God speaking to the ELCA in "the whirlwind"?
We’re all off topic and should probably start a new thread.
Bob, I was quoting what I thought was Piper’s writings, or sayings. I was trying to avoid conflating your post with his writings, and understand why that may not have been entirely clear. In any case, I still disagree with you - not in that salvation is by saving faith in the person and work of Christ - but that those works are just as important in order to prove that the believer’s faith is genuine. It’s not a case of works driven salvation as you seem to think but an example of a saving faith that will eventually produce fruit, thereby demonstrating that the tree in question is actually alive.
Anyway, since we’re all off topic, I’m going to step out of this conversation now.
Bob, I was quoting what I thought was Piper’s writings, or sayings. I was trying to avoid conflating your post with his writings, and understand why that may not have been entirely clear. In any case, I still disagree with you - not in that salvation is by saving faith in the person and work of Christ - but that those works are just as important in order to prove that the believer’s faith is genuine. It’s not a case of works driven salvation as you seem to think but an example of a saving faith that will eventually produce fruit, thereby demonstrating that the tree in question is actually alive.
Anyway, since we’re all off topic, I’m going to step out of this conversation now.
"Our task today is to tell people — who no longer know what sin is...no longer see themselves as sinners, and no longer have room for these categories — that Christ died for sins of which they do not think they’re guilty." - David Wells
Alex appears to give quotes and references that handle Piper’s view accurately and with theological discernment.
This controversy is viewed by some as going beyond Piper. Some Reformed churches appear to have been dealing with this false teaching.
I would think it is time for anyone who professes to be Evangelical or Fundamentalist to acknowledge this problem with regard to one of the most fundamental Christian doctrines and stop defending Piper. They should at least acknowledge that there may be some real problems here. The evidence offered lays out a prima facie case against Piper. There appears to be no real rebuttal based on other facts. It can be acknowledged that Piper is often unclear or appears contradictory. This should make one cautious in regards to his teachings.
As far as I am concerned it appears to be pointless to take this discussion further. The issues and facts have been laid out.
This controversy is viewed by some as going beyond Piper. Some Reformed churches appear to have been dealing with this false teaching.
I would think it is time for anyone who professes to be Evangelical or Fundamentalist to acknowledge this problem with regard to one of the most fundamental Christian doctrines and stop defending Piper. They should at least acknowledge that there may be some real problems here. The evidence offered lays out a prima facie case against Piper. There appears to be no real rebuttal based on other facts. It can be acknowledged that Piper is often unclear or appears contradictory. This should make one cautious in regards to his teachings.
As far as I am concerned it appears to be pointless to take this discussion further. The issues and facts have been laid out.
Alex appears to give quotes and references that handle Piper’s view accurately and with theological discernment.Sure, if you agree with the conclusion. Having read Future Grace I am not sure that Alex has handled that book properly. I am not sure that there is a great amount of theological discernment being shown. Remember that you, Bob, have actually argued your point (though it is off topic here). Alex has not really done so that I recall. He quoted someone else, and asserted that Piper was wrong. He did not show how.
As to the justification issue, I don’t see many here defending Piper. I certainly haven’t because I am not that familiar with what he says about it, and I am hesitant to take the little bit I have read here and form an opinion on it. On the actual topic of this thread, I have somewhat defended Piper, not in his conclusion or methodology per se, but only in the fact that Alex said some things that do not appear to be accurate and has declined to provide a good basis for those comments.
We agree that on many thing Piper is unclear or appears contradictory. We should be cautious of his teachings for a lot more reasons than that, just as we should be cautious of any teaching.
and then the conclusion itself that bothers me.
Perhaps Bro. Piper does mean to say that all destructive weather patterns are evidence of the curse, which was the result of sin, and that we can see tornadoes as reminders that we live in a world controlled by sin, and it should remind us of our need to repent and take God’s wrath against sin seriously… but I forgot to polish my crystal ball, and his post, standing on its own, seems to say that if we’d just get right with God, we’d not have to worry about disaster striking, and that this disaster was simply the result of a lack of repentance and God’s judgment on same.
Whatever else Mr. Piper has said or written is not really relevant IMO and for this reason- most folks who hear about or read this post probably have not read any of his books or listened to his messages. When you blog, each post really needs to read as a stand-alone. You can’t depend on someone reading your whole blog, your books, your diary, or your mind. This post reads to me like Bro. Piper believes that he can safely and Scripturally reach conclusions as to why this tornado broke off the steeple of Central Lutheran. I’ve said that it certainly is an interesting coincidence, and asking ourselves “What if” questions about such things is natural- drawing conclusions about them, however, is not prudent.
6. Conclusion: The tornado in Minneapolis was a gentle but firm warning to the ELCA and all of us: Turn from the approval of sin. Turn from the promotion of behaviors that lead to destruction. Reaffirm the great Lutheran heritage of allegiance to the truth and authority of Scripture. Turn back from distorting the grace of God into sensuality. Rejoice in the pardon of the cross of Christ and its power to transform left and right wing sinners.Would reaffirming the Scriptures make Minneapolis tornado proof? If we repent and forsake sin and anything that resembles the approval of sin, is there some guarantee that we will never experience destructive weather patterns, earthquakes, or other natural disasters?
Perhaps Bro. Piper does mean to say that all destructive weather patterns are evidence of the curse, which was the result of sin, and that we can see tornadoes as reminders that we live in a world controlled by sin, and it should remind us of our need to repent and take God’s wrath against sin seriously… but I forgot to polish my crystal ball, and his post, standing on its own, seems to say that if we’d just get right with God, we’d not have to worry about disaster striking, and that this disaster was simply the result of a lack of repentance and God’s judgment on same.
