Tags
Apostasy, charismatics, desiring, desiringgod, doctrine, error, false, God, gospelcoalition, John Piper, Theology
Earlier today, Bro. John Piper made the following tweet:
God humbles Charismatics by making their children Calvinists; and Calvinists by making their children speak in tongues.—
John Piper (@JohnPiper) August 29, 2011
I’ll have much more to say about this at a later time, but for now, mull over what Dr. Piper is saying. God humbles Calvinists by making their children speak in tongues??
There is no indication whatsoever that Piper is joking, so for those of you who insist he is, by all means, show the indication, ok? There is none.
Forget Calvinism for the moment. Would God, biblically speaking, according to His written Word, cause any Christian to speak in an unknown (to them) tongue? Is Acts 2 seriously seen by Reformed charismatics as a norm for the Church?
Do you see the danger of this? Do you realize the influence of Dr. Piper? Does anyone care anymore?
If this kind of thinking is not a threat to the doctrinal purity of the Church at large, I don’t know what is. Those who wish to remain popular, and on the speaker circuit, I imagine, will say nothing. In fact, I almost guarantee they’ll be silent. I’ll be surprised if this is even mentioned on the Gospel Coalition and their parasite sites.
I’ll have more to say on this at a later time. For now, this breaks my heart to see such falling away from Biblical teaching. It is as if we are watching Dr. Piper lose his doctrinal stability before our very eyes.
We must pray for this man. We must not be silent. We must speak out.
Or maybe it’s Piper making a funny? Maybe it’s him pointing out our potential arrogance and reminding us to remain humble? Maybe it’s not him losing his mind but reminding us that orthodoxy in itself can become a stumbling block?
Do you actually think that Piper meant that tongue speaking is a legitimate gift at this time, as if he’s endorsing charismatic Calvinists? Or do you think he means that God’s judgement is upon erring Calvinists to drive their children into the error of tongue speaking? Seems pretty obvious to me that it’s not the former.
Tim, Piper has been clear in the past that he does not believe that the ‘charismatic’ gifts have not ceased.
Pardon. I meant that he believes that those gifts have not ceased.
First the Warren debacle now this…Acts 2 is very clear that these were not unintelligible mutterings for self edification, as we have among the charismatic crowd today, but that they were men speaking in languages…native to some, expressly for the spread of the gospel and edification of the church. I’m becoming even more concerned about Dr. Piper…however, and this is just a thought, do you think he was just trying to tell a joke?
‘these were not unintelligible mutterings for self edification’
But in 1 Cor 14 they were precisely that.
Nooo, they were known languages. Where is your evidence young man?
I continue to get a more & more uneasy feeling about Piper. This is just one of many items over the last several years. I think he may be shifting or may be just now revealing that he has long-since shifted. I hope I am wrong.
Somebody’s got some ‘splaining to do!
Perhaps, as a teacher, Piper should be more careful making statements into the void that is the Internet that are so unclear?
What is your motive for doing this? You need to be careful of what you say, you young reformed guys need to learn to love and not judge before you look into such things. Yall sound like a bunch of school boys hyping others to join in something that you might be wrong on. Slow to speak should be your motto.
You’re the one who threw out the critique of Piper without contacting him or allowing him to explain himself. Plank and speck I think
scottdouglas82 – Methinks you need to reexamine the biblical teaching on personal rebuke, judging, etc. and perhaps you will find out that those passages speak of personal relationships – not “public square” exchanges.
Regarding the larger question posed – I think Piper began losing his doctrinal mind years ago when he posited “Christian hedonism”, flipping the doctrine of man’s priority on its head.
Public censure is appropriate for public offense (Gal. 2:11-14).
Scott, did you contact Joel privately first about this?
yeah yeah! Joel you didn’t genuflect first!
/sarc
David, what is your motive for doing this? You need to learn to love and not judge people like Joel.
Don’t you see the irony of clamping down on Joel (doing exactly what you condemn him for doing), while defending a guy who is drifting into error, who has far greater influence in the body of Christ than Joel? (no offense Joel, I think it would be better if you had more influence than Piper!)
