Dr.Piper invites Rick Warren to Desiring God (2010) conference?
- Thread starter awretchsavedbygrace
- Start date
- Status
Rae, yes, your post number 33 does state in effect, "Warren isn't as bad as all that, based on my exposure to him." That's not exactly a positive rationale for inviting him, but is better than dismissing the critics.
I'm not up in arms about it because I don't much care about conferences or movements or stars. But I would like to remind people who think that the critics are uncharitable that even if you're right, that doesn't give you an excuse for being uncharitable yourself.
I'm not up in arms about it because I don't much care about conferences or movements or stars. But I would like to remind people who think that the critics are uncharitable that even if you're right, that doesn't give you an excuse for being uncharitable yourself.
I see no problem with this.
1. Piper is an evangelical Baptist and HE IS NOT REFORMED in any sense of the term except for agreeing with Dort. He grew up fundamentalist and is a mainstream strongly evangelical baptist with calvinistic solteriology. He has no confessional subscription (and even if he did no confessions talk about issues of separation).
2. Waren is many things, a heretic is not one. I think he compromises the gospel, I do not think he preaches a false one. There is a difference there. He is giving a conference on how he sees things. The reason why many churches have conferences is to get a new take or view on things. Let Waren defend his beliefs and logic in person and get grilled in a panel or discussion and Q&A. I think thats great.
3. If you want to see churches reformed (of all sorts), you don't do it by leaving and joinging a tiny NAPARC or ARBCA church with represents a TINY MINORITY of all that consists in conservative evangelical circles, you stay in and make your difference that way. That's the example of 9 marks and they have been proven right that slow change over time in small strides is the best way to go.
4. You can call it UNWISE, but biblically it is wrong to call it a sin. There is no transgression of the Law.
5. He is not a good theologian. He is a great NT creds are unquestionable but when it comes to systematic theology his knowledge of historical theology seems to be very weak and at the end of the day he makes it clear that ''it's just him and his bible'' that determines what he believes and has a low view of tradition of the Church.
6. Speaking at a conference is not an endorsement of everything about them. Westminster hosted a debate between CHristopher hitchens and Douglas wilson. Westminster Seminary clearly endorses neither person's views. The goal of these kinds of conferences is not to feed the sheep but to debate and get discussions going
1. Piper is an evangelical Baptist and HE IS NOT REFORMED in any sense of the term except for agreeing with Dort. He grew up fundamentalist and is a mainstream strongly evangelical baptist with calvinistic solteriology. He has no confessional subscription (and even if he did no confessions talk about issues of separation).
2. Waren is many things, a heretic is not one. I think he compromises the gospel, I do not think he preaches a false one. There is a difference there. He is giving a conference on how he sees things. The reason why many churches have conferences is to get a new take or view on things. Let Waren defend his beliefs and logic in person and get grilled in a panel or discussion and Q&A. I think thats great.
3. If you want to see churches reformed (of all sorts), you don't do it by leaving and joinging a tiny NAPARC or ARBCA church with represents a TINY MINORITY of all that consists in conservative evangelical circles, you stay in and make your difference that way. That's the example of 9 marks and they have been proven right that slow change over time in small strides is the best way to go.
4. You can call it UNWISE, but biblically it is wrong to call it a sin. There is no transgression of the Law.
5. He is not a good theologian. He is a great NT creds are unquestionable but when it comes to systematic theology his knowledge of historical theology seems to be very weak and at the end of the day he makes it clear that ''it's just him and his bible'' that determines what he believes and has a low view of tradition of the Church.
6. Speaking at a conference is not an endorsement of everything about them. Westminster hosted a debate between CHristopher hitchens and Douglas wilson. Westminster Seminary clearly endorses neither person's views. The goal of these kinds of conferences is not to feed the sheep but to debate and get discussions going
AThornquist
Puritan Board Doctor
"The Desiring God National Conference is an annual gathering for worship, teaching, prayer, and fellowship centered on the person and work of Jesus Christ. While the conference theme is unique each year, the overarching aims remain the same:
* Doctrine: to see as clearly as we can the whole counsel of God centered in the glory of Christ revealed in the Bible.
* Worship: to savor the sharp contour of his countenance and his accomplishment.