Whatever else Mr. Piper has said or written is not really relevant IMO and for this reason- most folks who hear about or read this post probably have not read any of his books or listened to his messages. When you blog, each post really needs to read as a stand-alone. You can’t depend on someone reading your whole blog, your books, your diary, or your mind. This post reads to me like Bro. Piper believes that he can safely and Scripturally reach conclusions as to why this tornado broke off the steeple of Central Lutheran. I’ve said that it certainly is an interesting coincidence, and asking ourselves “What if” questions about such things is natural- drawing conclusions about them, however, is not prudent.
[Bob T.] This controversy is viewed by some as going beyond Piper. Some Reformed churches appear to have been dealing with this false teaching.It does seem pointless to continue, because your mind is made up. I think this stems more from a misunderstanding of reformed theology than heresy in Piper’s views. Are you really suggesting that Piper should not be considered Evangelical?
I would think it is time for anyone who professes to be Evangelical or Fundamentalist to acknowledge this problem with regard to one of the most fundamental Christian doctrines and stop defending Piper. They should at least acknowledge that there may be some real problems here. The evidence offered lays out a prima facie case against Piper. There appears to be no real rebuttal based on other facts. It can be acknowledged that Piper is often unclear or appears contradictory. This should make one cautious in regards to his teachings.
As far as I am concerned it appears to be pointless to take this discussion further. The issues and facts have been laid out.
Again, you haven’t adequately dealt with Rom. 2 yet. Works are necessary, just read 1 John. No works = no right to have assurance. Works are the fruit of God’s work in us that begins with his regeneration producing faith in our hearts.
I think the issue is a failure to understand the pervasive teaching of Scripture that we must persevere in the faith. Piper understands this, and is careful in his teaching to reflect this. I think many do not understand it, and so think this is a new strange teaching. It’s historic Reformation faith, however. Let me end by quoting from my Once Saved, Always Saved?!?! post, which explains some of the scriptural basis for this idea.
Perseverance is required of believers. It is our duty. But the flip side of this is the teaching that God will preserve His elect (John 10:26-30, 1 Pet. 1:5, etc.). So all of the elect–all the truly regenerate among professing believers–will persevere and it will be by God’s grace….
The Bible speaks of our need to “examine” ourselves (2 Cor. 13:5) and to diligently “make our calling and election sure” (2 Pet. 1:10). We cannot assume that since we believed in the past or made some profession of faith, we are absolutely and inviolably secure eternally. We must make room for the Scriptural potential that our faith could be insincere or not genuine. Luke 8:13 again, speaks of those who “believe for a while, and in time of testing fall away”. Even Paul leaves it open that he might even still yet become a “castaway” (same Greek word for apostate) in 1 Cor. 9:27.
Heb. 3:12-14 (along with other warning passages in Hebrews) is emphatically clear that we might ultimately fall away, and so thus we need to daily exhort one another to continue in belief. Paul calls this the “good fight of faith” in 1 Tim. 6:12 and exhorts Timothy to “take hold of the eternal life” (6:12) and to “hold faith” (1:19), because some had already “made shipwreck of their faith” (1:20), and some have “abandoned their former faith” (5:12), and others have “swerved from the faith” (6:21). This is why he exhorts Timothy to “Keep a close watch on yourself and on the teaching. Persist in this, for by so doing you will save both yourself and your hearers.” (4:16) This is why so often Paul and other Scriptural authors do not boldly assure their readers of their personal sharing in Christ, rather they hold out before them their duty to persevere. See all the conditional statements in the following verses: Col. 1:23–”if indeed you continue in the faith, stable and steadfast,…”; 1 Cor. 15:2–”by which [the gospel] you are being saved, if you hold fast to the word I preached to you–unless you believed in vain”; Heb. 3:6–”and we are his house if indeed we hold fast our confidence and our boasting in our hope”; Heb. 3:14–”we share in Christ, if indeed we hold our original confidence firm to the end”; John 8:31–”if you abide in my word, you are truly my disciples”; Mark 13:13–”the one who endures to the end will be saved”; 2 Tim. 2:12–”if we endure, we will also reign with him”; Rom. 8:13–”if by the Spirit you put to death the deeds of the body, you will live”; Gal. 6:9–”in due season we will reap [eternal life (see 6:8)] , if we do not give up”; Heb. 12:14–”holiness without which no one will see the Lord”; James 2:26 (with 14)–”faith apart from works is dead” and “can that faith save him?”
Striving for the unity of the faith, for the glory of God ~ Eph. 4:3, 13; Rom. 15:5-7 I blog at Fundamentally Reformed. Follow me on Twitter.
:::MODERATOR NOTE:::
Could those who would like to discuss John Piper’s beliefs re: anything that doesn’t directly deal with the original topic of this thread please start another thread? That’d be peachy ya’ll.
:::End Moderator Note:::
Could those who would like to discuss John Piper’s beliefs re: anything that doesn’t directly deal with the original topic of this thread please start another thread? That’d be peachy ya’ll.
:::End Moderator Note:::
[Susan R]:::MODERATOR NOTE:::Susan,
Could those who would like to discuss John Piper’s beliefs re: anything that doesn’t directly deal with the original topic of this thread please start another thread? That’d be peachy ya’ll.
:::End Moderator Note:::
At this point, it might be easier to start a new thread about the Tornado and rename this one using your awesome moderator super-powers.
Mike D
Discussion