John Piper has always been a continuationist. Always. Yes, and in recent years it does seem the influence of Driscoll, Warnock, and Chander have been pushing a lot more people like Piper to be more open to the Gifts of the Holy Spirit. I don’t think Piper is a heretic because he believes or is open to this, it just means he disagrees with cessationism. I don’t always agree with Dr. MacArthur especially with the Gifts of the Holy Spirit – however, Dr. MacArthur has a great grip of the Gospel – in particular – penal substitution. I think we have to be open to learning from different teachers. John Piper is not Joel Osteen.
>John Piper is not Joel Osteen.
This is what we call “damning with faint praise.”
Tongues questions aside;
I have heard J. Piper’s sermons. There is no doubt that he knows what the gospel is. But he always gives it with one hand and takes it back with the other by telling you how you must feel.
I always feel like the handcuffs are being put on me after a Piper sermon.
No thanks.
Well, I am 57, if age is a concern here, and I admit, I have no idea why Piper is dancing on the edge with some of his statements. Cessationism ehh? How come the things I think are right always get the darkest, dreariest names?
Because you’re just old….uh…wait…no. Actually, you’re not THAT old!
because they’re wrong?
Just presumbaly closer to that step into a Christ-filled glory…youngster!
It is very interesting – and perhaps telling – that the only Scripture you cite here is a chapter that you claim is no in effect, with no Biblical basis (that I have seen thus far) to support that claim. You pulled a similar feat in the article you link here, your previous post on the how these charismatic gifts of the early church no longer occur.
Do you have a Biblical base for this? I would really love to see this, as I have never really understood the contemporary hesitancy towards these things that seem so clearly and even – forgive the word – literally discussed in Scripture as possible blessings for the believer, and I would really love to know from where such a hesitancy springs.
Mate, I think you’ve reacted pretty threatened and as to why I’m not sure?
Surely, re thinking a position and even having the guts to change on a position you once held is radically humble. HOWEVER I believe Mr Piper is doing neither, but look how it rocked your world.
Find some perspective, this statement changes nothing which means anything to people needing to meet our Saviour (thought I better use a capital S, in cease you freaked out again and made another bold statement).
And ur last couple of paragraphs are pretty funny to with all that “self” talk! Jesus loved rocking ppls theology and maybe you should re think IRS as tongues is clearly a debated issue with great men of god on either side of thought.
Chill big fella!
>look how it rocked your world.
Making a blog post/rant means it “rocked his world”? Wow. Usually when I say something or write something it means an opinion was formed in my mind, but my world may very well be quite stable at the same time.
If any of my children become Charismatic and speak in tongues, I would not feel humbled at all. I am a Calvinist.
I would be alarmed.
I would see this as a failure on my part and on any of my past pastors part, in explaining ‘Cessationism’ and the Charismatic beliefs.
Isn’t there a Biblical way of speaking in tongues? Yeah, there is. A way that is consistent with Biblical teaching & far away from charismatic insanity. And what has Dr. Piper done to compromise doctrinal clarity & Biblical teaching?
I’m with DeMay. I’ve never understood the hyper dogmatic stance people take on the ceasing of certain spiritual gifts, when there is no teaching in scripture about them ceasing. It’s all inference and eisegesis (followed by name calling).
Wow, the (pied) Piper crowd cam out in force. Yeah, JT, wait for Piper to give you an interview before questioning in an open forum something tha he did in a open forum… LOL.
Piper’s “Rick Warren is doctrinal & sound” stance should have been enough for you folks but apparently it is not. His defense of Mark “I see pornographic visions” “I hear directly from God” “I talk crudely during my sermons” Driscoll apparently didn;t bother you either. Wake up people. This is not about attacking a person; it is about protecting the faith (is as much as we are responsible or doing so).
Chill indeed? I suppose we should just allow anyone to say anything and stamp it with orthodox just to keep the peace? How old are you folks? 12? Grow up. Bible up.
