Odd bedfellows? Perhaps not as much as you'd think.
A number of people have asked about John Piper's decision to invite Rick Warren to the national "Desiring God Conference". Here is a 12 minute clip from last night's "Ask Pastor John" session where he addresses that question and explains why he thinks it will be good for Rick to come.
If you can't see the video, you can check it out here, or here.
The State of Global Missions in 2024
2 hours ago
13 comments:
I'm surprised you thought they seemed like odd bedfellows. Both of them seem like they're fully part of the standard, wider, low church, American evangelicalism and share in those same theological-cultural characteristics.
What surprised me was the need for the video. I wonder what groups of people he's implicitly responding to by putting this together.
I'm surprised you were surprised that I thought they seemed like odd bedfellows. :-)
Maybe it stems from my relative ignorance of Warren, but it seemed like his "pragmatic, cross-cultural, focus on our similarities, put aside our differences gospel" illuminated an impurity of appreciation for Biblical theology.
they are worlds apart. i don't care how close piper is trying to make them look, there are massive diffrences. piper is not part of the low church in america and i don't know why he's slumming it with warren.
Luke,
:-)
Maybe Rick does have certain personal commitments that skews the focus on Biblical theology. I don't know. I've heard the same thing stated about Pastor Piper at times. The complaint about pragmatism sounds like a non-starter to me (unless we start clarifying what he's denying in the process). I'm not sure where him being cross-cultural dulls appreciation for Biblical theology, though I'd imagine that he's probably more focused on the various ways we communicate that theology than most theologians are. But maybe, as you're pointing out, he's saying that some of our theological differences don't matter as much as people think it does. And if that's the concern, I'd probably have to agree with him.
Then again, maybe you're right and he's off the deep end. I'm not informed enough to have anything more than a subjective, vague sense of the situation.
I was intrigued by this link when I saw it in my facebook newsfeed.
I don't know who Nick Steffen is, but JOHN PIPER IS NOT of the "wider, low church American evangelicalism". John Piper does NOT share theological cultural characteristics with Rick Warren. That was a blatant smear of John Piper.
Although I agree with Piper that Rick Warren's pragmatic "boots on the ground" approach to Christianity is admirable, I don't understand Piper's semantics on Rick Warren's half reformed theology. Rick Warren's half reformed theology does not line up with the no-lordship salvation he seems to preach.
How is your debate over these Christian teachers unlike what Paul preaches about in 1 Cor 1:10-17?
Anon: I can't speak for everyone here, but here's my perspective:
While I appreciate your concern, and I can see where you could maybe surmise that on the surface, I don't believe it falls into that category.
I didn't mean to convey the idea that I was giving loyalty to these men that rightly belongs to Christ. I believe everyone who's commented so far understands well that our loyalty and our allegiance is to Christ and Christ alone.
This discussion has arisen from my desire to be a discerning learner (Think Acts 17:10-11).
I have a lot of respect for John Piper and what He preaches, so when he vouches for another teacher (directly or indirectly), I take notice. In this case, I was surprised by his willingness to vouch for a teacher that didn't seem to line up with him on some key issues. However, I realize, as I stated before, that I'm no expert on Warren, so I've appreciate the dialog in these comments. I believe dialoging on issues such as these helps us share information we have so that we can be aware of what Peter talks of in 2 Peter 2:1-3.
Does that help, or does it still sound like we're disobeying 1 Cor 1:10-17?
Jonathan,
I'm sorry that you thought that my comments were some attempt to smear Pastor Piper. That was certainly not my intent. Please accept my apology.
When I think of evangelicalism today, I can think of no one who has greater theological influence than John Piper. Perhaps I'm wrong. But the reference to common American evangelicalism was nothing more than an acknowledgment of that influence. Also, I didn't think that claiming that Piper's ministry was 'low church' was a smear at all, since I've heard this exact description from some who intensely follow him. I'm not sure anyone would describe him as 'high church' as the term is commonly understood. Perhaps you can correct me on this, though.
