Larry Rogier: Here’s My Take On Piper and Warren

Why is it that we think Piper can have more influence through a book or a downloaded sermon than we can through weekly teaching and preaching in our churches? Do we really think our preaching and teaching is that bad?

When meat isn’t being served on Sunday/Wednesday, people who are hungry are going to try to find some spiritual sustenance, so I say- Yes, some preaching/teaching really is that bad- they know it and resent the ‘success’ of men they despise and instead of taking note of what is and is not Scriptural/beneficial, they just sit on the sidelines and mock. It’s like a 6th grade playground out there sometimes.

Perhaps the greatest failure in evangelicalism and fundamentalism is the failure to teach discernment, or perhaps the failure to believe that other people have discernment.

I agree- people who don’t want to be grounded are inevitably going to be led astray- you can’t treat a congregation like they are toddlers who need to be corralled and controlled. Folks who are growing and grounded are not going to be straining at gnats and swallowing camels, so it’s ok to ‘let’ them peruse and absorb information from a variety of sources.

John Piper has a different view of Genesis than me and a different view of Revelation. In between, he apparently has an entirely different hermeneutic and a very different theology — and has a background in a denomination and schools which have no affinity with anything I am involved in.

Other than that, the similarities between our views are striking ;) ;) :bigsmile:

Seriously, I just have never gotten the emotional connection to Piper which is such a draw to so many YF’s. They begin by overlooking his theology — but I think that quickly changes to accepting pieces of his theology for many of them.

My church showed Piper’s “Christian hedonism” videos in Sunday School. I must say they left me scratching my head at why there is such a fascination with him right now. I understand the concept of something filling a vacuum, as Susan alludes to, but there is just so much better material available than Piper’s, IMHO.

[Paul J. Scharf]…
My church showed Piper’s “Christian hedonism” videos in Sunday School. I must say they left me scratching my head at why there is such a fascination with him right now. I understand the concept of something filling a vacuum, as Susan alludes to, but there is just so much better material available than Piper’s, IMHO.

I agree that there is better material, but some of the men with the best material don’t have marketing know-how, or the desire to be widely published… which I understand, but by the same token, good quality material is needed, and IMO an effort made by churches to help the authors they might have in their congregations get their stuff published.

[Susan R] I agree that there is better material, but some of the men with the best material don’t have marketing know-how, or the desire to be widely published… which I understand, but by the same token, good quality material is needed, and IMO an effort made by churches to help the authors they might have in their congregations get their stuff published.

Susan, I agree with your statements and am all for more and better publishing and marketing — but I think the issue related to Piper with YF’s may be more theological in nature than it is related to the availability of better materials. As I search the Web — even just one site such as SermonAudio.com — or take one trip to a GOOD Christian bookstore, the term that often comes to mind is “sensory overload.” There is more good stuff available than I could ever comprehend making use of.

I tend to think the issue with Piper is YF’s who are not grounded theologically in any one particular direction — especially not toward traditional dispensationalism — who are attempting to fill the theological vacuum they find in fundamentalism. For reasons that escape me, they find Piper to be a fascinating subject — maybe it is that mysterious tag of “Reformed Baptist” which first draws them in — I don’t know, I don’t get it.

Actually, if you think about it, Piper and Warren are the perfect fit. They come from different points on the spectrum, but each brings a contemporary vocabulary and new approach to ministry and theology which seems to “scratch the itch” of YF’s and many others. Maybe they have finally found each other!! 8-)

[Paul J. Scharf]

I tend to think the issue with Piper is YF’s who are not grounded theologically in any one particular direction — especially not toward traditional dispensationalism — who are attempting to fill the theological vacuum they find in fundamentalism. For reasons that escape me, they find Piper to be a fascinating subject — maybe it is that mysterious tag of “Reformed Baptist” which first draws them in — I don’t know, I don’t get it.