* Mission: to spread a passion for his supremacy in all things for the joy of all peoples."
Sounds more like feeding than debating to me.
heartoflesh
Puritan Board Junior
I'd say he's got points 1-4 right.
Rich Koster
Puritan Board Post-Graduate
Let's all pray that Rick Warren dumps Saddleback Sam and becomes Jonathan Edwards advocate. God still does miracles !!!! There was this guy Saul, trained by Gamaliel.......
AThornquist
Puritan Board Doctor
Certainly may be. On number 4 though, I haven't yet seen someone claim that it is a sinful decision for Warren to speak. No doubt someone has said so, I just haven't seen it. Most people I know who are troubled by the decision are troubled because it is considered very unwise.
Rich Koster
Puritan Board Post-Graduate
If Warren doesn't change, and starts to promote some "garbage" , I hope John Piper would do as I would, and swiftly bump him out of front and center, and put someone who promotes good doctrine in.
christianyouth
Puritan Board Senior
After seeing the quotes from Michael Horton's blog on John Piper, I CANNOT believe that Piper is familiar with Warren's teaching. Hopefully the Q&A session will reveal how heretical Warren is.
Yes, when someone says, "And of course, that purpose now becomes greater — and in fact, I think that’s really what the message this week of Easter is, is that God can bring good out of bad. That he turns crucifixions into resurrections. That he takes the mess of our life, and when we give him all the pieces, he can — God can put it together in a new way”, they are a heretic. They are saying that the purpose of the Gospel is personal enrichment, not redemption.
Andrew pc, good to see you brother.
Yes, when someone says, "And of course, that purpose now becomes greater — and in fact, I think that’s really what the message this week of Easter is, is that God can bring good out of bad. That he turns crucifixions into resurrections. That he takes the mess of our life, and when we give him all the pieces, he can — God can put it together in a new way”, they are a heretic. They are saying that the purpose of the Gospel is personal enrichment, not redemption.
Andrew pc, good to see you brother.
DeborahtheJudge
Puritan Board Freshman
I think he is extending Christian friendship. Maybe he will grow in grace and truth like Mark Driscoll is. This isn't a church -its just a conference.
And wouldn't it be great that if instead of ostracizing someone, we told them the truth in love? Its not like leaving Warren to talk to his seeker-sensitive buddies is helping anyone. John Piper knows what hes doing.
And wouldn't it be great that if instead of ostracizing someone, we told them the truth in love? Its not like leaving Warren to talk to his seeker-sensitive buddies is helping anyone. John Piper knows what hes doing.
Rich Koster
Puritan Board Post-Graduate
Pray for RW that he does get it right, and bring your paint ball gun (just in case........it says to "mark" heretics)
I think I would go if I could Ivan. I am not scared of Warren. I am more scared of the likes of those who claim to be something they are not like Doug Wilson. He is not Reformed. Just my humble opinion. No one is considering Rick Warren as Reformed. He did get my family to read the bible a bit more for a period as Billy Graham has done. Albeit Billy has gone off the deep end a few times. Maybe Rick will also and has. Well, he has in my opinion. And not just mine. He has been unbiblical. But maybe this might pull him back a bit and I am most willing to bet that that is what is being prayed for. NO COMPROMISE. It would do no good for me call him to repent. It is up to another on his level. He wouldn't give me the time of day if he won't give it to Michael Horton. Just my humble opinion.
Sgt Grit
Puritan Board Freshman
I was in a seeker sensitive Rick Warren influenced church when I became a Christian, and it wasn’t a message from the pulpit that changed me, but one from John Macarthur preaching about what it meant to be a true Christian. As I listened to his sermon I realized I was not a true Christian, and went outside underneath a redwood tree and repented of my hypocritical life.
What happened next was the hardest test of my faith that I have ever encountered, and at first even my wife rejected what I had found in Christ. As I began to grow my In-laws saw me as a heretic and my church as terribly misguided, and I was completely alone except for God (I didn’t see it at the time), my Bible and books from every reformed author I could find. I spent many hours in tears begging God to help me find just one fellow reformed believer, or better yet a church, and after year he led me to where I am now.
I am very disappointed with Pipers decision.
