All Comments for: Romney's Speech Strengthens Theologian's Endorsement | Christianity Today

Free Newsletters:

RSS Feeds |

Audio |

Twitter

Home > 2007 > December (Web-only)

Christianity Today, December (Web-only), 2007 |

Romney's Speech Strengthens Theologian's Endorsement

Wayne Grudem believes evangelicals should promote religious liberty by being willing to vote for candidates who have different beliefs.

Interview by Sarah Pulliam | posted 12/07/2007 09:25AM

After presidential candidate Mitt Romney gave his highly anticipated speech addressing his Mormon faith Thursday, it only strengthened theologian Wayne Grudem's October endorsement. Grudem, a research ...

[Reader Reviews]

Average User Rating:

Rate and Comment on this article

Displaying 1 - 25 of 30 comments.

Page: 1 2

Show All

Anne	Posted: December 20, 2007 12:04 PM


My understanding is that Mormans believe that Jesus is just a prophet, so when disaster strikes our country, who will he pray to, seeing that there is only one worthy to " open the scroll"?. Only one whose name is above every other Name!!!

john chiarello

Posted: December 13, 2007 7:29 AM

While I understand and agree with some of Grudems points. The idea that if Evangelical's support for other Evangelicals is a violation of the 'religous test' in the constitution, this would effectivley cut off the free choice of all people to vote for the candidate of 'conscience'. Would we tell a Muslim that if he chose to vote for a Muslim because he believed in his moral religious underpinnings, that this would be a violation of the 'religous test'? We can be silly at times! The 'no religious test' applies not to the individuals who are voting, as much as to the governments intrusion into the separation of religion and state sponsorship.

guiroo

Posted: December 12, 2007 4:15 PM

Robert, the point is that just because someone believes something that is false does not make that person intentionally deceitful as you have accused in your first post. (Honesty is a synonym for integrity.) In one sentence you say Romney actively believes the tenets on Mormonism and in the next you say he "must know" they are false. Please enlighten my naivety and explain how he can do both at the same time.

P. W.

Posted: December 10, 2007 11:31 PM

While I have a measure of respect for Wayne Grudem as a theologian with whom I both have areas of agreement and disagreement, I must take exception to Grudem's and other evangelicals' compartmentalizations in their decisions to endorse Romney for President. Evangelicals recognize that Mormonism preaches a Jesus other than the Jesus depicted in Scripture. While Romney's personal relationship with God is really known only to him and God, and he could potentially be a born again believer with an admittedly grossly perverted Christology, it seems more likely that Romney's adherence to Mormonism probably indicates he is at heart an unbeliever. Scripture indicates that believers should not walk in the counsel of unbelievers. We evidently have a legitimate believer in Huckabee, and believers are advised by Scripture to walk in the counsel of the godly. Ignoring a person's spiritual condition is a perilous disregard for Scripture's admonition that believers walk in the counsel of the godly.

Clashes of tradition and Christlikeness

Posted: December 10, 2007 2:40 PM

Samaritans and Jews had completely different prophets and traditions; Jews looked down on the Samaritans as having wrong places of worship and traditions. But Jesus was kind to them on more than one occasion. Jesus knew that Jews were the bringers of salvation, but also that Samaritans knew and professed kindness and professed the coming messiah. There are strong similarities between the situation of mainstream Jews vs Samaritans and our modern mainstream Evangelicals vs LDS. We have the christlike duty to look for when LDS's are kind and when they profess Jesus as the Christ. Lest we become like the pharisees who were proud and stiffnecked in their assumption of their own purity; they thought it was secure because of their so-called pure doctrine; but, Jesus argued with them that their professed doctrines were held and taught just like man-made doctrines. Which is why Jesus astounded people when he taught because he taught not like the scribes. Evangelicals are dead like the scribes.

Mike	Posted: December 10, 2007 1:38 PM

Wayne Grudem has contributed many things over the years with his ministry and writing; he's a fine man. But he has blinders on in this case, and it has nothing to do with Romney's Mormon faith. Romney is only a recent advocate of many political beliefs that Grudem would support. Romney's no champion of many of the basic tenets of political and religious conservatism. He's a recent convert even in a best case scenario. Grudem says that one of the reasons Romney is the most qualified, is because, like Grudem, he's a Harvard grad. Wayne's got his Crimson-colored glasses on. As dogmatic as Grudem has been on so many issues over the years, it's shocking that he's chosen this person and this time to suddenly be more open-minded. Huckabee is stronger on almost all issues held dear by conservatives, and his pedigree at least suggests that his political beliefs are genuine, not soley based on political expediency, ala Romney. Wayne has been duped, and it has nothing to do with Mormonism.

