What I learnt from teaching Wayne Grudem’s “Systematic Theology” in a pandemic
For about 25 weeks, I engaged between 15-30 young adults reading Wayne Grudem’s classic “Systematic Theology” over 25 weeks for about 90 minutes during the Friday lunch hour. Each time we met, I presented summarised slides of Grudem’s material, around one or two chapters each time. We then had Q&A time at the tail end, often running over our alloted time to answer people’s questions. As far as possible I tried to be faithful to Grudem’s book, quoting him where appropriate, and in only a handful of instances, omitting arguments that went too in depth, took too long to explain, or offered too many different competing views on theological subjects. Here’s what I learnt:
1. We should not be afraid of engaging with profound, complex subject matter of systematic theology. Questions about the doctrine of God, the nature of Scripture, the end times, the hard doctrine of salvation from call to election, justification, sanctification to glorification can all be answered and explained. We need not be embarrassed or afraid of these branches of truth that may feel impossible to understand but have actually just been unarticulated! Yes, some of it will be hard to understand fully, but it can be explained. We just need to work at it and refine our way of saying it.
2. A “bite size chunks” strategy is immensely powerful in breaking up a big book. So much ground can be covered. This approach to handling big books can be life-changing, and we need not fear Christian classics or the grand treatises that inspire awe in us. Just chip away at it. Put a book by your bedside and work at it, a bit at a time. Just fill your mouth with it.
3. Too often, when people teach the Bible they’re proof-texting and not really explaining the Biblical text in its entirety. In systematic theology, we’re explaining texts by proof-texting most of the time, showing evidence from separate quotes pulled from all over Scripture which is opposed to biblical theology which shows how passages hold together as part of unfolding theological themes traced throughout the narrative of the Bible in unfolding revelation. This is necessary. Most of the time when we teach the Bible in Bible study, we are proof texting as if we are proving truths of systematics, which shows how much of a systematic approach has shaped Bible teaching in communities.
4. Systematic theological topics are necessary for Christian living and discipleship. Without the big ideas of Christian truth to frame how we understand the Gospel, salvation and our lives in response to God, we actually have no grid lines for plotting the curve of our experience. We need the x and the y axes to make sense of what is happening in between. Systematic theologies give us that.
5. Young people are hungry for systematic theology because they’ve either been kept from the “real stuff”, or it’s been presented in broad, clunky terms without structure or coherence. Each week, I was stirred to see that people came, in the middle of work with their questions, and they came enthusiastically and excitedly. I got to know some of them and hear their thoughts, and how old truths learnt anew helped them worship and pray and delight in Christ. But so many of them also shared that they had never heard this before, which was both exciting and sad. Others shared that they heard the broad lines, but no details, and they did not how to fit it together, how holiness related to the design of the church, and how baptism and the Lord’s supper related to election, and how the end times related to creation. Integrating it all together was both foreign yet satisfying for them, and I can only imagine how it will be useful moving forward for these young brothers and sisters.
Commitment to Christ, if genuine, must include a commitment to turn from sin. Preaching the need for faith without repentance is preaching only half of the gospel.
"Why will otherwise intelligent people commit themselves to beliefs that seem so irrational? It seems as though they will believe anything, so long as it is not belief in the personal God of Scripture, who calls us to forsake our pride, humble ourselves before him, ask his forgiveness for failure to obey his moral standards, and submit ourselves to his moral commands for the rest of our lives."
Review: Recovering Biblical Manhood and Womanhood by John Piper and Wayne Grudem
*Disclaimer: Anything said here is simply an expression of my current views and ideas. I cannot guarantee that my views won't change (knowing God, He will throw something in the mix to spin everything around anyway!), nor can I claim to be ultimately correct. I’m not trying to state facts, but instead just want to share my thoughts.*
Despite the length of this book, I will try keep this review as short as possible!
Surprisingly, the size of the book was deceiving. I found the structure (particularly for the first half) largely repetitive – although I could see the benefit of applying the key idea to different situations or sub-topics, to give it some context. The key idea running throughout the book is the idea that men and women are created to have different roles in both life and the church.
Thinking back, I realise that what let the book down for me was not necessarily the ideas contained within it, but the delivery of such ideas. Many chapters provided a structure of ‘Bible passage, various ideas, authors’ ideas’ however in parts the arrogance seemed almost Dawkins- esque, with the authors unnecessarily adding clauses such as ‘clearly this is the correct view’/’all other ideas are obviously wrong’ at the end of their point. Without this, I think I would have listened more to the ideas of the authors, since I sometimes felt that this arrogance could stem from their own uncertainty, and that they are somehow trying to ‘support’ their view further by making it appear more forceful or obvious. Admittedly, I have not read other things by these authors, so cannot distinguish whether this is definitely the case or whether it is simply a reflection of their individual writing styles.
