The following news is from The Trinity Foundation:
John Piper Endorses Doug Wilson
June 2009
John Piper has gone from defending Doug Wilson (and N. T. Wright as seen around the 43 minute mark of the video at http://theresurgence.com/driscoll_piper_chandler_2008-02-26_video_tnc_qa) [go to the last quarter of the video to see the relevant discussion of Doug Wilson's theology] to inviting him to come and speak at his Desiring God National Conference titled "With Calvin in the Theater of God" (information at Events
Piper even gives his rationale for why he invited Wilson, which can be seen at http://www.desiringgod.org/Blog/1878_why_doug_wilson_is_speaking_at_dgs_fall_conference/
As part of his rationale, he quotes Doug Wilson giving an analogy about the difference between "good advice" and "good news." Piper draws the conclusion from this analogy that Doug Wilson has the Gospel right. He even has a video of Wilson's testimony immediately after his rationale.
Further, in the June 2009 edition of Christianity Today, Piper continues his teaching on "future justification:
Notice the last sentence - "Without that validating transformation, there will be no future salvation." Our "present justification" is not enough to save us; rather it is our works done in union with Christ, which will determine our "future justification" and salvation. Peter Leithart has said the said the same thing. In fact it is one of the teachings of the Federal Vision. Is it any wonder that Piper has invited Wilson, the leading proponent of the Federal Vision, to speak with him at a conference?
Tom Juodaitis, http://www.trinityfoundation.org/
The Third Sunday after Trinity.
The Collect.
O LORD, we beseech thee mercifully to hear us; and grant that we, to whom though hast given an hearty desire to pray, may by thy mighty aid be defended and comforted in all dangers and adversities; through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.
John Piper Endorses Doug Wilson
June 2009
John Piper has gone from defending Doug Wilson (and N. T. Wright as seen around the 43 minute mark of the video at http://theresurgence.com/driscoll_piper_chandler_2008-02-26_video_tnc_qa) [go to the last quarter of the video to see the relevant discussion of Doug Wilson's theology] to inviting him to come and speak at his Desiring God National Conference titled "With Calvin in the Theater of God" (information at Events
Piper even gives his rationale for why he invited Wilson, which can be seen at http://www.desiringgod.org/Blog/1878_why_doug_wilson_is_speaking_at_dgs_fall_conference/
As part of his rationale, he quotes Doug Wilson giving an analogy about the difference between "good advice" and "good news." Piper draws the conclusion from this analogy that Doug Wilson has the Gospel right. He even has a video of Wilson's testimony immediately after his rationale.
Further, in the June 2009 edition of Christianity Today, Piper continues his teaching on "future justification:
Present justification is based on the substitutionary work of Christ alone, enjoyed in union with him through faith alone. Future justification is the open confirmation and declaration that in Christ Jesus we are perfectly blameless before God. This final judgment accords with our works. That is, the fruit of the Holy Spirit in our lives will be brought forward as the evidence and confirmation of true faith and union with Christ. Without that validating transformation, there will be no future salvation.
Notice the last sentence - "Without that validating transformation, there will be no future salvation." Our "present justification" is not enough to save us; rather it is our works done in union with Christ, which will determine our "future justification" and salvation. Peter Leithart has said the said the same thing. In fact it is one of the teachings of the Federal Vision. Is it any wonder that Piper has invited Wilson, the leading proponent of the Federal Vision, to speak with him at a conference?
Tom Juodaitis, http://www.trinityfoundation.org/
The Third Sunday after Trinity.
The Collect.
O LORD, we beseech thee mercifully to hear us; and grant that we, to whom though hast given an hearty desire to pray, may by thy mighty aid be defended and comforted in all dangers and adversities; through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.
Posts
12 comments:
If you listen closely to Piper, he is more concerned about "antinomianism" than he is about preserving objective justification by faith alone. Piper's views have an incipient Arminian tone to them where justification can only be absolutely assured in glorification rather than having an absolute assurance in the here and now based on the objective work of Christ on the cross.
