Background
As I’ve noted previously, John Piper is going to have Rick Warren speak at the Desiring God National Conference this year. And many conservative Bible-believing Christians are very concerned about this. They feel that Rick Warren preaches a watered-down Gospel and that Piper has sold-out on the Gospel by endorsing Warren in this way.
I’ve had blogging friends of mine express deep concern over this decision of my former pastor. I’m aware of at least one pastor who has publicly “separated” from Piper and removed all of his books from their church bookstore in response to this matter. Some fundamentalist bloggers are noting this as yet another example of a lack of discernment on Piper’s part and are encouraging pastors and fundamentalist leaders to not recommend Piper’s works to their congregations.
Now, some are even openly speculating about next week’s Together For the Gospel Conference, and wondering what kind of an impact this will have on the conference. Lou Martuneac a fundamentalist blogger can be quoted on this point:
The revelation of John Piper\’s invitation of Rick Warren to his Desiring God (DG) conference could not have been welcome news for Together for the Gospel (T4G)1 organizers and its key note speakers on the eve of their event. The Piper/Warren issue is sure to be the buzz of the conference. I do not expect anything on the Rick Warren invitation from the platform speakers unless it comes from Piper, which he may feel compelled to address in an attempt to quell the buzz.
The true irony of this year\’s T4G is the theme, which is, \”The (Unadjusted) Gospel.\” Rick Warren is among the high priests of a watered down, non-saving message….
I half-suspect Piper may take the platform at the outset to address the Warren invite. Why? For the purpose of getting it on the table, hashed out and hopefully quelled so that it is not a major lingering distraction during the conference. Nevertheless, there will undoubtedly be a huge buzz on the floor of T4G and in small groups settings throughout the conference….
What will be the reaction of the T4G men: MacArthur, Dever, Sproul, et. al.? I suspect some private attempts to admonish Piper have already taken place. All indications are he (Piper) will reject any admonishment from his brothers. Will there be some public negative reaction from the other T4G men? Will, for the sake of T4G/TGC fellowships, all be forgotten. At T4G will all embrace one another as if nothing is amiss?
Meanwhile, influential bloggers Tim Challies and Justin Taylor have tried to model reserve and charity in this whole debate. Taylor had to shut down comments on his blog due to how bitter and caustic many were. Challies has disagreed with Piper’s decision but also made the following points.
But before I continue, let me offer one more word. John Piper inviting Rick Warren to speak at the conference is not that big of a deal. It matters, to be sure, but not enough to get too riled up. It’s important that we put it in its proper context. Piper did not invite Robert Schuller or the Dalai Lama, someone who outright denies the Gospel. Warren professes faith in Christ and professes an evangelical understanding of that faith. Furthermore, this conference is Piper’s gig and he is free to invite whomever he wants (or whomever he is permitted within whatever structure there is inside of Desiring God). His house, his rules….
…let’s heed Piper’s warning not to fall into an error of secondary separation. There is no need for us to separate from Piper over such a decision. We have plenty of latitude to disagree with him; let’s do so with respect for him and for his long and faithful history of ministry to the church. The sky is not falling, the world will go on.
Doug Wilson has also explained how he thinks about all of this. He has a “wait and see” approach and thinks, we don’t need to “blow into a paper bag” over this. Phil Johnson, while strongly disagreeing with the decision is also concerned over how negative the reactions are to this. He thinks we should not approach this as a cause to separate from Piper in an all-or-nothing sort of way. Johnson was interviewed Tues. and Wed. on Iron Sharpens Iron radio, and the mp3s are available for free download from sharpens.org. [UPDATE: Phil just posted his official response to this on his blog. He has some good things to say which I largely agree with.]
Isn’t this a Big Deal?
Why is it that these leaders and many other less influential theology bloggers (like me) think such an action by Piper is not a big deal? Isn’t supporting someone like Warren a contradiction of the Gospel?
Here are some of the reasons given for thinking this is a big deal:
- Warren pleases people and adapts his message to suit the audience he’s at. He doesn’t strongly teach or write about repentance – this constitutes a watered-down Gospel.
