John Piper Show and Tell
SHOW
TELL
For some strange reason, evangelicals continue to tolerate John Piper’s bizarre teachings—including the belief that Christians are still dead in trespasses and sins. However, and per the usual, he chooses his words very carefully so as to not come right out with stating it. Nevertheless, just in case you think he is speaking of the unregenerate, consider that he says: “….why you would call dead people to do things.” If he had the unregenerate in mind, this is certainly a strange choice of words. One might also think to himself: “Wasn’t Lazarus a believer?”
Furthermore, Piper shows his close kinship with Sonship Theology with the whole concept of “speaking life into people.”
And by the way, what’s the difference between what he is saying in the video and this description of metaphysical Christian Science: “In metaphysics the higher rules the lower. What we control in the spiritual realm will manifest in the physical. This process is done by seeing or speaking, affirmations. In the word faith philosophy words have power, they contain the force when spoken in faith…. The concept is to have it birthed in the spiritual realm first and then it will come about in the natural. As one takes the Scripture believing and confessing it the process of supernatural faith begins. One is to speak what they want into existence.”
And no John Piper verbiage would be complete without a direct contradiction to the plain sense of Scripture. He says we “can’t please God” when the apostle Paul makes it clear that we “make it our goal to please Him” and will be judged accordingly at the Bema Seat judgement.
paul
Paul's Passing Thoughts 
Cindy,
I only invited you to my site so you could find out what I believe rather than having to write it all again. I thought you really wanted to know. Sorry for the misunderstanding.
Randy
LikeLike
Paul,
I wish I could but it would cost a king’s ransom to send it from here. Next time I come to the States I’ll send you a bag. Our favorite brand is Nosara.
Randy
LikeLike
Cindy,
I searched my explanation of the gospel for references to the Sovereignty of God and couldn’t find what you were talking about. Perhaps you could point out what you are referring to.
Randy
LikeLike
Cindy,
You asked how my views differ from NC. It is my understanding that they are not cessationists in the matter of the extraordinary gifts of the Spirit. I continue to be a cessationist. Apparently they are flooding the cities. I still really like the country.
Randy
LikeLike
Randy,
I don’t mean to be antagonistic, but I hoped to get you to think about these things a little differently. We are brethren in Christ, I believe, and I don’t question that. I celebrate that and give God glory in that. My questions are aimed at helping you understand a different viewpoint, not question your doctrine.
The Apostle Paul said this to the Corinthians (in chapter 11 of the second epistle; ESV):
But I am afraid that as the serpent deceived Eve by his cunning, your thoughts will be led astray from a sincere and pure devotion to Christ. For if someone comes and proclaims another Jesus than the one we proclaimed, or if you receive a different spirit from the one you received, or if you accept a different gospel from the one you accepted, you put up with it readily enough.
The KJV calls it the simplicity of the Gospel.
I understand that, here on this blog, Paul (Dohse) is trying to help others understand this very subtle nature of the influences that have changed the way the ideas of the Australian Forum have affected how many Believers today understand the basics of the faith and the simplicity of the Gospel.
There is solid documentation that those at Westminster Theological Seminary were influenced by this, and one of those people who was there and was influenced was John Zens who pioneered the original ideas that are known today as the Systematic Theology and tenets of Faith of New Covenant Theology.
My own working theology and understanding and beliefs from Scripture look very much like NCT, I have participated with and labored in the faith along with Zens, some of Zens followers and many more of Reisinger’s followers, and others who just follow what looks like NCT. (I would gladly visit your blog to learn more, but I have a very good working knowledge of different variations of NCT and I understand its primary distinctions. I understand many practical secondary distinctions, too.)
But in concert with Paul’s concerns about NC, there are lots of really weird issues coming out of the formal NCT and from NC, and some of them are very common. Some of them are the history of the Presbyterian academic community. Some are coming from the Reformed Seventh Day Adventist movement and the overlap that they shared with these Presbyterians (who have trained many Reformed Baptists). There is also a neo-liberal influence there, too, that is very common to the people Paul has named.