What happened next was the hardest test of my faith that I have ever encountered, and at first even my wife rejected what I had found in Christ. As I began to grow my In-laws saw me as a heretic and my church as terribly misguided, and I was completely alone except for God (I didn’t see it at the time), my Bible and books from every reformed author I could find. I spent many hours in tears begging God to help me find just one fellow reformed believer, or better yet a church, and after year he led me to where I am now.
I am very disappointed with Pipers decision.
Ivan
Pastor
Pray for RW that he does get it right, and bring your paint ball gun (just in case........it says to "mark" heretics)
No paint gun for me. Just an open heart to the Lord and a curious mind as to what will happen at the conference.
Clay7926
Puritan Board Sophomore
There are a few ways to look at this:
A). It's a chance for Pastor Warren explain himself to us. In that regard, I think that should be worth the cost of admission alone. I have no doubt that Dr. Piper and some of the other folks at the conference will respectfully call him to task on some of his words and actions in the public square.
B). Dr. Piper could've invited T.D. Jakes (a man who denies the Trinity). It could be a lot worse, folks.
I disagree with Dr. Piper's decision. If Dr. Piper wants Pastor Warren to "lay his cards out on the table," why not sit and talk with him one on one, or invite him for coffee at Dunkin' Donuts or Starbucks? The problem is that Pastor Warren's actions, words, and appearance at certain events (i.e. the Azuza anniversary thingamabob back in 2001) have not endeared him to a number of folks in the Christian community worldwide, let alone Reformed folks. Letting him speak at the conference only gives Pastor Warren a bigger stage to peddle his pragmatism.
On the other side of the coin, I don't think Dr. Piper is a heretic, or that he's lost and going to hell for the invitation.
If anything, I pray that God will be glorified in this.
A). It's a chance for Pastor Warren explain himself to us. In that regard, I think that should be worth the cost of admission alone. I have no doubt that Dr. Piper and some of the other folks at the conference will respectfully call him to task on some of his words and actions in the public square.
B). Dr. Piper could've invited T.D. Jakes (a man who denies the Trinity). It could be a lot worse, folks.
I disagree with Dr. Piper's decision. If Dr. Piper wants Pastor Warren to "lay his cards out on the table," why not sit and talk with him one on one, or invite him for coffee at Dunkin' Donuts or Starbucks? The problem is that Pastor Warren's actions, words, and appearance at certain events (i.e. the Azuza anniversary thingamabob back in 2001) have not endeared him to a number of folks in the Christian community worldwide, let alone Reformed folks. Letting him speak at the conference only gives Pastor Warren a bigger stage to peddle his pragmatism.
On the other side of the coin, I don't think Dr. Piper is a heretic, or that he's lost and going to hell for the invitation.
If anything, I pray that God will be glorified in this.
Me too Rae. And I have been no fan of Dr. Piper for the last few years. I am thoroughly a Covenant guy which he is not. Maybe his time away will help him see the importance of a Confessional Christianity. I hope so. I am ever hopeful.
kvanlaan
Puritan Board Doctor
I still don't understand this discussion. Has Arminianism ceased to be heresy? If not, then why is this even an issue? This is not a confessionally out-of-bounds question, it is well within bounds (and then some). We are not talking about some poor misguided congregant, we are talking about a man who does the misguiding. I am all for restoring this man to orthodoxy, but that's not the purpose in inviting him. He has "laid his cards on the table" time and time again; there is no reason to elevate his message/theology/methodology in giving it credibility by an invite to this conference.
SemperEruditio
Puritan Board Junior
I have not attended a conference which was a debate on the speaker's ideas. There were sessions where this may occur but the questions were prearranged and none of the questions got to the heart of any isses. On the other had at GA last year a large majority flocked to listen to Duncan and Keller discuss the deaconess issue but at conferences this has not been my experience.
After reading Horton's post and the articles in periodicals about the "New Calvinist" or how Calvinism is "resurging" I just see Calvinists as another audience Warren will cater to. He speaks out of both sides of his mouth and I'm pretty sure Warren is not going to attend if he knows that he is going to be blasted for his beliefs. Like the other poster I'm not sure what cards are left to put on the table. We have Warren's books and are probably able to download his sermons. Unless Warren is "coming out" and talking about how he believes in the sovereignty of God over man's decisions this invitation is questionable to me. I give Piper the benefit of the doubt that there is a reason for this but I would not invite Warren to speak. I would invite him and give him "backstage access" to the other speakers but Warren would not be more than an attendee.