Leroy

Posted: December 10, 2007 1:11 PM

mike-I find your response amusing. Here's why: I'm not making fun of anything, but merely pointing out the fact that the Book of Mormon reads like a bad science fiction novel. That you don't know this because you have never read it. When you do, you may be in a position to judge me. Until then, I'd put a lid on it since your comments makes you seem silly and uninformed. You may find my comments indicative of my being arrogant or proud, but I disagree. My comments are those of a rational person who can't believe that Grudem (given who he is) could possibly believe the things he is quoted as having said. I don't have a dog in this fight, since there is not a presidential candidate other than Ron Paulson who is honest or decent by any measure, for whom I would vote. And since I'm a registered independent I can't vote in the Republican primary. Judge me all you want. I'm a straight shooter and don't have time for those who are simply too lazy to think for themselves.

Lance in TX

Posted: December 10, 2007 1:00 PM

"The man will not even let a woman teach in a church"??? Since when are women not allowed to teach in the LDS church? This is not real at all. We have MANY women teachers. My wife was one. I think you need to get your facts straight. Women all the time stand in front of the congregation and teach! BTW: Does anyone know what was believed during the time before the Nicaea (32A.D.)? There were 2 different groups: 1) Those that believe in the Trinity 2) Those that believe they are separate. It was a POLITICAL move to make #1 "The view of the Church". Also, where in the Bible is the word TRINITY used? As far as I can tell, it never does.

Robert

Posted: December 10, 2007 12:50 PM

guiroo - I hate to be the one to point this out, but you are exceptionally naive if you do not think that Romney understands the tenants of Mormonism. Moreover, the counter arguments you put forth are simply silly and completely irrelevant. That you do not understand this may be an explanation as to why you don't think Mr. Romney's adhering to a belief system that anyone who cares to do the slightest bit of investigation would soon discover has zero factual basis is a issue of personal integrity. That some Christians are unaware of the factual basis for their belief is quite different from someone being well aware that the basis of their belief is false, but continuing to believe it any way. That some people might hold ancillary beliefs (ie, number of wise men) is unrelated to the central historical facts upon which the Christian faith is founded. Again, that you seem not to be able to distinguish between central tenants and ancillary concerns, may explain you point of view.

Robert

Posted: December 10, 2007 12:40 PM

Riccardo - I couldn't agree with your more. The only requirement to be a follower of Jesus is to believe he died, rose again and as our substitute paid the penalty for our sin. All the things you site are not fundamental tenants to the Christian faith. Your counter argument would be the say the same regarding Mormonism. The difference however is that Romney is not saying that he does not believe that he can literally become a god just like Jesus, or that he does not baptize for the dead, or that he does not wear magic underware, etc. That you do not see the fundamental difference between this and the ancillary beliefs subscribed to by "SOME" Christians is unfortunate. As to your last argument, I'm certain someone could come up with a list of child molesters who give to humanitarian causes. I know for a fact that the drug lords in Rio's favelas provide free medicine to anyone living in the favela that cannot afford such care. Are you suggesting that they too be judged by such fruit?

Wendy

Posted: December 09, 2007 11:19 PM

Just pretend for a moment that the teachings of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints were true; that prophets are on the earth today just like in Biblical times, that God was revealing more of his word-thus more scripture; that we were literal spirit children of an Eternal Father and his heirs; that Christ did visit the America's after his resurrection to teach "other sheep that are not of this fold"; if mankind has a higher purpose and that God has a plan for us and that includes continued growth and knowledge after we leave this mortal existence; if the resurrection is not just figurative but literal (spirit and body united never to be separated again)....if these truths were honestly real....what would you do? Some Jews believed Jesus Christ and some did not....why?