There is often a fine line between antinomianism and justification by works. Piper seems to be crossing that line in the direction of the Federal Vision view.
I have to admit I'm rather astounded. I've sat under Pastor Wilson's teaching for 15 years, and although you gentlemen may have three times the education I do (and you probably do), I have first-hand knowledge of his week-to-week preaching, his counseling, and his faithfulness. And never ONCE has he preached that we're saved by the works which we do.
If you really believe Douglas Wilson believes that Christians are saved by their works, you don't understand him one bit. I know you're probably a godly Christian who's trying to keep other Christians from falling into sin and heresy, which is great. But you DON'T understand Douglas Wilson if you really believe he preaches justification by works. Rather, he teaches and lives justification by grace alone 100%, all the way and all the time.
Sincerely in Christ,
Brother Luke
Wouldn't you say that is what St. Paul meant when he said "Now is our salvation nearer then when we first believed."?
I know enough about Doug Wilson to know that he redefines terms from Reformed theology to fit his own agenda in the Federal Vision movement. Even Piper "admits" that Wilson has "problem areas" so if PIPER is saying that, isn't that an indication that Wilson is NOT teaching the classical Protestant and Reformed position?
Simply because you have sat under his ministry does not mean you are informed about the issues. To discern what is counterfeit you would need to know the genuine article. All you have testified to is that you know the counterfeit and it sounds good to you. Mormons and Jehovah's Witnesses think their view is the genuine article as well but is it?
No, I have problems with the Federal Visionists and with Piper himself. Piper's view compromises justification by faith alone by appealing to the last judgment as the completion of justification. This is essentially to compromise with Rome which teaches a similar doctrine of justification.
Our sanctification is imperfect in this life and the elect may and do backslide temporarily, yet they can never completely or finally fall away. In fact, some of the elect are saved on the deathbed. So tell me HOW can our justification be "completed" by our works which are judged in the final judgment as Piper is suggesting?
I would not argue with the teaching that sanctification is our testimony before men. That testimony sometimes disappears for a time. However, since God is omnipotent and omniscient, our justification is by faith alone which faith is absolutely a divine gift. From God's perspective our justification is NEVER in doubt.
The final judgment is not for our benefit at all. The rewards of the elect are to display God's justice, mercy, and love toward his people whom Jesus Christ has redeemed from their sins. The judgment of the wicked displays God's justice, his wrath against sin, and his hatred of evil and sin. As Loraine Boettner puts it:
"The condemnation of the non-elect is designed primarily to furnish an eternal exhibition, before men and angels, of God's hatred for sin, or, in other words, it is to be an eternal manifestation of the justice of God. (Let it be remembered that God's justice as certainly demands the punishment of sin as it demands the rewarding of righteousness). This decree displays one of the divine attributes which apart from it could never have been adequately appreciated. The salvation of some through a redeemer is designed to display the attributes of love, mercy, and holiness." Page 121-122, The Reformed Doctrine of Predestination. (Phillipsburg: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing, 1932). Reprint.
The fact is if it sounds Arminian, even if it is clothed in allegedly "reformed" clothing, it is indeed an Arminian doctrine. It might even be semi-pelagian!!
Charlie
Our final redemption and final salvation is based solely on Christ's works and merits which are imputed to us by faith. Any final judgment the Christian faces is for rewards and not to determine whether or not he or she is saved. To confuse justification by faith alone with a justification by good works, even in the final judgment, is still to compromise the biblical doctrine of justification by faith alone.
Romans 4:4-8
Along with Luke, I too have heard Pastor Wilson's teaching and preaching for several years, though far less than Luke (only 4). But 4 years, you would think, is enough to understand what he says. I agree completely with Luke. Pastor Wilson does not teacher any kind of Justification by works.