Truthy (not so old, not so grumpy, and not so reformed)
Let’s assume for the sake of discussion that biblical tongues are still operative today. First, what of other supernatural gifts? Second, why are modern “tongues” not the counterpart of NT tongues? The babble of modern Pentecostal and Charismatic does not seem to me the same thing as the God produced gift of unknown languages in Acts.
It seems to me that the problem with men who give way to the mushy, subjective world of modern “tongue” speaking is that their thirrst for “experience” exceeds their exercise of discernment.
If it comes from the hand of God, I weicome the genuine gift of tongues (or any other supernatural gift) but I will not accept a sham replacement just to feign God’s blessing.
David, I must say I agree with you completely here. We would be remiss to box God’s blessings into what we think they should be or shouldn’t be, just as we would be remiss to try to fake or take on such blessings on our own power.
As for your first question, I would assume all supernatural gifts illumined by Paul are still in effect. No problem there.
As for your second question, you would have to grapple with 1 Cor 14 to define all instances of “tongues” as languages. Paul seems quite clear that “glossa” refers to the ecstatic utterance that “speaketh not unto men, but unto God” (14:2). Obviously, though, a church that requires such ecstatic speech as a proof of faith, or a church that brokers in showing off such behavior, is well outside Paul’s intended model.
So, in your view, reformed charismatics like Matt Chandler are unscriptural? Actually, if you take the Bible seriously, there is much more support for reformed charismatic Christianity (see Acts) than there is for cessationist Christianity. Cessationalists Christianity sure is not found in the New Testament.
Well Shelly, you being a woman, and calling yourself a ‘pastor’ is about as unbiblical as it gets. So I trust my readers will take your comments on cessationism with a grain of salt, and consider the source. Thanks for stopping by.
Well joke or not if we take it at face value Piper is making a Calvinist and one who speaks in tongues mutually exclusive. Which would lead one to believe he is being sarcastic? But this is part of the problem of our twitter/texting world is does not allow for context. But if we examine all the issues with Piper in the last 2 or 3 years it is quite disturbing, like the fact that he does not believe in the literal account of Genesis and admits he has never yes NEVER taught thru the first part of Genesis. Can we say success equal compromise? Big church needs to cover big overhead leading to slowly start entertaining the sheep? As for the speaking in tongues yes the gifts have stopped yes there is biblical evidence and as I have said before unless someone thinks the office of apostle is still in effect than we are all cessationists to some degree. But as for the tongues if those who claim to do this would just follow Paul’s rules here in 1Cor 14:27-28 27If anyone speaks in a tongue, it should be by two or at the most three, and each in turn, and one must interpret; 28but if there is no interpreter, he must keep silent in the church; and let him speak to himself and to God. Of course we should take in account the whole chapter but if no one can interpret then keep silent. How many accounts do we have among charismatic’s of one speaking in a actual language foreign to them and someone else translating what they have said?
I’d recommend reading RC Sproul Jr.’s article about disagreeing lovingly with brothers in Christ on secondary issues. Could we please stop condemning people as heretics over secondary issues, important though they may be?
http://www.ligonier.org/blog/it-was-nice-while-it-lasted/
Nathan, first, no one ‘condemned Piper. 2) No one called Piper a ‘heretic’. 3) There are no secondary issues in the Bible. 4) How much more loving can one be than you suggest prayer for a brother?
Joel, do you think you are speaking to me or anyone else with the love of God? Do you think being mean-spirited and snarky is a good Christian witness? Do you think your tone reflects the love of Christ? Just wondering…..
Yes, and since the Word of God is clear on women not being qualified (or called) for the pastorate, you stand lovingly corrected.
This is a typical response from those who do not obey the Scriptures in what is forbidden and what is permitted. Rather than read them and obey them, you attack those who do.
Joel was not mean-spirited or snarky with you. He told you the truth. Rather than hear it, or at the very least say, “Thank you, but I disagree.” you attack his character.
