Give John Piper the benefit of the doubt

I just wanted to say this briefly, as a man who confesses the 1689 LBCF and Keache's Catechism and the Cambridge Declaration and believes that Calvin's threefold use of the law makes good biblical sense, that I am dismayed by John Piper's recent comments about and invitation to Doug Wilson of Federal Vision heresy fame. I believe (and hope) that in this case that John Piper is reading Wilson wrong and believes that Wilson has been misunderstood.

The problem is, as far as I know, that those who have seen a different gospel in Wilson's beliefs have not been rebuked by Wilson for mis-reading him but have been told that they are misreading Scripture, much in the same way Tom Wright has poo-pooed anyone who labels his heretical departure from the gospel for what it is. Of course, Wright goes farther and humbly explains that his detractors' main problem is that they have not read enough Wright and went to the wrong schools.

But I digress; as I have also read some of Dr. Piper's works and listened to many sermons by him, I am willing to give him the benefit of the doubt concerning his actions involving Wilson, because I have never heard another Pastor preach the gospel of justification by grace through faith with more clarity and conviction, and his Christ centeredness and commitment to the absolute sovereignty of God is compelling and commendable.

That being said, I do not consider John Piper to be a Reformed Baptist because he does not adhere to the theology of one of the historic Baptist confessions of faith or its modern equivalent, most likely because of his views of the law and gospel, which I believe lean toward New Covenant theology which is basically antinomian. He admits as much (not the antinomian part). I have that against him.

What dismays me more is some of the assaults I have read recently on John Piper from the Reformed Baptist blogosphere, which, ironically, accuse Piper of legalism and assault his character and ministry. Now there are many thoughtful and Christlike posts out there expressing concerns about Piper's comments and selection of Doug Wilson, such as the post by Pastor Keith Throop, but there are many that seem to harbor some hateful grudge against Piper that is definitely not compelling nor Christlike, that make a concerted effort to disparage Piper with half-truths and misinformation, quoting Piper out of context, etc. This is worthless drivel, and I would that these posters would repent or may hap lose interest in opining on the internet altogether.

I think John Piper is a man of God who has done much to advance the kingdom of God and glorify Christ and God, and deserves better than to be slandered with straw-man attacks against his character and ministry. He may forsake the gospel and make me eat my words, but I say he deserves the benefit of the doubt concerning this.

I have purposefully left out links to the posts that have irritated me concerning this, and would hope that readers would read and listen to Piper's sermons and books and judge him based on his own work and ministry. All of his sermons and books are available for free from the website Desiring God.

Angels and Demons Truth

Angels and Demons Truth

Seems that we have another major motion picture inspired by the fertile imagination of Dan Brown. As has been well documented in the multitude of rebuttals to The Da Vinci Code blockbuster, we know Mr. Brown is not above stretching, embellishing twisting and portioning the truth, and even resorts to outright fabrications to establish his plot. The thing that got Christians in an uproar was Dan’s insistence that all his “facts” were indeed factual and not the imaginative and fanciful plot thickening ingredients that they truly were.

Nevertheless, some Christians whom I respect and are well grounded in the reality of biblical Christianity found entertainment value in the Da Vinci Code book and movie, and so I will not tell everybody “don’t go see this movie”. I chose not to partake of the former book or movie (and will not involve myself in the current book or film) because I find the reality of biblical Christianity much more exciting, intriguing, enriching and mind blowing than some modern tall tales fabricated in the mind of an unscrupulous unbeliever with an agenda. Also, malevolent blasphemies make me uncomfortable and angry, not what I call a “good time”.

For those of you who may see the movie or read the book, and have questions about some of the movie’s “facts” , Westminster Theological Seminary has set up this great website that answers many claims made by Dan Brown with hard, cold, reality.

Angels and Demons Truth

Vern Poythress, Ph. D., Th. D., Professor of New Testament Interpretation at Westminster Theological Seminary looks to be the major contributor. And in his usual humble, irenic and lucid style, intelligently reduces Dan Brown’s fallacies to naught.