Once past the opinionated beginning of the book, I enjoyed seeing different interpretations of passages within the Bible. One of the criticisms made by Piper and Grudem was that ‘evangelical feminists’ (meaning anyone who disagrees with them) can only use said passages to support their view when ‘wrongly’ interpreted, or cherry-picking verses out of the specific context within which they are meant to be. Although a fair criticism in some cases, I also felt that Piper and Grudem did the same throughout the book – making a point and cherry-picking verses to support it. I felt that this was one of the mistakes they made, which put me off of their ideas.
Other mistakes that I felt they made (besides the interwoven arrogance and cherry-picking some verses) were in the way they discriminated against the LGBT community. Although unsure of where I stand on this issue (I won’t dwell on this, since it’s a whole different topic) my understanding is that as Christians (or even humans!) we are meant to love people first, and not judge them. Ultimately, if anyone needs change in their lives (or doesn’t) then God is big enough and powerful enough to tell them that himself. It’s our job just to love people. That’s it.
But anyway, there seemed to be an unnecessary spiteful attitude toward the LGBT community from Piper and Grudem. Here, I found it important to remind myself that this book was published over 10 years ago, in 1991, and views have evolved and changed a lot since then. Regardless of your view, I think many of us would agree that saying ‘women in leadership has given rise to lesbianism’ is simply absurd, and calling members of the LGBT community ‘disturbed’ is just plain rude and completely ignorant! Needless to say, I probably don’t need to outline their view to you.
Piper and Grudem’s belief that men and women have different roles boils down to the idea that the key role of men in the church is to teach, and in the home is to be ‘in charge’, whilst the role of women in church is to listen, submit to the men, and only teach other women/children so as not to undermine the authority of the men, and at home to be a traditional housewife who cleans and looks after the children. They criticize women pursuing careers and putting their children in day care, or mothers working whilst the fathers look after the children. They say that this leads to various problems since it ‘corrupts the created order’ – but I think this is a closed-minded view, and parents need to work out what works for them, and ask God in their own lives what would be best.
Equally, I never completely understand how it can be okay for a woman to prophesy in church etc, but not to actually teach in church, even though she may teach other women or children. The idea was that it undermines the naturally given leadership of men in creation, but then surely women must not teach anyone. I think the reason I find this hardest is because I was 100% for all-male leadership until God placed leadership on my own heart. Only at that point did I dare to dream that God has bigger plans for me than I thought. Despite not knowing what this will lead to yet, I refuse to rule out any options simply because ‘women must submit to men’ – I will only follow God’s lead.
Another issue I had was the constant degrading of women (because of the creation order) yet trying to claim that they viewed the role of women as equal, as men and women are both ‘created in the image of God’. I understood it, but again I think the undertones of arrogance undermined the actual point here, where I would have found it easier to take on board if it had sounded less biased.
Ultimately though, there were some things I agreed with, and some really interesting points (such as the biological and psychological differences between men and women) as I gradually worked my way through the book. Before beginning this book, my views would probably have been defined best under the term ‘egalitarian’ – ie that there is no particular role distinction between men and women, either in day-to-day life, or within the church. Now, I cannot put myself under that umbrella, for the following reasons:
I do think that men and women have different roles in marriage. I can’t say that I know exactly what that looks like, although I do like the idea of the man being the ‘head’ of the family as Piper and Grudem describe. Part of me thinks that within this, God intends that wives have free expression, but also part of me realizes that I would find it hard to marry someone who I felt didn’t challenge and lead me spiritually, as well as my natural desire to feel protected and loved. This is what makes me agree with their idea of different roles within marriage – since if this is properly expressed, then as a wife, I know that I will be able to make my views known and be supported by my husband – not ‘overruled’ but working as a team. My opinionated nature and strong independence need not be oppressed by marriage, but directed toward helping my husband. (Which is why he must be a strong spiritual leader, otherwise I could see how it could be easy to feel oppressed and unable to be all that God created me to be).
This is my general overview of the book. Again, I do not know what the future holds. I am surprised to have come to the conclusion that I have, since even yesterday I was sure that I disagreed with a lot more of the book than I actually did in the end. Overall, the way in which the book is written is perhaps what lets it down – although the whole book was interesting and thought-provoking.
"Having gifts that differ according to the grace given to us, let us use them: if prophecy, in proportion to our faith;" -Romans 12:6
Since I was born in 1994 there have been have around 40 predictions that the world would end [1]. One of the major "predictions" was from Harold Camping. He predicted the end of the world multiple times (the irony of that is clear). The truth is, the Bible gives us guidelines on how we are to handle "prophets" (I use that word vary loosely in this case. With this in mind, it makes me wonder why there is not more discussion of the gift of prophecy. This gift has seemed to become a topic for the more "scholarly", when it is something that is vary applicable to the ordinary.