I think that the grand challenge before all of us is to get refocused and to reiterate for ourselves what the heart of the Evangelical Christian message is and what it is not. If you’re at odds with what the NCs are pushing or even what Zens is pushing, that’s fantastic, and I would hope that this info here would push you on into an even stronger understanding and affirmation of your own doctrine and good doctrine.
But I think that another challenge here is to recognize that we need to look more deeply into what good doctrine really is — to return to orthodoxy (a “right opinion” about the Word) and what it tells us of justification and sanctification. Did we run Jesus out of the process in favor of a Systematic Theology, a tradition of men, the words of a teacher, or a special focus on a particular doctrine over the essentials of the faith? Do these things bring us closer together in our love for one another, or do they cause strife and factions? I’m challenged by these challenges, too. Do we contend for Christ and Him crucified? And are we contending for those things which are in the Word, clearly and plainly, far above the other details?
If we have those things in line and if we are in agreement, does it matter whether Lydia or Paul or I disagree if we affirm the essentials? There are problems in the history of the NCT movement. I would challenge you to consider those things so that you are not pulled away from the simplicity of the Gospel. That should bond us together in the love of Jesus, not cause us to be at odds. I want to affirm that.
LikeLike
Randy wrote:
You asked how my views differ from NC.
Randy,
My statement of asking how the way you first explained what the gospel was aimed at clarifying a statement you made that I found unclear. My statement “How does that differ” was a rhetorical question to point out that I found your explanation unclear. You are free to choose what you want, and I am not judging you. Just as I am, you are working out your salvation in fear and trembling. It should not matter what I think. The Spirit of God will either condemn your heart or will give you confidence towards God.
But I do encourage you took into the origins of NCT, and I hoped to get you to step back to see how many different versions of NCT there are and that some are more focused on the salient message of the Word than they are on an indentified Systematic Theology. No matter what our approach and understanding as Christians, the most clear part of our message should be that the sacrifice of Jesus offers us the forgiveness of sins. Whether a person is elect or not and how they understand that is not dependent on sharing that message with them. I don’t really care what the intramurals are as much as the central message that Jesus offers us forgiveness of sins and new life in Christ which delivers us and reunites us with our Creator. But we hear so many other things, and this is what concerns me.
LikeLike
Randy,
You are the one who stated that the Gospel was about the Sovereignty of God. I asked you to back that up with Scripture. Matthew, Mark, Luke and John repeat the phrase “the gospel (good news) of the Kingdom of God.” If you believe it is about sovereignty, there should be some passages in Scripture that teach us that.
Did you get that concept from the Word directly or from a Systematic Theology, or from a specific teacher? I asked because I found your initial comment confusing and inconsistent from my own understanding of the Gospel of the kingdom which I understand as the redemption that we are offered by grace through faith in Jesus Christ.
You said it was about the sovereignty of God, not me. That was your idea. I was asking you to defend it.
Again, please note that I am asking a rhetorical question because you didn’t defend the idea from Scripture. We ought to be able to defend what we believe solidly from the Word.
I am familiar with dispensationalism, NCT, and standard Covenant Theology as well as the doctrines of Grace. I don’t need to know them. (I can probably defend them for you, but it’s not important to me.) But if you are going to offer that as an answer, you need to know where that belief comes from and how to defend it from Scripture, not from a doctrine. That’s my point.
LikeLike
Cindy,
I didn’t say that. I said it was good news that God is in control of the universe, but that is not the gospel in the context in which I am using the term. Go back and read what I said. BTW, I don’t mind if you question my teaching. If it is true, it will bear scrutiny.
LikeLike
Here is the statement Cindy:
Of course the term gospel means good news. It is good news that God is in sovereign control of the universe, BUT THAT IS NOT THE GOSPEL in the context in which I am using the term. The gospel is good news but everything that is good news [TRUTHS SUCH AS GOD’S SOVEREIGN CONTROL] is not the gospel in that sense.
LikeLike
Cindy,
I am certainly aware that there are many folks claiming NCT who have no understanding of the position. John Reisinger used to pray, “Lord, deliver us from our disciples.” I am not sure his prayers were answered. I just don’t think I should be lumped with the loons because I helped define the position in the first place.
LikeLike
Randy, None of the NCT crowd claim their daddy, Jon Zens because of his association with Brinsmead.
> —–Original Message—– >
LikeLike