After reading Horton's post and the articles in periodicals about the "New Calvinist" or how Calvinism is "resurging" I just see Calvinists as another audience Warren will cater to. He speaks out of both sides of his mouth and I'm pretty sure Warren is not going to attend if he knows that he is going to be blasted for his beliefs. Like the other poster I'm not sure what cards are left to put on the table. We have Warren's books and are probably able to download his sermons. Unless Warren is "coming out" and talking about how he believes in the sovereignty of God over man's decisions this invitation is questionable to me. I give Piper the benefit of the doubt that there is a reason for this but I would not invite Warren to speak. I would invite him and give him "backstage access" to the other speakers but Warren would not be more than an attendee.
Never was one. There is a difference between ''heresy'' for a Reformed Church (that is what Dort was saying in our English translations) and ''heresy'' for Christianity in general that would include arianism, pelegianism, etc...à
Also, if you look at Dort at Dort in the various english translations (URC, Canadian Reformed, CRC, the French translation used by the ÉRQ, The Heritage reformed congregations, etc...) it doesn't call arminians heretics. In fact it call it the «Arminian error» in several places. The only time heresy is mentioned is when there is a reference to pelegius and if you read the context it is clear that they are not being called pelegians rather the accusation is that of pushing in that direction.
I truely hope you don't honestly believe that only 5 point calvinists will be in Heaven. If so, that's going to be a rather small and lonely place filled with mostly white guys from Holland and North America.
Also, if you look at Dort at Dort in the various english translations (URC, Canadian Reformed, CRC, the French translation used by the ÉRQ, The Heritage reformed congregations, etc...) it doesn't call arminians heretics. In fact it call it the «Arminian error» in several places. The only time heresy is mentioned is when there is a reference to pelegius and if you read the context it is clear that they are not being called pelegians rather the accusation is that of pushing in that direction.
I truely hope you don't honestly believe that only 5 point calvinists will be in Heaven. If so, that's going to be a rather small and lonely place filled with mostly white guys from Holland and North America.
You're forgetting Scotland.
Skyler
Puritan Board Graduate
I believe that only 5-point Calvinists will be in heaven.
Some of them might have been Arminian before, but they won't be by the time God's through with glorifying them.
kvanlaan
Puritan Board Doctor
Not at all. But Arminianism is heresy. It is not a cultural thing, it is a biblical thing.
Arminianism: The system of doctrine known as Arminianism is heresy.
Thus you may have a point, if Rick Warren doesn't know enough about his own theology to truly know what it is that he's preaching. That is very possible. But then he should be corrected, and not be in a teaching capacity until he is properly instructed.
Actually, we're a lot of fun, and the beer's great!
Last edited:
christianyouth
Puritan Board Senior
Jogri, what about other aspects of his doctrine? He seems to be saying that the Christian message isn't about freedom from God's wrath but is about freedom from the temporary effects of sin(estrangement from God, lack of life purpose, general 'angst'). That's heretical, dude.
Particular Baptist
Puritan Board Freshman
I still don't understand this discussion. Has Arminianism ceased to be heresy? If not, then why is this even an issue? This is not a confessionally out-of-bounds question, it is well within bounds (and then some). We are not talking about some poor misguided congregant, we are talking about a man who does the misguiding. I am all for restoring this man to orthodoxy, but that's not the purpose in inviting him. He has "laid his cards on the table" time and time again; there is no reason to elevate his message/theology/methodology in giving it credibility by an invite to this conference.
Arminianism is not heresy, though it can lead to that. I would not believe that John Wesley and Charles Wesley were heretics, nor are more modern day ministers such as Adrian Rogers was.
Is Arminianism more heretical than baptismal regeneration which is what Augustine believed? (http://www.puritanboard.com/f18/baptismal-regeneration-ecf-9228/ ) Surely you would not say that Augustine was a heretic, though he was wrong on this point. Was Richard Baxter a heretic because of his peculiar soteriological views? Are Baptists heretics because we don't subscribe to paedobaptism as contained in the Westminster Confession or the Belgic Confession? Are Grace Brethren churches heretical because they still subscribe to Chrisitian non-violence?