Is Prophecy- Foretelling?
And we have the prophetic word more fully confirmed, to which you will do well to pay attention as to a lamp shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts, knowing this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture comes from someone's own interpretation. For no prophecy was ever produced by the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit. - 2 Peter 1:19-21
Here Peter is writing to churches more then likely "in Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia" (1 Peter 1:1) at least if his other letter is a clue to us. Here Peter is writing of Jesus, which the "prophetic word" of the Old Testament point us too. Peter is recalling the moment it clicked to him who Jesus truly was. In the verses leading up to v. 19 he is recounting the mount of transfiguration (Matthew 17) when a voice spoke saying “This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased,”. Peter saw that Jesus was the fulfillment of the words of the prophets. Peter knew that while they had the voice of God from Heaven confirming Jesus as the Son of God, but we have the words of the prophets. Peter knew that when the Old Testament prophets spoke, they spoke for God. "For no prophecy was ever produced by the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit". As the prophets foretold the coming the Messiah they spoke the very words of God. So, we can see that prophecy, at least in the Old Testament sense, included foretelling and was authoritative in the sense that the prophet spoke for God.
New Testament Prophecy
Within the last 20 years, many conversations, once again among the more "scholarly" have happened regarding the gift of prophecy as it relates to the New Testament. Part of the conversation comes up with the inclusion of this gift in the both the more "miraculous gifts" included in 1 Corinthians 12-14 and the more still supernatural but none apostolic gifts of Romans 12. Also, the statement in 1 Cor. 13:8 where it says that the gift of prophecy will remain "the perfect comes" being, more then likely, the second coming of Christ. (more is discussed on this passage in Chapter _____)
Some have taken to the view that New Testament prophecy is "Spirit-Prompted yet No Intrinsic, Divine Authority." [2] This view of prophecy was originally proposed by respected Systematic Theologian Wayne Grudem. John Piper, as well as others today hold to this view. The basic idea is that New Testament prophecy is "God bringing something to mind that you would not otherwise have thought of in the moment for the sake of upbuilding, encouragement, consolation." [3] but that this is also not authoritative.
More could be said about this view, if interested in a complete handling of this view by Grudem himself, you can read many of his works, specifically "The Gift of Prophecy in the New Testament and Today" published by Crossway.
I, as much as I respect John Piper and Wayne Grudem as men of God and pastors, must disagree with them on this issue. One of the key characters in this whole debate is the lesser known prophet Agabus, found in the book of Acts. [4] He is found two times. Once in Acts 11 and another time in Acts 21. Found both times prophesying. In Acts 11, what do we see?
Now in these days prophets came down from Jerusalem to Antioch. And one of them named Agabus stood up and foretold by the Spirit that there would be a great famine over all the world (this took place in the days of Claudius). -Acts 11:27-28
We see the words of Agabus being described as "through the Spirit" and we see that they came to pass exactly as he said they would. This is, as we stated earlier about the Old Testament prophets, authoritative foretelling- speaking on behalf of God.
We see a vary similar account over in Acts 21. Paul was staying in Ptolemais
While we were staying for many days, a prophet named Agabus came down from Judea. And coming to us, he took Paul's belt and bound his own feet and hands and said, “Thus says the Holy Spirit, ‘This is how the Jews at Jerusalem will bind the man who owns this belt and deliver him into the hands of the Gentiles.’ -Acts 21:10-11
Agabus, once again, makes a prediction and it comes to pass. Also, note that it equates his words with those of the Holy Spirit. Paul, at Jerusalem was arrested by Jews and handed over to Romans (the officials at that time, would have been Roman). Once again, authoritative speaking for God- in the form of foretelling.
But New Testament prophecy is more then just foretelling. I believe there is an element, the element that is alive today in the church, of forth-telling. By forth-telling, I mean, "publicly speaking God's Word with authority" [5] We can see a little more about this, along with the purpose of prophecy in the church but a look at a few verses in 1 Corinthians 14:
But if all prophesy, and an unbeliever or outsider enters, he is convicted by all, he is called to account by all, the secrets of his heart are disclosed, and so, falling on his face, he will worship God and declare that God is really among you. - 1 Corinthians 14:24-25"Let two or three prophets speak, and let the others weigh what is said." - 1 Corinthians 14:29 "For you can all prophesy one by one, so that all may learn and all be encouraged, and the spirits of prophets are subject to prophets." - 1 Corinthians 14:31-32
So, these three verses teach us three things about prophecy that should be noted.
1) Prophecy has the power to convict.
2) Prophecy should be weighed by hearers.
3) Prophecy, being at the power of the prophet, is meant to encourage and instruct.