Dan Ra

Posted: December 09, 2007 9:59 PM

As an "evangelical" Christian, I believe that the likes of Mitt Romney and Mike Huckabee will be VERY dangerous for America. We must not have someone who will revert to scripture when it comes to policy in America. The way of Jesus is not promoted through public office, but through Christians in everyday life. We MUST understand that. I still do not understand why evangelicals can't see this? Why has evangelicalism become so staunch and static in its thinking, when I believe a truly biblical approach is to think about the needs of the oppressed. We live in an American empire. We need someone who will deal with the bigger problems in a "secular" nation, not some theological positions. Let's leave that up to Grudem and his biblical-life-sucking systematic theology. I urge you guys to denounce the likes of Huckabee and Romney. If you're going to stay Republican, vote Ron Paul. If democrat, vote Barack Obama. Don't be stubborn.

Paul	Posted: December 09, 2007 6:38 PM

Sally, can you help me out here? I'm a Mormon, and in my experience when someone chooses to leave the church there may be some effort to fellowship them and maybe see if they want to talk about it, but persecute them? Let's get real. And I can't ever remember being taught that I can have as many wives as I want. So your father left and took the family with him. Fine. I wish you all of you well. But try to try to be reasonable. Truth is hard to find when you sensationalize.

Riccardo

Posted: December 09, 2007 4:24 PM

To my fellow Evangelicals posting above, I ask....What do think constitutes "preposterous"? Is it preposterous to believe that Jonah spent days and nights in the belly of a whale? How about that the earth was actually covered with water for 40 days...you do realize that its physically impossible to have that occur, any physicist will tell you. How about that the wafer and wine actually turn in to the blood and body of Jesus after communion? How about people speaking languages that they don't have any training in...the list goes on and on. It is presumptive beyond words to apply this type of spiritual reasoning to Mormons. Many are my neighbors and they are among the most Christian people I know...by their fruits ye shall know them. And the fruits of Mormonism are indisputably positive. They are the first to donate to humanitarian causes within and without their faith, they run the largest free standing welfare system in the world, there is a long list of proof of their Christianity

guiroo

Posted: December 08, 2007 3:18 PM

Robert, I understand that Mormonism is not historically accurate and is not centered on the Jesus of Christianity. But again, it is not an issue of integrity when it comes to Mr. Romney's qualifications for President. How do you know that "he MUST know"? I would venture to say that many Christians truly believe in Jesus yet would have no clue about its historical accuracy. They may even hold some historically inaccurate beliefs about Christianity like three wise men and three shepherds all being present at the manger. (Never happened.) Does this make you question those Christians' integrity, implying that they are deceitful liars?

Carlton

Posted: December 08, 2007 11:31 AM

I marvel that so many are blind to the danger of making governmental decisions based solely on Religious merit. Mitt Romney is running for President--not Pastor. That he believes in a religion which adheres to erroneous doctrine would certainly disqualify him as a Pastor or Elder of the Church. But I'm not appealing to him for Spiritual matters, nor do I need my President able to soundly expostulate on matters of Scripture. I have my Pastors and Church Leaders for this. Conversely, I do not wish to have my Pastor making economical decisions for our Nation, or enforcing its Laws and Policies, for that is the job of our Nation's Head. Do not confound these two separate entities! And do not limit the Arms of God by suppositions that He only uses the doctrinally sound to accomplish His ends. It was God Himself who elected Cyrus to be the King which would deliver Israel (Judah) from their cruel captivity. Cyrus was certainly no believer, and yet God calls him His choice.

Larry

Posted: December 08, 2007 7:35 AM

In the space of thirteen comments, the following expressions were used: “closed-minded”, “comments are scary and out of line with human decency”, “showing your pride and ignorance”, “you are a religious bigot”, “you are mistaken and have zero clue”, “naïve”, “preposterous”, “absurd”, “ that (is) just plain silly”, “ill-informed”, “undeveloped”. In Ephesians 4:29-32 the Apostle Paul encourages us with the following words, “Let no corrupting talk come out of your mouths, but only such as is good for building up, as fits the occasion, that it may give grace to those who hear. And do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God, by whom you were sealed for the day of redemption. Let all bitterness and wrath and anger and clamor and slander be put away from you, along with all malice. Be kind to one another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, as God in Christ forgave you.” (ESV) Surely we can react to each other in a more understanding fashion.

Brent Vermillion

Posted: December 08, 2007 4:21 AM

Grudem is certainly mistaken like he is about many other things. The man will not even let a woman teach in a church (he represents a small minority of closed-minded evangelicals). I certainly think his endorsement has far less effect on greater evangelicalism than CT may think. Romney is not our horse. Evangelicals will be going with Huckabee because he truly is one and his positions mirror ours.