I think most young people (I am a young person) are looking for a comprehensive vision - some idea or set of values by which they can order their lives. During my time in Fundamentalism, I either didn’t notice that there was one, or the one that did hold sway was ugly, such as “winning souls.” Piper’s Christian Hedonism is attractive because it’s profound enough to pass for an ultimate goal and broad enough to comprehend all of the aspects of life. Seeing the supremacy of God in Christ is something that Christians desperately need, and it’s natural that people who hear that for the first time from Piper would be grateful to him. By the way, I am Reformed, and I don’t consider Piper Reformed.

Paul,

IMO, the reason that you are seeing some YF abandoning a dispensational hermanutic has little to do with Piper. I know of several that grew up within dispensationalism but were turned off by LaHay’s Left Behind series and/or John Hagee’s accesses. I agree that these men both have some bad excesses, I just haven’t abandoned it.

Roger,

Anyone who would turn from a dispensational (literal) hermeneutic and go to Piper — because of the Left Behind series — probably wasn’t grounded in it to begin with…

[Paul J. Scharf]
I tend to think the issue with Piper is YF’s who are not grounded theologically in any one particular direction — especially not toward traditional dispensationalism — who are attempting to fill the theological vacuum they find in fundamentalism. For reasons that escape me, they find Piper to be a fascinating subject — maybe it is that mysterious tag of “Reformed Baptist” which first draws them in — I don’t know, I don’t get it.

I’m not as young as a YF, but I would say that “theological grounding” didn’t occur in very many fundamental churches in spite of strong preaching (which often could be summarized as “what we believe — good; what others believe — bad”). In some cases that might not be quite fair. It’s not that those men didn’t preach the Bible — many did. However, the presuppositions for dispensationalism, or you name it, were not really mentioned or dealt with as the preacher’s particular lens was applied to the scripture.

As soon as the younger people are eventually exposed to what are apparently solid believers from a different tradition (What? You mean they’re not apostate just because they don’t believe like my church does?) or other Christian writings, they immediately want to seek out some of what is out there,just because they are hungry, have had enough of preaching that even though from scripture, somehow always seems to turn around to the same topics, rules, and traditions, and are looking to see if what they have been taught is right.

The advent of electronic communication and access to books ordered from the internet, etc., has only accelerated this. Younger believers are exposed to that much more than they used to be. I don’t think the YFs are really all that different from younger believers seeking meaning in their lives (as Charlie mentioned) in the preceding generations. They just have a way to get more info, share it with others, and get together in ways unimagined in previous generations.

The reactions to all this new teaching and information will continue to be a complete spectrum. Some will leave what they’ve been taught, some will modify it, and some will be strengthened in what they believe. However, as long as many churches put up with shallow preaching and and wrong emphasis (traditions of men) in their teaching, they should come to expect more and more “falling away” from what was taught in the church. The tragedy is that some will go out and get completely away from the faith or go to something that is apostate but with more “order.” The flip side is that some will go on to something better, strengthened in the faith.

The only way to keep men like Piper from having an undesired influence on the church people is to feed them properly (ground them theologically), so they have good discernment before they ever encounter those mens’ writings (which are written well, and often doctrinally richer than what they have been getting).

[Paul J. Scharf]
Anyone who would turn from a dispensational (literal) hermeneutic and go to Piper — because of the Left Behind series — probably wasn’t grounded in it to begin with…

Yeah, and for those who didn’t understand that those books were fiction, I think it’s fair to say they didn’t have much grounding in anything …

[Paul J. Scharf]

[Susan R] I agree that there is better material, but some of the men with the best material don’t have marketing know-how, or the desire to be widely published… which I understand, but by the same token, good quality material is needed, and IMO an effort made by churches to help the authors they might have in their congregations get their stuff published.