To point one, the verse makes clear that when one prophecies they not only speak of God (so they know that God, and who God is, is among them) but discloses the secrets of there hearts. The Word of God lays there hearts bear and we have that in the Scripture.
To the second point, 1 John 4 makes this point evidently clear.
Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, for many false prophets have gone out into the world. By this you know the Spirit of God: every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God, and every spirit that does not confess Jesus is not from God. This is the spirit of the antichrist, which you heard was coming and now is in the world already. - 1 John 4:1-3
The words of false prophets are paralleled with false teaching. To "test the spirits" is to weigh what prophets say according to proper doctrine. That is what Paul means by 1 Thessalonians 5:19-21, "Do not quench the Spirit. Do not despise prophecies, but test everything; hold fast what is good"
To "quench" here is to put out. [5] The way we put out the Spirit of God is false teaching, such as denying that Jesus came in the flesh and is from God. But it is through proper understanding of Gods Word that we can live out the commands of 5:16-18. Orthodoxy leads to orthpraxy.
Rejoice always, pray without ceasing, give thanks in all circumstances; for this is the will of God in Christ Jesus for you
Is the gift of Prophecy for today?
So, after a long, but needed introduction and definition as to what the gift is, we need to arrive at our answer, is the gift for today. The answer: yes and no!
No in the sense of the revelation of God's word- fore-telling. We are not the Old Testament prophets, nor are we the apostles and early disciples who are showing there authority as apostles and also speaking forth the Scripture of God. The gift of fore-telling is not active in the church today, as we saw early in the chapter with the mention of the end times prediction. God has revealed what we need to know about the future in the Bible. But, as I said earlier, prophecy is a bit tricky.
The gift of prophecy is available in that sense that it is a part of the list of gifts in Romans 12. I believe that in this passage Paul is writing of the gift of forth-telling (publicly speaking God's Word). If we look close at the passage we'll see why I believe that. Let's look at Romans 12:6,
"Having gifts that differ according to the grace given to us, let us use them: if prophecy, in proportion to our faith;" -Romans 12:6
So, when one prophecies (Publicly speaks the Word of God) they are to do it in proportion (analogia) to our faith. Now, what does the word "analogia" means? If we take it simply "ana"- means "among", "logia" comes from the word "logo" which means, "Word". So, when we take that into account we are to prophesy "among the Word" of faith. In other words, we are speak the Word of God in proper doctrine. The gift of prophesy- forth-telling the Word of God authoritatively and effectively, is still available to the Church today.
Is the Gift of Prophecy the Same as Teaching?
I think the final question that needs to be addressed is the difference between prophesying and teaching?
Well, I think, while there are similar functions in some ways, they different in scope.
Similarities between prophecy and teaching involve the instruction of the saints, that the Word when taught can weigh on the heart of the hearers and false teaching happens. All of these are also purposes of prophecy. But, what we learn from Scripture is the scope of the gifts.
Elders are to be able to teach, but are not told to prophesy. (1 Timothy 3:2) Also, while Elders are to be men, women can prophesy. (ex. Phillips daughter Acts 21:9). I think prophesy is on an individual level what preaching and teaching are before the church. Teaching involved expositional teaching of the Word of shepherding God's people. Prophesy is what is done in personal evangelism, counseling and discipleship. With teaching comes leadership with prophecy comes accountability, while both use the Word of God authoritatively 1 Cor. 14:3- "But the one who prophesies speaks to people for their strengthening,encouraging and comfort"
Conclusion
I'm sure for some this does not satisfy them. I'm sure there are questions that remain regarding the gift of prophecy, what we do know is that we have the glorious Word of God and it is powerful. What we know is that we do not and cannot see the future as the prophets did, but that we can publicly speak for God- through the forth telling of His Word. And let's us do so boldly for the Glory of Jesus.
"...For the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy." -Revelation 19:10
[1] http://www.bible.ca/pre-date-setters.htm *I used this site to find examples of end of the world predictions, I do not support much of what is on this site.
[2] John Piper, sermon, "The Authority and Nature of the Gift of Prophecy", March 25, 1990, http://www.desiringgod.org/resource-library/sermons/the-authority-and-nature-of-the-gift-of-prophecy
[3] John Piper, interview, "What is the Gift of Prophecy in the New Covenant?", Desiring God.org
https://vimeo.com/57007870
[4] Note: there are many texts, especially in Acts that talk about prophecy that could be handled, but, to keep this brief and due to the ambiguity of the passages, I will leave them and handle the main ones.
[5] Calvin Commentary on 1 Thessalonians. http://www.ccel.org/ccel/calvin/calcom42.vi.vii.iv.html
i'm currently writing my doctrinal position paper for my theology class and our whole class was based off of what wayne grudem says. i'm having a hard time trying to figure out if i go with the grudem or not on my stances. easy way or hard way on this, buddies.
