## The Author of my Faith

FenderPriest said:


> I think it's helpful to remember that Grudem's _Systematic_ is a beginner's guide and introduction to the entire field of systematic theology. And on that note, he's done an excellent job of edifying thousands upon thousands of Christ's people to know their Bible's better. I think it would be a great loss for people to refuse recommending it simply because they disagree with secondary issues contained therein. His exposition of each doctrine is helpful, clear, and practical with the devotional at the end of each chapter. I also appreciate that he intentionally wrote it to: 1) Have Scripture _quoted_ instead of cited (Grudem takes the point of Scripture's authority and use by the Spirit very seriously in this easily overlooked editorial note - a point many Reformed people need to take notice of.) 2) Each chapter is self-contained, not requiring the previous chapters for comprehension making it easily dropped in to.
> 
> I appreciate Grudem's _Systematic_ on many fronts. Are their better systematics? It depends on what "better" you're looking for. As some have noted, to the regular layman, Grudem's going to be the most accessible systematic out there (that I've read). The fact is, many systematics (Reformed or not) are hard to read and in many cases unwilling to meet the regular churchman where he is. Grudem writes so that truck drivers can understand the Bible better, and I appreciate that about him. Are their more thorough systematics out there? Sure (Bavinck and Calvin for starters), but again, his work is an introduction to the whole field, with an excellent bibliography for further reading (as noted) that I think serves as a great gateway systematic to walk along side people in knowing God. On the whole, much like _Knowing God_, I think Grudem's _Systematic_ will go down as one of the most positively influential, popular books of our generation for the glory of Christ.


 

AMEN! AND AMEN!

I am amazed at the attitude that shuts out anyone who does not agree 1000% with their views on issues that are not heretical. I do not agree with child baptism but embrace reformed and presbyterian teaching and soak it in like a sponge. I am not against it but do not neccesarrily agree. So I should throw out all Systematic Theology books and writings by anyone who holds to a point I don't agree? What a silly thing to do.


----------



## Rich Koster

I generally like it. I have a copy. I have used it in Sunday School. I like the way he presents different viewpoints and explains why he chose his. I'm glad he wrote it so someone who does not have degrees after their name can handle it. I have some disagreement with some points in the Spiritual Gifts area.


----------



## Kim G

I have read portions of it and found it easy to read. My only beef was that I am a default credobaptist but I still found his explanation of paedobaptism to be a bit of a caricature. 

Also, we all read books we disagree with in some way. So read Grudem, enjoy the good stuff, and let God's Spirit help you discern areas in which he is lacking.


----------



## discipulo

I don't know Grudem, I don't even plan to get it, Bavinck, Berkhof, Reymond, Van Genderen, Kersten, Muller PRRD (covering some areas like Prolegomena)

and have 2 volumes of Frame 4 vols set (not exactly a ST though), these are more than enough for me,

yet I plan to buy Horton's while Douglas Kelly will be a must when complete.

But I have a word or two about Grudem from a source I truly trust.

A good brother and dear friend of mine, Dr. Alan Pallister is Professor of Systematic Theology in the Baptist Theological Seminar in Portugal,

Seminrio Teolgico Baptista

God has used him in my life in so many ways, not the least by his devotion to Calvinism or to the Puritan writers.

I don't agree with his view on Baptism and some other areas (he is also a Baptist Pastor) 

but for more than 15 years he used Louis Berkhof as his Manual for the Class in a Baptist Seminary, and this says a lot!

Some years ago he started using Wayne Grudem instead and he highly recommends it. We had a talk about it.

Dr. Pallister is not a strict cessationist but he is amillenialist (how he dealt with Berkhof earlier on the fomer and now with Grudem on the later

I really don't know). 

But he is a man of God who excells in doctrinal integrity and dedication to the Church, both as a Pastor and Professor, he wouldn't use or recommend 

Grudem if it wasn't truly very Biblical !!!


----------



## AThornquist

With some of the logic in this thread, there is _no way_ I could recommend a Presbyterian or Reformed systematic theology to a new believer; I would feel terrible if it contributed to them becoming paedobaptist, among other things. If I am going to wait for systematic theology that has everything right, I am going to be waiting for a long, long time.


----------



## Peairtach

His worst error is that he believes that true prophecy can have error. But he is looking at things through the lens of Pentecostalism/Charismatic experience, where "prophecy" does have error.

Just further confirmation - if needed - of the erroneousness of Pentecostalism.

Although he's Pentecostal he takes a good line on the baptism with the Spirit i.e. that all experience it at regeneration.

But he's easy to read for those who aren't used to reading systematics.


----------



## Steve Curtis

I've never thought that Grudem was Pentecostal. Charismatic, perhaps, but not Pentecostal. In fact, in the very treatment of the baptism of the Spirit occurring at regeneration, it would seem that he excludes himself from Pentecostalism.


----------



## Iconoclast

jogri17 said:


> I'm just curious, is their a reason why the admin. have not commented about your signature (or the lack thereof?).
> 
> ---------- Post added at 09:31 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:30 PM ----------
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iconoclast said:
> 
> 
> 
> I would not recommend it to anyone.These "errors' are not slight but major,and dangerous.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I totally agree... adult only baptism and promotional of pure congregationalism is a major and dangerous error.
> 
> Come on brother. you walked right into that one.
Click to expand...

 
 I knew when I posted someone would do this ...I just was not sure who it would be,lol. Of course Adult only baptism is error. We both know it is believers baptism even if the believer is not yet an adult. The NT. is full of the command and teaching of this as you know....we do not even have to turn back to Gen17 to find a command for believers baptism, as the NT is very clear on baptism. I think we might have a few threads discussing this issue in the archives


----------



## bookslover

MLCOPE2 said:


> jogri17 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Best systematic theology except for : Church gov't, baptism, gifts of the spirit.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He also holds to a historic premil eschatology.
Click to expand...