JL Fuller

Posted: December 07, 2007 11:01 PM

As a Mormon I am gratified to read that there a a few people in traditional Christianity who are willing to live up to higher ideals. Your approach to the religion in politics issue gives me some hope that our country may not be at the verge of ecumenical barbarism. In fact, I would like to hear your views on other religious things some time. I would even look forward to a theological discussion. I don't think I would get skewered for having divergent views. But we as Republicans and loyal Americans must look to the more urgent matters at hand. We must elect a Republican president. So far the best man for the job appears to be Mitt Romney. But we will see. In any event, I would likely support whomever our party chooses.

mike	Posted: December 07, 2007 9:36 PM


Leroy, your comments are scary and out of line with human decency. You may think it is cool to make fun of other people's religion, but you are showing your pride and ignorance. Mitt Romney's speech is exactly for people like you who have no ability to look in the mirror and see that you are a religious bigot. Reread Romney's speech and apply it to your life and you will be a better Christian.

Don Gilliam

Posted: December 07, 2007 9:05 PM


I see nothing in your comments contrary to the truth.

Robert

Posted: December 07, 2007 5:33 PM

Ken, you're more confused than guiroo. If you believe what you write, so be it. However, you are mistaken and have zero clue about what Mormons believe or the fact that it can be demonstrated with absolute certainly that Mormonism was founded on historical fabrications. When you decide to do some research regarding Mormonism, you may be better situated to make the sort of comments you have made, but will not be inclined to do so. I don't care about Romney's personal beliefs as far as they remain personal. But given that he wants to be president of the US, I am concerned about a person who would actively and knowingly endorse a belief system that he MUST KNOW (seriously!) is based upon historical inaccuracies, falsified documents and beliefs that are so incredible that a moron would find them unbelievable upon the most superficial investigation. I would suggest that you do your home work before you stick you neck out on the line and make the sort of statements you have made.

Robert

Posted: December 07, 2007 5:19 PM

guiroo - if you want to believe what you have written, by all means please do. However, you are mistaken. Romney's belief is not mistaken, it is an active endorsement of what is objectively untrue. If you and or Romney would take the time to exam the precepts of the Mormon religion, you would have to face the fact that what Mormons believe can be demonstrated to be untrue, both in substance and historical content. If that is not a matter of personal integrity, I wouldn't know what was. As a believer in Jesus, I would have to abandon my faith (absolutely and without hesitation) if it were demonstrated that Jesus never existed, that the Gospel record was not essentially reliable, that Jesus never rose from the dead, etc. Mormonism can be demonstrated to be historical inaccurate, based upon falsified documents and a religion that endorses behavior that is questionable and convictions that are more akin to science fiction that religious belief generally speaking. Wake up my friend!

Leroy

Posted: December 07, 2007 5:10 PM

It is fundamentally inconceivable to me that Grudem can be naive enough to make such comments. Allowing for Romney's Mormon convictions, which are preposterous (to say the least) to represent an endorsement of religious liberty is absurd. Romeny has the right to believe what he wants, a right I fully respect. However, for Grudem to blindly accept a person' s commitment to a set of religious beliefs, regardless of their absurdity is not just naive its foolish. What if a presidential candidate endorsed a religion that promoted child sacrifice, or polygamy (as Mormons did, and many Mormons still do), would Grudem be so enthusiastic about such a candidate. This is not about religious liberty (not in the least) but about a candidate for the president believing in a religion founded upon fabrication, who believes in baptizing for the dead, that he can become a son of God like Jesus and who wears magic underware to protect him from evil forces. To me that is not just absurd, but scary.

bob shelton

Posted: December 07, 2007 4:57 PM

to be a research professor Gruden is certainly skimming the surface on this one. Salvation exclusively in Christ alone means all world religions are basically false and cults are sourced in Satan. Voting for an angel of light just shows how far the ecumenical attitude has spread with it's gospel of tolerance and minimalisation of doctrine. The true church as body of Christ has it's citizenship in heaven where our seat of government really is. We are just mission outposts in the devil's world. It's spooks me to find out what some brothers really believe, especially when you are required to read their books.

Page: 1 2

E-mail this page

Write CT

Print this article

Post a comment