- Warren has had Obama come to his church, and has accepted the likes of Robert Schuler. He has given wishy-washy answers on public interviews to questions related to the Gospel.
- Scripture calls for us to mark and avoid, and separate from those who do not uphold the Gospel. See the following summary of this idea of separation by David Cloud, fundamentalist leader:
We believe that the Bible requires separation from all forms of heresy and ecclesiastical apostasy (Rom. 16:17; 2 Cor. 6:14-18; 1 Thess. 3:6; 1 Tim. 6:3-5; 2 Tim. 3:5; Titus 3:10-11; 2 John 10-11; Rev. 18:4). We are commanded to try them, mark them, rebuke them, have no fellowship with them, withdraw ourselves, receive them not, have no company with them, reject them, and separate ourselves from them. The Bible teaches that the course of the church age is characterized by increasing apostasy (2 Timothy 3:1 – 4:6).
When put this way, such a reaction by Piper makes him a disobedient brother who should be separated from. This is the way most who practice secondary separation would think. It’s not that we separate because he chooses not to separate from people we would (as Piper phrased “secondary separation” in his video defense of this decision). Rather, they think Piper’s refusal to separate is disobedience, and 2 Thess. 3:6, 13-15 would urge us to separate from disobedient brothers.
But what about the Gospel?
I contend that the Gospel is a big enough matter to unify around. In fact the separation texts mentioned above particularly apply to a wholesale rejection of the Gospel. It is true “enemies of the cross of Christ” who preach “another gospel” who are to be so rejected. The withdrawal from brothers in Christ, happens primarily in a context of a local church with church discipline. Even then the erring ones are to be “admonished as brothers” not treated like outsiders.
Warren’s pragmatic approach to ministry may be foolhardy. His answers to Gospel-questions given on the spur of the moment in the context of media interviews, may not be as good as we would like. His books are aimed to less well-read readers, those that abound in today’s world. He connects with them, and appeals to a wide range of people. He aims to win them to Christ after he’s disarmed their defensive reaction to Christianity, but from our perspective he may be going too far in a 1 Cor. 9 be “all things to all” policy. His message may not be as theologically precise as we prefer. But he does not deny the Gospel. He affirms it. He preaches it, and he aims to live it out.
Meanwhile, John Piper is very clear about the Gospel and his books promote a Gospel-centered philosophy and world-view. The fellow speakers at T4G (Mark Dever, C.J. Mahaney, Albert Mohler, J. Ligon Duncan, R.C. Sproul, John MacArthur and Thabiti Anyabwile) have many traits which could divide them. Varying positions on the charismatic gifts, the nature of baptism, eschatology, church government, music, and even who they “hang out with” (to use Piper’s expression). Some are very suspicious and careful with Mark Driscoll’s ministry style, others have befriended him. Some have chosen not to sign the Manhattan Declaration for important reasons, others see it as a means to encourage the defense of family values in today’s world and have signed it.
All of these differences matter, and these men don’t see eye-to-eye on a host of other concerns. But the speakers at T4G see the Gospel as being so important, that since they all joyfully affirm a rich, robust, Biblical Gospel message, they can allow this union to define them. Rather than being defined by what they are against, or more minor theological differences, they define themselves as being Gospel-driven.
When we separate over every little thing. When we allow personality differences, or just plain differences of opinion spur us on to cast judgment on fellow believers, we have crossed a Biblical line ourselves. More than that, we allow ourselves to be defined by these lesser things, and in so doing minimize the importance of the Gospel.