Honestly, this is something that has bothered me about "Reformed" believers. We believe that all the reforming is done and if you don't conform to a set of confessions you must be heretical. I'm not saying that Arminians are right, but I am saying that there are many, many brothers and sisters in Christ who are saved and are children of God who don't subscribe to everything we believe. There are things that we can learn from our Arminian brothers and sisters if we would only listen.
kvanlaan
Puritan Board Doctor
Did you read the article?
You must remember that this is a confessional board. Arguing against the confessions is quite simply out of bounds.
http://www.apuritansmind.com/Creeds/TheRemonstrants.htm
Again, I am not talking about gunning Rick Warren down in effigy. But I would hope that he would not be allowed to spread his theology at such an event. He needs correction.
You must remember that this is a confessional board. Arguing against the confessions is quite simply out of bounds.
http://www.apuritansmind.com/Creeds/TheRemonstrants.htm
Again, I am not talking about gunning Rick Warren down in effigy. But I would hope that he would not be allowed to spread his theology at such an event. He needs correction.
Last edited:
DMcFadden
Puritanboard Commissioner
I think some of you are evaluating this from the standpoint of your confessional subscriptionism and missing the reason for Piper's actions.
As a Westmont grad (pretty similar to Wheaton where Piper graduated) and Fuller grad (like Piper), I swear that the corporate culture of broad evangelicalism is OPENmindedness. I only half in jest say that a typical Fuller grad preaches "on the one hand, but on the other hand." Piper is a darling of some Reformed folks for the same reason MacArthur is: he boldly proclaims soteriological Calvinism and defends the sovereignty of God. He does not claim to be a Presbyterian, paedo baptist, amillenniarian, or adherent of a NAPARC or ARBCA church. He does not see the sabbath or "2nd Commandment violations" the way PBers do. Inviting a fellow evangelical preacher with zeal to his conference should surprise nobody. Evangelicals pride themselves on being so open that they could share their platform with a Pentecostal, Confessional Calvinist, Methodist, or any other variety of "evangelical." After more than 50 years as a card carying evangelical, Piper's action makes complete sense to me (when thinking like an evangelical) while my time in the PB has left me horrified to see him do it for all of the many reasons identified in this thread.
As a Westmont grad (pretty similar to Wheaton where Piper graduated) and Fuller grad (like Piper), I swear that the corporate culture of broad evangelicalism is OPENmindedness. I only half in jest say that a typical Fuller grad preaches "on the one hand, but on the other hand." Piper is a darling of some Reformed folks for the same reason MacArthur is: he boldly proclaims soteriological Calvinism and defends the sovereignty of God. He does not claim to be a Presbyterian, paedo baptist, amillenniarian, or adherent of a NAPARC or ARBCA church. He does not see the sabbath or "2nd Commandment violations" the way PBers do. Inviting a fellow evangelical preacher with zeal to his conference should surprise nobody. Evangelicals pride themselves on being so open that they could share their platform with a Pentecostal, Confessional Calvinist, Methodist, or any other variety of "evangelical." After more than 50 years as a card carying evangelical, Piper's action makes complete sense to me (when thinking like an evangelical) while my time in the PB has left me horrified to see him do it for all of the many reasons identified in this thread.
kvanlaan
Puritan Board Doctor
Fair enough, but here's a HUGE problem:
Maybe what you're saying is that we shouldn't have had such high hopes for Piper's "filter" in who he invites and who he does not. (?)
Warren endorses a strategy, the seeker sensitive model, that is simply incorrect and leads to unbelief (in the words of RC Sproul). He is not doctrinally sound. In that light, I find it odd to see the previous statement coming from Piper...
I think Todd Friel said it well: No one doubts what he (Rick Warren) believes in private, it's what he says in public that's the problem. Also: "John Piper has him coming to his conference, he must be OK."
This was a nice measured response:
http://www.whitehorseinn.org/archives/425.html
But Horton includes this: "I believe that (Warren's) message distorts the gospel and that he is contributing to the human-centered pragmatism that is eroding the proper ministry and mission of the church."
Last edited:
- Status