The site itself is well designed and easily navigated, full of great content and links. I will be bookmarking it just to keep up with what is being said and argued concerning this. I know it is usually better to consult primary sources, but I think that in this case I'll consult this reliable, trustworthy secondary source.

Praying just got a little easier!

Woke up late and in a rush, no time for prayer? Got distracted and forget to pray?

Well, now you won't have to worry anymore. This new web service is fully automated and will send your petitions and supplications skyward for you! Simply select your religion, select your favorite prayer and then...

"[they] use state of the art text to speech synthesizers to voice each prayer at a volume and speed equivalent to typical person praying. Each prayer is voiced individually, with the name of the subscriber displayed on screen."

You really can't make this stuff up. Amazing.

Encouragement for a lonely Calvinist

Time Magazine's 10 Ideas Changing the World Right Now: #3 The New Calvinism

You could have knocked me over with a feather. Frankly, I had come to believe that the Reformed movement was really just a few mouthy types (like me) who opined on the Internet. And John Piper. I expected that if I attended the church of some of the Reformed pastors that I enjoy listening to I would see a congregation of 40-50 people.

As far as I know, myself and my family are the only Calvinistic confessional Baptists in the whole county where I live. The nearest Reformed Baptist church is an hour away on the highway. We have begun attending a Presbyterian church (PCA) and it is a fine fellowship of conservative Reformed confessional believers, but they aren't credo, and I'm not paedo, so there is always that element of strong disagreement that underlies everything.

But if Time Magazine has noticed, maybe there really is a Reformed Resurgence! Maybe it isn't all smoke and mirrors. Maybe in the near future, I will discover like minded believers in my community and we can form a new fellowship, a Reformed Baptist church, a dream come true.

I did notice a sad line in the Time story:

Indeed, some of today's enthusiasts imply that non-Calvinists may actually not be Christians.

That's the error so many make when coming to believe that their entire worldview is wrong. The tendency is to run headlong the other direction into equally or worse error than before. And that is sadly the case I've observed on the Internet among some of the Neo-Calvinists. Hyper Calvinism breaks the band of tension that the bible holds intact between God's sovereignty and man's responsibility, adopting a heretical fatalism concerning salvation and sin. The Hyper Calvinist says things that make a true Calvinist cringe. And making Calvinism the test of one's standing with God rather than repentance from sin and faith Christ alone for forgiveness of sins and entrance into the kingdom of God is one of the most distasteful teachings of this unorthodox sect.

Another fine example of breaking the tension that the bible upholds is the tendency among some who become disallusioned with their dispensational pre-trib rapture eschatology and spring all the way over to preterism, denying the second coming of Christ and the bodily resurrection of believers. And the second state has become worse than the first.

So I would encourage my Neo-Calvinist brothers and sisters to study the old paths and not use blogs and Internet sites as you're primary source for theology. There are many, many disguised wolves on the Internet. I've almost been eaten by a few. And study the Reformed creeds and confessions like the London Baptist 1689, Westminster, and the Three Forms of Unity (pdf). These old creeds serve as a buffer against the heretical tendencies of the unlearned.

And here's a couple of tips. When you run across a Hyper-Calvinist or otherwise questionable blog or Website, there won't be a neon flashing sign that says *HYPER CALVINIST* or *HERETIC*. The first thing to look for is a confession of faith. If they don't have one then use extreme caution. I've found many times people hide their beliefs for a reason. If they have any sort of other doctrinal statement such as a "statement of faith" or "beliefs" then read them carefully, and judge them against some of the clear and precise doctrinal confessions I listed above and of course scripture.

If their statement of faith is weak and ambiguous, that is cause for caution. I've seen statements of faith that were so vague that many cult groups would be comfortable with them.

Look for a curriculum vitae for those that claim a title such as "Dr." If they don't have plainly listed the schools they went to then be very suspicious. If they list the schools and they aren't immediately recognizable then Google them to see what comes up.

I pray that the resurgence of historical Reformation theology gains even more ground and strengthens God's people for tough times ahead, with a zeal for the lost and a heart that finds joy in the glory of God and the truth of his word.