In closing, let me ask you to ponder the ramifications of the following texts to the current debate:
Who are you to pass judgment on the servant of another? It is before his own master that he stands or falls. And he will be upheld, for the Lord is able to make him stand…. Why do you pass judgment on your brother? Or you, why do you despise your brother? For we will all stand before the judgment seat of God. (Rom. 14:4, 10)
May the God of endurance and encouragement grant you to live in such harmony with one another, in accord with Christ Jesus, that together you may with one voice glorify the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ. Therefore welcome one another as Christ has welcomed you, for the glory of God. (Rom. 15:5-7)
I therefore, a prisoner for the Lord, urge you to walk in a manner worthy of the calling to which you have been called, with all humility and gentleness, with patience, bearing with one another in love, eager to maintain the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. There is one body and one Spirit\””just as you were called to the one hope that belongs to your call\”” one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all. But grace was given to each one of us according to the measure of Christ\’s gift. (Eph. 4:1-7)
And he gave the apostles, the prophets, the evangelists, the shepherds and teachers, to equip the saints for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ, until we all attain to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to mature manhood, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ, so that we may no longer be children, tossed to and fro by the waves and carried about by every wind of doctrine, by human cunning, by craftiness in deceitful schemes. Rather, speaking the truth in love, we are to grow up in every way into him who is the head, into Christ, from whom the whole body, joined and held together by every joint with which it is equipped, when each part is working properly, makes the body grow so that it builds itself up in love. (Eph. 4:11-16)
Notice the stress on love, humility and gentleness, and the assumption that those differing with us are not enemies but brothers. They shouldn’t be judged, but may need teaching. We should strive for a sincere and edifying unity. This is the measure of the fullness of Christ. May this be our aim and may we all learn some important lessons as we think Biblically about this controversy and aim to react in a Christ-like and gracious way.
Seems the bigger issue is how much (especially the “new Calvinists.” the younger (re)surgence of the base) how much people are elevating John Piper. It is hard to imagine a more holy grail for some. Why not use this to remind our friends that we worship one Savior, one Lord. And any man, well, he is just that, a man.
JJ,
that’s a strawman, and honestly quite annoying. You’re not the only one saying that though.
Thank about this please. Bob just spent time showing how people WITHIN the very movement of Piper are voicing their opinion AGAINST him. He’s not untouchable. No one worships him. Those who think he’s wrong (such as myself) but also appreciate things about him (such as myself) are not “elevating” him at all. We know full well that Jesus is the One we serve.
Damien & Bob.
My apologies. I didn’t mean to be annoying. I was trying to make a point. I too enjoy John Piper VERY much. But, at the same time, it is hard to deny that, in many of our reformed churches, especially younger ones, John Piper is seen as nearly pope-like (boy, I am going to be in trouble for that one, I am sure!) No, what I mean… well, you know what I mean… John Piper is so highly regarded that many trip over themselves to offer praises. (And if we can’t agree on that much, I might as well have not responded).
Now, I am not saying that you, Damien, fall victim to this. Nor that there are many mature Christians that fall victim to this. But, there is nothing more sure amoung the “new Calvinists” than that many are new and younger. Yes? And, perhaps I am just stupid, but there seems to be a select group of devotees to a few main teachers … and maybe that is true for every generation.
The only point I was trying to make (and it wasn’t a big point) is that we (as more mature believers, I hope) should be careful not to elevate a man to this level… and correct this when we see it. That is all.
I am well aware that this wasn’t Bob’s main point. Consider me painfully off target (and as you said, “annoying.”) But I was NOT disagreeing with a single point Bob made. I agree with it whole-heartedly. I just started thinking that THIS particular issue HAS been elevated precisely because John Piper is who he is. That’s all.
I don’t know how that is a straw man. You may disagree, and that is fine. But it was offered as a simple observation.
Thanks.
JJ
JJ,
I think Damien took you wrong at first. He may not have the background I have with you commenting over here. I didn’t take your comments as edgy or irritating. You make a good point. Damien also added to that by saying the fact that so many are upset over this does show not everyone is marching in lockstep with their guru.
Guru or leader-worship is dangerous. And this does illustrate how we all need to be careful of not following a man. With anything we read or anyone we admire, we have to separate the good from the bad, the wise from the perhaps-not-so-wise. I don’t think this means we should stop reading certain people. But we all need to be mature and rooted in the Scriptures ourselves.
