Talk:Wayne Grudem

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Christianity Portal This article is part of WikiProject Charismatic Christianity, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Pentecostalism, the Charismatic movement and its relatives and offshoots on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.

???

This article has not yet received a rating on the Project's quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article.

[edit] Grudem & Vineyard

Article currently states that:

"[Grudem] is a member of the Vineyard Movement and one of its main apologists and spokespeople."

Is this still the case? — Matt Crypto 23:37, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Pretty certain of this. I haven't read anything that shows he has left them or anything. His Systematic Theology book reflects a lot of Vineyard teaching, but is orthodox enough for conservative non-Charismatics to endorse it (although with a big "BUT" attached). I'm no fan of the Vineyard movement, but they did distance themselves from the Toronto Blessing ten years ago... which indicates that there is a semblence of orthodoxy within their ranks. This probably due to the efforts of Grudem. --One Salient Oversight 23:58, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Further to this: the reason I asked is that I half-remembered reading something about this in a book a while back, but I couldn't find or remember the book. Right after posting (of course) I found the book — sorry about that. It's Are Miraculous Gifts for Today? (1996), edited by Grudem. In the preface, he writes:

For most of my life, I have attended "open but cautious" churches with three exceptions:

During my college years I had the privilege of working one summer in Mt. Vernon, New York, as an assistant to the Rev. Harald Bredesen, who was by that time a prominent spokesman for the charismatic renewal. Then, during my seminary years, I served as a summer intern at a "cessationist" Orthodox Presbyterian Church in Westfield, New Jersey -- pastor Robert Atwell, himself a cessationist, simply asked that I not make my convictions a matter of controversy in the church. Finally, during the years 1989–1994 my wife and I were part of one Vineyard church and also helped to start another one, but the 45-minute drive finally proved far too much for effective church involvement. For that reason we began attending a wonderful Southern Baptist church near our home, where we are now members.

This implies that Grudem was no longer attending a Vineyard church between '94 and '96. He might, of course, still have been associated with the Vineyard movement afterwards, but I think this is worth looking at some more. (His Systematic Theology was published '94). — Matt Crypto 00:20, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)

In accordance with the discussion and the information we have right now I think it's best to remove the part regarding his membership but leave the rest about his support of vineyard as it is. We could say "has been" but this begs the question, "Why did he leave?" I think the best thing to do is leave this out until we have more current information. --Victoria h 04:10, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] "little value" judgement

His Systematic theology deliberately does not interact with any who disagrees with his doctrine of scripture, This means that the work has little value for those outside of the conservative evangelical wing of the church.

I admit that this statment was provocative but I do think that it is important to note that in his systematic theology he deliberately does not interact with those who disagree with his view on scripture. Even to the point of not dealing with alternative models of scripture User:Xopher_mc 24 March 2006

Grudem does provide counterarguments to typical objections to his view of Scripture, but, given that he thinks they're wrong, it's not particularly surprising that he doesn't bother to "interact" with them further after the section on the doctrines of Scripture. I don't think we really need make the point that someone from a such-and-such a theological background seems committed to discussing things only from that viewpoint. — Matt Crypto 08:45, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

I agree with Matt. First, that statement isn't true. Second, this type of statement doesn't belong here for any number of reasons: non-NPOV, no original research, and it's a value judgement. Thirdly, the reading of materials one disagrees with for the purpose of better understanding, argument preparation, etc. is a nearly universal practice.--Victoria h 06:04, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

I also agree with Matt. However, if you could supply a quote and reference from Grudem to substantiate the claim that this is a "deliberate" omission, we could probably work it into the text (though in a more neutral way). --Flex 13:11, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

See page 17 in systematic theology (point 4 in his preface) User:Xopher_mc

I don't have the book. Please quote it here (with sufficient context, of course). --Flex 13:34, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

Yes, please do, Xopher_mc, if you could. (My copy is currently on loan.) — Matt Crypto 13:36, 31 March 2006 (UTC)