Grimmson
Puritan Board Sophomore
First of all I want to thank Jonathan Hunt for bring this article to my attention. I did not read all of the critiques in relation to the article in question on the Board, but one I would recommend you look at is Archlute.
I think some of Dr. Peter Masters’ prejudice and tradition does stand out, which others have commented on as while. In regards to the issue of Calvinism and Reformed Theology, Calvinism is Soteriological in its substance and not an invention of the Puritans. By equating Calvinism with Reformed Theology you are doing what I would consider fundamentally a systematic error. This equating systematic error has been around for quite a while from those who confess to be reformed, many times to the area of one’s sacramental theology to such a degree that reformed individual of a Presbyterians perspective would deny Baptist as being reformed. So I think we need to be careful of are systematic categories and what they represent.
I also think we need to be careful how we define the new era of Calvinism particularly in light of other eras or periods in history. We are quick today to condemn Luther and Calvin’s magisterial position or perhaps the some the Puritans on their Post-mil position. We must recognize that we may not have all of our theology in order, some in light of our own tradition. Therefore, we should show Christian love to individuals such as Mark Driscoll, who has been moving away to some degree from the emergent scene. Perhaps share what are differences are biblical, but not go at a straight forward attack who maybe growing in the reformed faith.
Let us face it Finneyism is not dead, especially if you read books such as the Purpose Driven Church. Where the focus is on the person by external means outside of the proclaimed Word of God. It is such a powerful tradition that has infected the church that it should be no surprise that it has affected many of our Calvinistic brethren. In fact what we should probably recognize is that many of a charismatic tradition are now learning of the reformed faith by being introduced to Calvinism, and as being a gateway drug start to move to a fuller form of reformed thinking. It just requires teaching and patience on our part.
Piety has always been under attack, and I would say just as much so in the fundamentalist anti-theological other side of the liberal face coin. What I have seen from individuals like Paul Washer, who I think Masters would also criticize, is a cry out towards a return to piety. I would subject looking at a few of his sermons like the “10 Indictments” as a reference for that. What we need to do is define piety in relation to God’s grace and word instead of the strict moralism that we have attached to it outside of holy scripture. Therefore true worldliness must be defined, something sadly must churches or pastors have trouble doing out here in the U.S. and the rest of the West.
The article clearly shows his perspective on charismatic worship, which I might add am against as well as theologically, and the use of various forms of music. Here I think his own tradition is standing out:
“We are told of thunderous music, thousands of raised hands, ‘Christian’ hip-hop and rap lyrics (the examples seeming inept and awkward in construction) uniting the doctrines of grace with the immoral drug-induced musical forms of worldly culture.”
I want to focus initial on his use of language, “drug-induced musical forms of worldly culture.” Music by its nature, even though it can dramatically affect one being is not by its nature immoral, even though however many immoral acts associate that genre of music. One example is the upbeat of the great hymn “Joy to the World”. I was critized for being to fast of a song which was compared to immoral music. However today we would not dream to think such with ‘Joy to the World” growing up with it in are own tradition. Here may be another example of culture change, which Masters’ unknowingly may be blinded his tradition. This is not an attack personally on him however for many of are guilty of the same and I do not want it seem as if I am attacking him. Luther, and if this is legend I do not know, why I used modern music in his hymns and his answer was simple. It was so the people could learn the music. Of course we do not sing in the same way they did then even though using the same type of language as the author did above, he may criticize Luther for uniting the doctrines of grace with the immoral drunken-induced musical forms of worldly culture. I think his statement here went a bit to far, but however should be discussed with our circles because we should want to worship God in the manner that he so desires for his worship.
I do not think John MacArthur, Mark Driscol, or John Piper has an “anti-fourth-commandment” view. I do think the church at large, regardless of denomination, has a weak view concerning the Lord’s Day. It is a subject that I think needs to be taught more on and a concern that I agree with Masters over, though I would not use his language there of.
Many of Masters concerns I think are legitimate concerns, but the rhetoric must be balanced with love. We do not want to be as some have called a “Chosen Frozen”. Therefore instead of attacking we should move to biblical discussions on the issues at hand. Also how history has also shaped on views as well, challenging are own man made traditions. Hopefully articles like this will continue the conversation instead of hurt it.
