I have the tremendous privilege of team teaching an adult Bible study class this fall with John Voss in the essentials of the Christian faith. The curriculum for the course comes from Wayne Grudem’s Christian Beliefs: Twenty Basics Every Christian Should Know, which is based off of his Bible Doctrine, which is itself a condensation of his excellent Systematic Theology.
We’ll cover all of the chapters of the book, in order. They are:
What is the Bible?
What is God like?
What is the Trinity?
What is creation?
What is prayer?
What are angels and demons?
What is man?
What is sin?
Who is Christ?
What is the atonement?
What is the resurrection?
What is election?
What does it mean to become a Christian?
What are justification and adoption?
What are sanctification and perseverance?
What is death?
What is the church?
What will happen when Christ returns?
What is the final judgment?
What is heaven?
It’s an excellent little book–eminently readable and thoroughly Biblical. I’m excited about it and think it will be a great study of the foundational truths of our faith that we never outgrow. So, whether you are considering Christianity, are new to the faith, or have been a believer for years, consider joining us. It starts this Sunday (August 20th). We’ve got plenty of books available at cost ($10).
Where do you stand on Grudem’s non-cessationist views? I am just curious because a student wants me to go through his systematic with him and I am wondering how to handle that section. I am a cessationist.
Is it a particular view related to gifting that you take issue with Grudem on or just the fact that he is not a cessationist?
I would take issue with Grudem on his view of prophesy (that we test the prophesy and not the prophet), but I have yet to come across that view in his ST book.
I’m curious, what to you base your cessationism on?
Right, it is his view of prophesy specifically that I am referring to. I thought it was in his ST book. I will have to go back and read Ferguson (who argues against it). If it is not then great, because I was nervous about explaining that section. It is a pretty technical debate.
I base my cessationism on my ST, in short. My understanding of the whole bible’s teaching about the progress and nature of revelation coupled with my understanding of the structure of Acts.
I just did a very cursory scan of chapter 53, part A (on Prophesy). He cleary lays out Scripture as the supreme authority for the Church, and I didn’t see any mention of the ‘test the prophesy, not the prophet’ teaching.
I may have some disagreement with Grudem on this area, but on the whole, I have seen no other ST text in which the author is committed to a Biblical position.
You might also have a problem with his avocation of believers baptism–although, I think he is very fair in presenting the reasoning for paedobaptism.
You might also be interested to know that Grudem appears to be a presuppositionalist, and credits John Frame as one of his most influencial teachers.
I appreciate you looking that up for me. I haven’t heard of the way that you phrase the ‘test the prophecy, not the prophet’ view. But I think we are mentioning the same thing concerning his two levels of prophecy. One that is absolute and the other that is not true in all parts, just in some.
You give high praise to Grudem. I like him too. I haven’t read him, but I hear great things and he is well respected.
Yeah, I believe in paedobaptism and I am not premil…and I am presbyterian so I might take issue with some points of his ecclesiology, but I still respect him and like what I have heard about his ST book. I recommend it to those who I can tell are Reformed and yet still hold to believer’s baptism- Reformed Baptists.
I didn’t know that he appears to have presuppositional leanings. That is cool, but I promise you that this is not my personal litmus-test for orthodoxy.