Don Johnson on "The Piper-Warren Kerfuffle"
It’s Not about Separation Selected quotes:
- I should be extremely careful about recommending Piper as a reliable source for my people to develop their spiritual lives.
- If Piper’s judgement is so flawed, the next question is not “should we practice secondary separation?” – that is irrelevant, not a reality. But there is a follow-up question: Should we as pastors use and recommend his resources to others? How valuable are they if the author’s judgment is revealed to be so fatally flawed?
- if my fellow fundamentalists become a group of people generally pushing the works of men who make such significant errors as this… well, we are going to have problems getting along. We are likely going to find ourselves in contention when things like this come up. We are going to find less and less in common and will likely find ourselves operating in distinct spheres of fellowship.
- I hope that fundamentalists will see these errors as very significant and will begin to pull back from the love affair they have been having with Piper and others.
I have not read many Piper books, I have read “Let the Nations Be Glad” and “Don’t Waste Your Life.” I have also read some messages on his web site. In these readings, there are 3 areas where I have been challenged by Piper.
1. Don’t waste your life - a lot of people do this, including a lot of professing christians. I was especially challenged by Piper’s view of risk. He says that risk is right. In my background, I have often been challenged the just do the comfortable. I have been greatly affected by this challenge and I am taking more risks for the glory of God.
2. Sacrifice is worth it - Piper talks about sacrifice in ways I have not seen in other writings. It’s powerful.
3. The glory of God - it’s all about the glory of God. Again, he teaches about this in ways I have never heard it explained. It humbles me and changes me.
So, the idea that we should not recommend Piper books is ridiculous in my mind. I believe every fundamental Bible college ought to urge their students to read “Don’t Waste Your Life.” If Piper left the ministry tomorrow because of some scandal, the book is still good. We still sing “Come Thou Fount” even though the author of that hymn died in his gross immorality.
It’s funny how we get extreme with the doctrine of separation - we even try to take it to the extreme that you can read a guy’s book who ends up doing something wrong- wow! That’s going to illiminate a lot of books if we all try to follow that one.
1. Don’t waste your life - a lot of people do this, including a lot of professing christians. I was especially challenged by Piper’s view of risk. He says that risk is right. In my background, I have often been challenged the just do the comfortable. I have been greatly affected by this challenge and I am taking more risks for the glory of God.
2. Sacrifice is worth it - Piper talks about sacrifice in ways I have not seen in other writings. It’s powerful.
3. The glory of God - it’s all about the glory of God. Again, he teaches about this in ways I have never heard it explained. It humbles me and changes me.
So, the idea that we should not recommend Piper books is ridiculous in my mind. I believe every fundamental Bible college ought to urge their students to read “Don’t Waste Your Life.” If Piper left the ministry tomorrow because of some scandal, the book is still good. We still sing “Come Thou Fount” even though the author of that hymn died in his gross immorality.
It’s funny how we get extreme with the doctrine of separation - we even try to take it to the extreme that you can read a guy’s book who ends up doing something wrong- wow! That’s going to illiminate a lot of books if we all try to follow that one.
How valuable are they if the author’s judgment is revealed to be so fatally flawed?This seems to be a valid question until we start looking for people who haven’t exercised poor judgment from time to time. God’s work is done on earth through flawed, though redeemed humans. (And judging by the fact that he will be taking an 8 month sabbatical, I think that saying his flaws are “fatal” is a little much.) None of us has ex cathedra privileges by which we are prevented from speaking error. An error in one area does not invalidate truth in another, just like sin in one area of our life does not mean that we have not been born again. Granted, there are books and authors who are so laden with obvious doctrinal error that we would be better off not reading or recommending them. However, I believe we ought to evaluate books, statements, sermons, and men on their own merits as they compare to Scripture. Otherwise, tee-totalers should ignore away Martin Luther, non-Calvinists should get rid of Charles Spurgeon, and Baptists should disregard Jonathan Edwards and John Wesley. See, we’re already exercising discernment without throwing out complete libraries. I don’t think Don’s insinuation is fair.
Also, it doesn’t take chronology into account. Desiring God was written 30 years ago. I fail to see how a man’s decision in 2009 calls into question something he wrote in 1980. Of course, there could be a connection, but you would have to demonstrate it for it to be valid.
This is not an endorsement of John Piper’s recent decision, but I don’t automatically agree with Don’s conclusions. I have no problem saying “This is a good book” without implying that everything the author has to say on every other topic is also good. And I don’t think I have ever inferred that from anyone else’s book recommendations. Let’s give folks a little bit of credit; they can be quite intelligent.
Faith is obeying when you can't even imagine how things might turn out right.
When I read this discussion, I am glad I am more on the Conservative Evangelical side, a type C, as Joel would say.
I don’t think Warren is a heretic. I don’t think Piper is a heretic. I like Piper a lot more than Warren, and it strikes me as an odd combination. But they agree on the fundamentals (at least I think Warren does), so, in my view, I am left questioning Piper’s judgment. If he invited Catholics, liberals, or Mormons, I would have trouble.
It sure is nice.:)
I don’t think Warren is a heretic. I don’t think Piper is a heretic. I like Piper a lot more than Warren, and it strikes me as an odd combination. But they agree on the fundamentals (at least I think Warren does), so, in my view, I am left questioning Piper’s judgment. If he invited Catholics, liberals, or Mormons, I would have trouble.
It sure is nice.:)
"The Midrash Detective"
Quote
“I wouldn’t read anything by a guy who committed adultery…”
Thats why I never read most of the Psalms! How about you?
I read Mein Kampf. Have read some of Karl Marx. I have read some liberal theologians. I have also read some of John Piper.
What does reading something have to do with associations in ministry or personal separation? What does simply attending a non immoral gathering have to do with association in ministry or personal approval? Discretion and self protection are advisable for all things but not necessarily demanding separation at all, or even explanation.
The core essence of Fundamentalism is not separation but you would think that is what it is all about with some.
“I wouldn’t read anything by a guy who committed adultery…”
Thats why I never read most of the Psalms! How about you?
I read Mein Kampf. Have read some of Karl Marx. I have read some liberal theologians. I have also read some of John Piper.
What does reading something have to do with associations in ministry or personal separation? What does simply attending a non immoral gathering have to do with association in ministry or personal approval? Discretion and self protection are advisable for all things but not necessarily demanding separation at all, or even explanation.
The core essence of Fundamentalism is not separation but you would think that is what it is all about with some.
Discussion