Finally, suggesting that Piper shares theological or cultural influences with Rick Warren should not be a flammatory statement, given that Piper's video is saying just that.
Once again, I honestly meant no offense by the comment. If you'd like to talk more about this, please contact me over email.
anonymous, are you serious? can you really not see the difference? can no one's name even be mentioned without this oft-repeated accusation coming up? no one is claiming to be "of piper" here. we're simply discussing who is trustworthy as far as preaching a bibilical gospel.
1 Cor 1:10-17
"I appeal to you, brothers, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree, and that there be no divisions among you, but that you be united in the same mind and the same judgment. For it has been reported to me by Chloe's people that there is quarreling among you, my brothers. What I mean is that each one of you says, “I follow Paul,” or “I follow Apollos,” or “I follow Cephas,” or “I follow Christ.” Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul? I thank God that I baptized none of you except Crispus and Gaius, so that no one may say that you were baptized in my name. (I did baptize also the household of Stephanas. Beyond that, I do not know whether I baptized anyone else.) For Christ did not send me to baptize but to preach the gospel, and not with words of eloquent wisdom, lest the cross of Christ be emptied of its power."
In the video on this post, Pastor Piper is explaining why he invited Pastor Warren to speak at his conference. He notes some of his theological concerns about Mr Warren and how some of those concerns were alleviated during their discussion. Though they would certainly differ on some topics, he seems to believe that they share the same faith in Jesus Christ (or at least that's my impression of the video).
In Paul's passage above, he points out that the Christian community should not be defined by the leaders of their particular community or who had baptized them, for Christ himself was the source of that unity. By pointing out that Rick Warren and he substantially shared the same faith, John Piper argues that Rick Warren's teaching should included in his conference. Insofar as he is correct in his assessment that they are largely on the same page doctrinally, he is acting in the spirit of the 1 Corinthians passage you mentioned.
If your concern was about the comments posted here (and not the video itself), I would point out that Traever (and Luke, to some extent) are not convinced by the video that John Piper's assessment is entirely correct. I guess that just makes me the burr in the saddle, suggesting that didn't appear to be that different in the first place. Luke's comment clarifies this very well, I think.
In the future, when quoting passages of Scripture, please try to give more context behind the passage in question. You asked how this debate is unlike what Paul preached. But you never explained how it is at all like what Paul preached. That would've been of great help.
Nick: Thanks for that clarifying comment. I appreciate the spirit in which you approach discussion and debate.
I would like to re-state and clarify my admission of relative ignorance of who Warren is and what all he stands for. I had made assumptions based on my limited knowledge of Him, and Piper's comments caught me a little off-guard. My assumptions would not have lead me the conclusions Piper came to in this video. I look forward to learning more about Warren and hopefully hearing his interview with Piper to learn more about where he stands.
From Anon;
Nick: I appreciate your comments on clarifying why this verse was relevant to this particular conversation. It would have been helpful to the conversation as you pointed out. However, you seemed to understand my intent behind the question as I interpreted Piper's messsage to be an attempt to "bridge the gap" between the Warren and Piper camps and to be in the spirit of 1 Cor that you quoted.
Luke: I enjoy reading your blog from time to time and am glad that you posted this video from John Piper. From my practical non-theological approach to Christianity, I felt inspired to possibly attempt to read some of Piper's writing. Perhaps in inviting Rick Warren to his conference, it will inspire some of his church members to do the same. I appreciate that Piper does not simply write off individuals because at first glance they might not appear to be on the same page theologically.
I often do not engage in theological types of conversations for the fear of being caught in my words or because I do not know the definitions of all the words being spoken! Maybe that can be of encouragement to your readers....
Here's a link to the Dividing Line (James White's podcast). He addresses this issue by playing a clip from Phil Johnson (the Director of Grace to You), whom I greatly respect. The entire podcast is long, but it loads quickly, and he addresses this topic right off the bat. http://www.aomin.org/podcasts/20100408.mp3
Post a Comment