You accuse Luke of having "never heard the real article." While I don't think that's a good argument, I will point out that you cannot use it on me. For I have been to literally dozens of PCA churches as my father is a 30+ year PCA pastor, and MTW missionary. Support raising over the years, I have seen every form of PCA preaching. And believe me, they vary, both in form and content.
I might add that I have studied the issues at hand as well. I don't have a PhD in Federal Vision, but neither am I ignorant of the issues. I have read much pro and con material, ranging from RINE to Scott Clark's stuff.
I would urge you to be slow to condemn in these issues. Listen to Pastor Wilson's sermons if you want to know what he truly preaches. His current series on Romans is great.
Respectfully,
Your brother in Christ,
Daniel
Daniel,
I sincerely appreciate your sincerity. However, it seems to me that your emotional attachment to the church and your pastor has clouded your objectivity. The articles criticizing Wilson's theology are substantial. I myself have read the website where Wilson was interviewed by the church officials of his denomination and then "cleared" of the charges.
In reading that website it was confirmed in my own mind that what Wilson is doing is redefining terms to fit his preconceived position. Quite often he even avoids giving straight answers because his agenda is to deceive rather than be forthright.
Furthermore, I have questions about Piper himself since he is overly concerned with antinomianism, emphasizes "future justification", meaning that in the future judgment believers are "vindicated" by their good works. In short, Piper has gone over to the Federal Vision side on that point. Furthermore, Piper was a student of Daniel Miller of Fuller Theological Seminary. Daniel Fuller is also a proponent of the New Perspectives on Paul. So for Piper to write a book against N.T. Wright is simply a show so folks won't identify him with NPP or FV. Piper invited Wilson because they are on the same page.
For more on this see: Daniel Fuller's book on law and gospel and The Justification Controversy: A Guide for the Perplexed.
See also: Pied Piper
See also Sean Gerety's critique of the PCA in dealing with the Federal Vision: Peter Leithart and the PCA's Failure to Deal with the Federal Vision.
Charlie, your "faith" has made you paranoid. You can't even trust the plain truth spoken by a man who lives a life devoted to Christ. Do you really think you are defending the "faith once for all delivered to the saints" by claiming that Wilson and Piper are both deceptive? Sad.
Mr. Anonymous,
First of all, the doctrine of sola Scriptura and the priesthood of believers would say that we must test every minister by God's Word. We do not simply accept what they say at face value. This approach is why there are so many false teachers out there.
Piper may not be "totally apostate." However, Piper's charismatic theology leads him into other compromises. John Robbins' article linking Piper to the New Perspectives teacher, Daniel Fuller, is proof enough that Piper has connections to the teaching. What is particularly alarming is that when we listen closely to Piper it is observable that his emphasis on sanctification over against justification by faith alone is borrowed directly from Daniel Fuller.
As they say, the devil is in the details. I would suggest that anyone who just accepts what ANYONE says at face value, including myself, is naive and unwilling to be a true disciple of Christ. The final rule and authority is NOT John Piper OR any other minister BUT God's Word.
I'm not paranoid. I'm BIBLICAL.
(See 1 John 4:1-6; John 5:39; Acts 17:11).
I do not like anonymous posting but I opened it up again to encourage more participation. The fact of the matter is that anonymity does not exist on the internet in the way it did earlier on.
I'm out here wide open and in yo' face because I am not ashamed of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. I call it like I see it and I want EVERYONE to know what "I" think. This is the way true Christianity operates: in the daylight. A faith that is unexamined is not true faith. Know what you believe and WHY you believe it. Iron sharpens iron.
Charlie
Let me put it even more bluntly, the fact that Piper invited Wilson PROVES that Piper approves of Wilson's doctrines. Therefore, either Piper is ignorant of Wilson's compromises--which I do not for one minute believe OR Piper is in an underhanded way trying to promote Federal Vision by denying that he really believes it and sneaking it in.
This is the tactic used by satan. He will say one thing and do another. It's basically called "dissimulation." False teachers do this all the time.
Post a Comment