I wish the best for Piper and am praying for his sabbatical to refresh his soul. I think he is as genuinely sold-out to Christ as a man can be. I respect him highly. But I can’t worship him or follow his every whim with no questions asked.
Thanks again for interjecting your thoughts brother. They are always welcome.
In Christ,
Bob
I do think JJ’s point is important, but as Damien show’s it’s been illustrated in all of this. I am not agreeing lockstep with Piper on this at all. I think in many respects his decision was unwise. I’m just amazed at how vitriolic many of the comments are that are directed towards him or the statements said about him.
Thanks Bob, I agree. John Piper is a highly gifted man. What a joy to listen to, to read from, and to learn from. I probably disagree with some of his theology, but not much of it. Of course, I disagree with some of MY theology!
More seriously, I think it is wise to pray for all our leaders. And while I think it fine that Pastor Piper would invite Pastor Warren to a conference, I do find it odd/out of place for John Piper to invite Rick Warren to THIS conference with THIS topic. I am hoping that JP knows something that we do not!
God Bless,
JJ
T4G falling apart because someone reaches out? I’m sorry…but how funny is that!
I wish it were just humorous, but in light of the reaction I’m seeing many places, some think it will happen.
I suspect that some of the speakers will be watching Piper’s behaviour very carefully from now on. My guess is that T4G cannot survive another Piper blunder.
But if it is to survive it will probably in the long run have to say, ‘John, if you want famous gospel compromisers speaking at your gigs that’s your business buddy, but we don’t want to be associated with that. So long’. Phil Johnson has already flagged up the possibility that if Piper continues to make these bizarre decisions full separation may be on the cards for the future.
sorry JJ.
You’re not annoying.
I sort of had a knee jerk reaction to your comment. Over the past few days I’ve read and heard people say things about “those who swoon over John Piper” and I thought, I know a lot of people, myself included, who are big fans of Piper’s ministry and books, but I don’t know one person who thinks he’s incapable of doing wrong. That’s why I said it was a straw man. I admit evangelicals are no more immune to hero worship than fundamentalism. Piper certainly ranks high on the list of heroes for a lot of former fundamentalists as well as evangelicals. Still, this is one of those things that I think requires more substantiation, such as a quote or something. I’d like to know who these guys are who think Piper can do no wrong.
so, sorry for lashing out at you. God bless.
I only live 90 minutes from Louisville, where T4G will be held, and several of our people are attending it.
Considering that the 7,000 seats were sold out, I am confident that this contretemps surrounding Piper will provoke little more than a ripple. There are numerous speakers presenting, and Piper is only one of them. The only way I could imagine it becoming a big thing is if Piper or one of the other speakers actually bring it up, which I rather doubt any of them will do — they wouldn’t want this to overshadow the focus of the conference. I imagine there might be private talk between themselves, behind the scenes. I don’t know if the speakers are like ships who pass in the night at these sorts of events. But that’s their business; and if Piper needs to hear from anyone, he’s more likely to listen to his peers, who actually merit his respect, then he’s going to listen to the cries of mature, concerned laymen (like Tim Challies), let alone ranting watchbloggers.
In my opinion, when some people say that there will be controversy at the T4G conference, what they’re actually saying is that they hope that there will be, because it will validate their opinions about this whole thing. But remember that the majority of people attending will not be Independent- Fundamentalist type Christians, and my guess is that many of them very likely don’t even know that this controversy is even happening.
I think many of you brothers don’t sense just how small and intramural this controversy still is, measured against broader evangelicalism. Lots of conservative Christians like me see Warren as a salesman/evangelist who is wishy-washy on the Gospel, and over-adapts to modern thought-forms in his zeal to remove mental stumbling blocks in other people’s minds. We realize that he (apparently) isn’t a Calvinist. But we don’t believe he is the 2nd beast of the end-times, we don’t believe he’s part of a new-age conspiracy, and we don’t believe he denies any of the fundamentals of the faith.