My advice is to drop the hubris and offer Joel an apology
Pingback: Has John Piper Lost His Doctrinal Mind?
If you are just now finding out that John Piper is a charismatic then I am not sure you know enough about the man’s theology to offer any kind of complaint, period. Piper has been open about this for DECADES!
In the light of some of the comments on this thread, this post from the archives of Sacred Sandwich made me chuckle.
http://sacredsandwich.com/archives/2781
TY: You said “Big church needs to cover big overhead leading to slowly start entertaining the sheep?” I’m a member of Bethlehem Baptist. I left another church that entertains people. BBC does not entertain us, and the pastors are NOT going in that direction, not even slowly. As for the overhead, giving has been down and probably will continue to be until near the end of the year. (I see the numbers in the quarterly meetings.) The appeal in the service two weeks ago was simple: Please give. No entertainment.
I think he is absolutely right and I admire his courage to speak the truth.
Late I know but…..are we really trying to denounce a guy who has consistently for decades preached the unadulterated gospel based on 1 TWEET? Like really?
I would understand if you put together an article outlining several seriously eronious things Piper has said (and not just tweeted) but no – sir you are making out as if Piper has denounced the Trinity, or justification by faith alone – based on 1 TWEET which was most likely highlighting a principle as opposed to making a dogmatic statement.
Should Piper know better? Maybe.
Does he have major influence? Yes.
But for crying out loud let’s learn where to draw the lines properly at the points where they are needed and not just draw them every 2mm. Here, here to the fellow who said “John Piper is not Joel Osteen”.
I mean you can only tweet 140 characters for crying out loud, how do we know he DIDN’T mean it in jest as you are so quick to point out implicitly that he didn’t.
My take (which may be wrong), but based on the many sermons I have heard of Piper is that he is making a principial statement using semi-literal overtones and saying that those who are proud in their system need to calm down and not necessarily leave their system but not be so haughty – that’s a lot more than 140 characters though!
I all for contending for truth in the Ephesians 4 way as the next guy, but come on let’s calm down a bit.
Piper has a long track record of being off the narrow path on many issues.
I’ve not been a fan of Piper – don’t like his emotionalism nor agree with his organizational structure. But lately, there’s been a lot of talk about him hanging out with Mark Driscoll and endorsing Doug Wilson’s Federal Vision. In response to this site: http://defendingcontending.com/2009/11/05/piper-the-slope-to-heresy/ I searched for critiques of Piper’s “Christian Hedonism”, which I had heard of but not looked into. Should have. Here’s what I found that Piper has written:
“You might turn the world on its head by changing one word in your creed.The old tradition says, ‘The chief end of man is to glorify God AND enjoy him forever’.… The overriding concern of this book is that in all of life God be glorified the way he himself has appointed.To that end this book aims to persuade you that ‘The chief end of man is to glorify God BY enjoying him forever’.” (Piper, Desiring God, page 15,)
“The radical implication is that pursuing pleasure in God is our highest calling.”(Piper, page 21, The Dangerous Duty of Delight, bold emphasis added)
“Maximizing our joy in God is what we were created for.”(page 16, Dangerous Duty)
“The aim of life is to maximize our joy.”(page 19, Dangerous Duty)
“Unless a man be born again into a Christian Hedonist he cannot see the kingdom of God” (John Piper, Desiring God, page 55)
“Could it be that today the most straightforward biblical command for conversion is not, ‘Believe in the Lord,’ but, ‘Delight yourself in the Lord’?” (John Piper, Desiring God, page 55)
“The pursuit of joy in God is not optional. It is not an ‘extra’ that a person might grow into after he comes to faith. Until your heart has hit upon this pursuit, your ‘faith’ cannot please God. It is not saving faith.” (John Piper, Desiring God, page 69)
“Not everybody is saved from God’s wrath just because Christ died for sinners. There is a condition we must meet in order to be saved. I want to try to show that the condition…is nothing less than the creation of a Christian Hedonist.” (John Piper, Desiring God, page 61)
Pingback: Gospel Influence « Kevin Nunez