 
That's a good reason to like him!


----------



## Marrow Man

AThornquist said:


> If I am going to wait for systematic theology that has everything right, I am going to be waiting for a long, long time.



No need to wait at all, my friend, as that ST was written about 450 years ago -- Calvin's _Institutes_.


----------



## JML

Marrow Man said:


> No need to wait at all, my friend, as that ST was written about 450 years ago -- Calvin's Institutes.



There is also John Gill's Body of Doctrinal & Practical Divinity. Plus Gill is a Baptist.


----------



## Marrow Man

On a more serious note, I think the point above is that we can benefit greatly from theologians and STs even if we don't agree with every single jot and tittle of their writing. Sometimes this trends toward the ridiculous. A year or so ago I bought a copy of James Ussher's _A Body of Divinity_ from Solid Ground Christian Books. I genuinely like SGCB and especially what they do with reprinting classic reformed books. However, they found it necessary to put a disclaimer in the book stating how they disagreed with Ussher's views on baptism. Really? Was it necessary for Baptists to make it clear that they didn't agree with paedo-baptism? 

I'm just glad they didn't find it necessary to deface Thornwell's four volume work on theology in the same way.


----------



## Joseph Scibbe

Come on guys! The fact that there are people that say this book is in serious error over sign gifts, baptism, and historic premil is disheartening. Sounds like when Paul mentioned people that spent tons of time arguing over genealogy. The book is so thick that even if you rip those pages out, you have plenty of book left to read. I have only found 1 book that I can recommend if we are requiring 100% agreement as the basis. So throw all your theologies away because they could be wrong. Just read the Bible. It's the only way to be sure you will be agreeing 100% of the time.


And whats so terribly bad about being historic premil, credo, and moderate non-cessacionist


----------



## jayce475

Unashamed 116 said:


> Come on guys! The fact that there are people that say this book is in serious error over sign gifts, baptism, and historic premil is disheartening. Sounds like when Paul mentioned people that spent tons of time arguing over genealogy. The book is so thick that even if you rip those pages out, you have plenty of book left to read. I have only found 1 book that I can recommend if we are requiring 100% agreement as the basis. So throw all your theologies away because they could be wrong. Just read the Bible. It's the only way to be sure you will be agreeing 100% of the time.
> 
> 
> And whats so terribly bad about being historic premil, credo, and moderate non-cessacionist


 
I don't think it's very fair to speak about these three in the same light as if they are similar. They're not. I, and many others, are premil and Reformed. One can be credo and Reformed, if one is willing to accept our Reformed Baptist brethren as Reformed. No one can be a "moderate non-cessationist", whatever nuance that may take and still be Reformed, as Charismatism is contrary to our Confessions as it undermines the sufficiency of Scripture. You may be of a different opinion, but many of us do view Charismatism as serious error at the very least, so yes, it is terribly bad.

I don't know about the personal experiences of others, but I have often found systematics to be quite influential in shaping the thinking of many of the brethren around me. Therefore, I would hesitate to recommend it to one whom I think may be influenced as such and if someone insists on reading it, I find it needful to warn him about the compromising remarks on worship and the Charismatism within the book. Many who are here on the Puritanboard are mature Christians or church ministers and so will not be easily misled by the book, but there are many younger sheep out there lacking discernment and the last thing we need is for them to pick up Grudem and start speaking in tongues. Next thing we know, they're jumping around in a Charismatic church that claims to preach the 5 points of Calvinism.

We do have the confessions and catechisms which systematize and summarize theology wonderfully and are suitable for the instruction of younger ones. There are plenty of books that expound upon them as well. Do we really need Grudem?

---------- Post added at 12:31 AM ---------- Previous post was at 12:19 AM ----------




FenderPriest said:


> On the whole, much like Knowing God, I think Grudem's Systematic will go down as one of the most positively influential, popular books of our generation for the glory of Christ.



Really? And you are certain that it is not responsible for the creation of many a New Calvinist who marries charismatism with TULIP?


----------



## BlackCalvinist

MLCOPE2 said:


> jogri17 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Best systematic theology except for : Church gov't, baptism, gifts of the spirit.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He also holds to a historic premil eschatology.
Click to expand...


Well, he's got that part right. ;-)


----------



## kodos

After my conversion, I was introduced to Grudem's Systematic through a Evangelical (Semi-Pelagian?) coworker of mine (I hesitate to use the word Arminian, as his theology didn't seem to account for what Arminians believe, prevenient grace and all that). He had railed against Calvinism (I was too immature to know what Calvinism was right after conversion!) and he had Grudem's Systematic on his desk. Evidently, he never read it - as I pointed out shortly after showing him the chapters on Predestination, Conversion, etc.

So I will always have fond memories of Grudem's work. That said, I've drifted more into a Presbyterian/Covenant Theology framework - and he doesn't do a very good job on covering/explaining the Covenants. I also disagree with his eschatology, and I've drifted more into the infant baptism camp. 

His ST is light, and highly readable. Newcomers to a Calvinistic background will find it easy reading and very understandable. I continue to recommend it to my friends. However, I picked up Horton's ST recently, and boy - do I feel at home with it. It's great, and fits my current perspective much better.

But Grudem's teaches the BIG TRUTHS in such a great way that the lay-person will find very understandable. Especially when it comes to controversial issues where modern evangelicals split from the Reformed tradition (Predestination, etc.).


----------



## MLCOPE2

Unashamed 116 said:


> And whats so terribly bad about being historic premil, credo, and moderate non-cessacionist



I wasn't pointing out his position as an erroneous one, I was just pointing out the fact that his is a different position than most reformed folk hold.


----------