So this might be a secondary topic of lunchtime chat at T4G, but my guess is that the conference will go forward just fine.
Thanks again, Jack. I hope that is the case.
I appreciated this statement in your post. “Notice the stress on love, humility and gentleness, and the assumption that those differing with us are not enemies but brothers.” I think we need to learn how to disagree in better ways.
Thanks, Steve. I very much agree.
4/15/10: The update is that T4G is going great guns.
Thanks for the update Jack. Are you at T4G?
No, my assistant pastor went, along with one of our deacons. I’m also internet-friends with a Coral Ridge Pres guy who told a bunch of us thru Facebook how it was. He loved it. The Rick Warren thing never came up. Not a peep.
Most of my on-line friends have said that they wouldn’t have invited Warren, but in the end it was Piper’s decision, and they’ll be interested to see what happens at the DG conference.
Thanks Jack. I appreciate the follow up. Great to hear it all went well. Our unity doesn’t need to be impacted by the latest juicy gossip on the internet.
Blessings in Christ,
Bob
[...] The third and final post is by Bob Hayton (who has an interesting story all his own which you can read here). Bob’s post was written prior to the recently ended Together for the Gospel conference and considers what it really means to be unified around the gospel. Here are Bob’s thoughts. [...]
Really helpful collection and assimilation of thoughts here, Bob. Great line about how when we define ourselves by lesser things we minimize the significance of the gospel.
P.S. I found your site via a link from Barry Wallace. You’ve got some great stuff here. I’ve subscribed to your blog through my RSS reader. Keep up the great work.
Thanks brother, for the encouragement.
When I first heard about the invitation to Rick Warren, I thought, well, this is sure to be the most prayed over DG conference ever. And that is a good thing. I hope that those who agree and disagree with Piper’s invitation to Warren are continuing to pray hard that the true and only Gospel will be clearly proclaimed and that there will be no wrong things shared at all.
Good thoughts, Chris.
John Piper must have fine well known that this move, which seems to have no apparent purpose, would bring serious division. If he wanted to take Warren under his wing to teach him reform theology privily or allow him to sit under his preaching, fine. But instead he allows a man who denigrates the Puritans and the Reformers while simultaneously engaging in unholy alliances with the Roman Catholic Church, gay churches and the ungodly United Nations, palliating the persecution of Christians by the Syrian government, (And if I’m not mistaken, the North Korean government as well) plays Purple Haze by Jimi Hendrix to celebrate Saddleback’s anniversary, (I’ve dropped Purple Haze a few times in my rock and roll band playing days. In case you didn’t know, that’s LSD), engages in other extreme forms of ecumenism too inumerable to mention here, and is guilty of some serious forms of gospel reductionism that far exceeds the so-called easy believism that you accuse some IBF churches of engaging in, to preach to his (Piper’s) sheep. What folly! The division that Piper is bringing is not division that comes from the preaching of the pure Gospel or the defense of it. Therefore Rom. 16:17 applies to Piper almost to a T. But we live in a day where Evangelicals and the vast majority of the “reformed” have chosen to ignore such apostolic directives and interpret their way around them, thus bringing about great confusion in the area of Christian unity. I am a Free Presbyterian stuck within a Reform Baptist context. I strongly believe that what is needed today is a good crossbreeding of the strength of reform theology and the militancy of fundamentalism. I’ve grown (as Dr. Cairns would say) “sick and sore” of both camps claiming that you can only be either or and not both and. I have had to learn, by the grace of God, to forebear with erring brethren regarding this subject of separation. I strongly suggest reading Martyn Lloyd-Jones on the subject of Christian Unity. (I notice that he is not someone mentioned much within these circles) Make note that principled biblical separation from the likes of J.R. Stott and J.I. Packer ensued as a result of the stand that he took on unity. Yea I know. I guess he was wrong too.
[...] John Piper’s explanations about why he invited Rick Warren: here and here. I’ve also posted about the controversy at length before. (And I’m not the only one who thinks the reactions against Piper and Warren are seriously [...]