Susan, I agree with your statements and am all for more and better publishing and marketing — but I think the issue related to Piper with YF’s may be more theological in nature than it is related to the availability of better materials. As I search the Web — even just one site such as SermonAudio.com — or take one trip to a GOOD Christian bookstore, the term that often comes to mind is “sensory overload.” There is more good stuff available than I could ever comprehend making use of.

True- but it’s more than just availability, it’s also about presentation. I think folks today equate quality with a sort of professionalism. For instance, literature that is printed in color on glossy paper is often going to be thought of as ‘better’ by virtue of first impression, not content. Haven’t we discussed on SI the ‘cheesiness’ of alot of inspirational fiction and ‘Christian’ movies? If someone has a good schtick, folks will buy into it.

Piper and a few other popular authors/speakers have a polished, modern air about them that appeals to modern consumers looking for more bang for their buck. It sounds a bit materialistic and shallow, but those are two adjective that pretty much apply to American Christianity, IMO. Warren’s pragmatism is just the thing to draw folks who love Clark Howard and HGTV and Reader’s Digest.

In any case, I thought Larry’s assessment was fair and most likely accurate.

Susan and Dave,

All good points — but I still think there is a larger theological component to it. Piper’s Covenant Theology/Post-Trib., etc. approach apparently carries an air of sophistication to YF’s who are looking for something “deeper.” My question is, “Why Piper?” (Someone said he is to this generation what MacArthur was to mine 20 years ago. If that is true, what does it say for the current and future state of fundamentalism??)

Also, my questions are meant to be a bit rhetorical — shame on us for creating such a climate. To paraphrase a famous historian, “There is no excuse for a boring sermon or theology lesson.”

Charlie — Interesting points…Perhaps you could tell us how Piper is viewed in the PCA, or why you don’t consider him Reformed…

I like Piper because he gives his books away for free. I also like the fact that he’s well-spoken and (usually) well-reasoned in his preaching - something that hasn’t really been modelled well by Fundies.

Hey, let’s not go way deep. Piper makes his better-quality stuff more widely available at a better price than most. That strengthens his appeal.

Hmmmm…Somewhere the next great enterprising fundamentalist is taking notes…. 0:)

I am by no means a strong supporter of Christian Hedonism or of Piper, some of his theological considerations I gulp at, however, I can tell you what causes me to be encouraged by Piper’s preaching and teaching (his books don’t really do it for me, because while they have some great content, they are very similar to each other and if you would just read desiring God, you probably get the whole of what he is saying, but I have digressed). I enjoy hearing him preach, because when I do, I hear someone who is passionate about the glory and supremacy of God. It is a far cry from many fundamentalists (not all, it is the same reason I enjoy hearing Dr. Tim Jordan preach) who only are passionate about hell,sin, and the bad stuff. That stuff needs to be preached, and I preach on the judgment of God often, but Piper shows great love for the glory of God and that edifies my soul, therefore, I appreciate his ministry. It is not that I turn a blind eye to that which I disagree with. In fact, I know I probably have doctrinal errors that I hope God will change in me through the Word, but YF (and I am one) are excited when someone proclaims truth, not in snarky or angry tones, but in genuine passion for God’s glory. That is we are drawn to MacArthur-it is not that they are reformed that draws me (However you cannot deny that reformed doctrine exalts God). It is the same reason why YF are not drawn to the message of Warren (which is why it saddens me that Piper invited him). Warren is passionate about “his model” and I cannot see a passion for GOd. I know I am not the judge of any man, but I see what I see.

My last post might cause confusion… I am not saying that preaching or teaching about hell is not good, but it seems like some fundamentalists are only passionate when they are talking about everyone’s sins and how people are going to hell. It doesn’t come across even as genuine concern, but rather “Oh, goody, I like telling everyone what is wrong with them.” By all means preach hell, but preach that God is glorified when the wicked are cast into the lake of fire and God is glorified when the saint is delivered from the chains of hell and sin. Preach about God! is my point. Hope that doesn’t spark an off-topic conundrum.