To God be the Glory and Honor Forever
I think some of Dr. Peter Masters’ prejudice and tradition does stand out, which others have commented on as while. In regards to the issue of Calvinism and Reformed Theology, Calvinism is Soteriological in its substance and not an invention of the Puritans. By equating Calvinism with Reformed Theology you are doing what I would consider fundamentally a systematic error. This equating systematic error has been around for quite a while from those who confess to be reformed, many times to the area of one’s sacramental theology to such a degree that reformed individual of a Presbyterians perspective would deny Baptist as being reformed. So I think we need to be careful of are systematic categories and what they represent.
I also think we need to be careful how we define the new era of Calvinism particularly in light of other eras or periods in history. We are quick today to condemn Luther and Calvin’s magisterial position or perhaps the some the Puritans on their Post-mil position. We must recognize that we may not have all of our theology in order, some in light of our own tradition. Therefore, we should show Christian love to individuals such as Mark Driscoll, who has been moving away to some degree from the emergent scene. Perhaps share what are differences are biblical, but not go at a straight forward attack who maybe growing in the reformed faith.
Let us face it Finneyism is not dead, especially if you read books such as the Purpose Driven Church. Where the focus is on the person by external means outside of the proclaimed Word of God. It is such a powerful tradition that has infected the church that it should be no surprise that it has affected many of our Calvinistic brethren. In fact what we should probably recognize is that many of a charismatic tradition are now learning of the reformed faith by being introduced to Calvinism, and as being a gateway drug start to move to a fuller form of reformed thinking. It just requires teaching and patience on our part.
Piety has always been under attack, and I would say just as much so in the fundamentalist anti-theological other side of the liberal face coin. What I have seen from individuals like Paul Washer, who I think Masters would also criticize, is a cry out towards a return to piety. I would subject looking at a few of his sermons like the “10 Indictments” as a reference for that. What we need to do is define piety in relation to God’s grace and word instead of the strict moralism that we have attached to it outside of holy scripture. Therefore true worldliness must be defined, something sadly must churches or pastors have trouble doing out here in the U.S. and the rest of the West.
The article clearly shows his perspective on charismatic worship, which I might add am against as well as theologically, and the use of various forms of music. Here I think his own tradition is standing out:
“We are told of thunderous music, thousands of raised hands, ‘Christian’ hip-hop and rap lyrics (the examples seeming inept and awkward in construction) uniting the doctrines of grace with the immoral drug-induced musical forms of worldly culture.”
I want to focus initial on his use of language, “drug-induced musical forms of worldly culture.” Music by its nature, even though it can dramatically affect one being is not by its nature immoral, even though however many immoral acts associate that genre of music. One example is the upbeat of the great hymn “Joy to the World”. I was critized for being to fast of a song which was compared to immoral music. However today we would not dream to think such with ‘Joy to the World” growing up with it in are own tradition. Here may be another example of culture change, which Masters’ unknowingly may be blinded his tradition. This is not an attack personally on him however for many of are guilty of the same and I do not want it seem as if I am attacking him. Luther, and if this is legend I do not know, why I used modern music in his hymns and his answer was simple. It was so the people could learn the music. Of course we do not sing in the same way they did then even though using the same type of language as the author did above, he may criticize Luther for uniting the doctrines of grace with the immoral drunken-induced musical forms of worldly culture. I think his statement here went a bit to far, but however should be discussed with our circles because we should want to worship God in the manner that he so desires for his worship.
I do not think John MacArthur, Mark Driscol, or John Piper has an “anti-fourth-commandment” view. I do think the church at large, regardless of denomination, has a weak view concerning the Lord’s Day. It is a subject that I think needs to be taught more on and a concern that I agree with Masters over, though I would not use his language there of.
Many of Masters concerns I think are legitimate concerns, but the rhetoric must be balanced with love. We do not want to be as some have called a “Chosen Frozen”. Therefore instead of attacking we should move to biblical discussions on the issues at hand. Also how history has also shaped on views as well, challenging are own man made traditions. Hopefully articles like this will continue the conversation instead of hurt it.
To God be the Glory and Honor Forever
Unfortunately, it seems to be the norm in Christian circles where theology is not handled systematically to either obsess over eschatology or to consider it unimportant and ignore it. 
