Click to join the conversation with over 500,000 Pentecostal believers and scholars
Click to get our FREE MOBILE APP and stay connected
Библията Тв | PentecostalTheology.com
John Ruffle [08/29/2015 1:15 AM]
This is a complete nonsense, because neither Piper (who is way out on right field in this one) nor the blogger make any distinction between civil society and the Ecclessia.
We represent a different kingdom; leadership within the ruke of the Kingdom is not about power or ruling over anyone. It’s servanthood – and I a depth of level civic society can’t even contemplate.
The Church tries to mimic society. I do think we need to re-visit he distinctive male – – female roles in the Church. I am not in agreement with the theology of women priests within a liturgical and sacramental context. Because my personal faith is highly sacramental and liturgical, I do not personally agree with women having full leadership over an entire local Church assembly. Having said that, prior as a chaplain, I’ve worked with and met some wonderful women priests. But my experience – positive as it nay be – does not change my theology on this issue.
In non-sacramental situations, I’ve got a whole lot more latitude on the question partly because the NT epistles are addressing more formal gatherings; at least one can derive that implication from context. Civic society is not addressed in this context so Piper needs to shut up too.
In Catholic circles, as we know, there is much debate about woman priests. Episcopal churches have woman bishops for goodness sake. Why? I’m pretty convinced it is because the supporters of this fail to understand the sacramental nature of the priesthood.
A priest is not a pastor in different clothes – although all priests should also be pastors. (But not always are, I admit!) This also goes back to the Liturgy of the Eucharist. If the bread and wine are but symbols, then there is a lot of latitude. But if in the other hand, in some mystical way, the bread and wine actually becomes the Body and Blood if our Saviour, *as Jesus clearly said) then everything elevates into an entirely different and more sacred plain, and the role of “president” at the Eucharist becomes a critical issue.
As a closing side bar, i find it curious and nit a littke hypocritical how avid self-identifying fundamental Bible-believers almost to a man (or woman!) categorically refuse to believe the Scriptures – in Jesus’ own recorded words – regarding the Body and Blood of Christ. Even when Jesus spoke on the subject , some if his disciples followed him no more — so I guess it should not surprise me — but it still does! This is actually one major reason why I feel I had no option to be either Catholic or Orthodox.
John Ruffle [08/29/2015 1:18 AM]
(Will try to correct typos when on a pc later)
Timothy Carter [08/29/2015 5:55 AM]
This is where I am coming from: Desiring GodGod-centered resources from the ministry of John Piper, John Piper is founder and teacher of desiringGod.org and chancellor of Bethlehem College & Seminary. For over 30 years, he served as senior pastor at Bethlehem Baptist Church, Minneapolis, Minnesota. He grew up in Greenville, South Carolina, and studied at Wheaton College, Fuller Theological Seminary (B.D.), and the University of Munich (D.theol.). For six years, he taught Biblical Studies at Bethel College in St. Paul, Minnesota, and in 1980 accepted the call to serve as pastor at Bethlehem.
John is the author of more than 50 books and more than 30 years of his preaching and teaching is available free at desiringGod.org. John and his wife, Noël, have four sons, one daughter, and twelve grandchildren.
Link Hudson [10/02/2015 10:56 PM]
This is an old thread. Is there a rule against resurrecting them? I missed it the first go-round.
I’d rather see this woman’s way of thinking ‘exorcised.’ Here understanding of ‘demonic’ is just to weird and vague. I believe that demons are actual entities, not just some sort of vague spiritual force that works against the creative force of the Spirit. And I don’t equate the work of the Spirit with left-wing concepts of social justice.
We are here on the earth for a short time, living our lives before the kingdom is established in a fuller way at the return of Christ. There are a lot of social justice concepts that aren’t worth our time bothering with, particularly those that aren’t Biblical.
I think if we used this bloggers idea of sexism, we’d have to conclude that the Bible is sexist. Using that definition, there is good sexism and bad sexism.
God gave a lot of laws that could be considered ‘sexist’. Letting men cancel their wives vows, but the wives not cancel their husband’s vows. That’s good sexism right there. Making the husband the head of the wife– good sexism. If this stuff is ‘sexist’, yes it’s good sexism. God’s law is holy, just, and good.
God made men and women different. I believe God created some types and shadows of spiritual reality into the creation. God is the Father, and when He made us in His image, He made men with the ability to be fathers. The creation is patriachal, because God is the Father. And God created a world where there would be patriarchy, because he made man first and made the man with the potential to be a father.
Luke tells us that Adam was the son of God. He was a created son, though, but a type of Christ. In some ways, he was a kind of opposite type of Christ as well. God took His son, pierced his side, and took something out and created woman, his bride.
We read in Ephesians 5 31 For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh. 32 This is a great mystery: but I speak concerning Christ and the church.
The differences between man and woman are a good thing. Christian wives should embrace what the Bible teaches wives. They should embrace fearing/respecting their husbands and men should embrace the idea of loving their wives.
Ricky Grimsley
It sure doesnt sound like john piper serves the same God that I do. But i guess if he is right i cant help it?
Jim Kingsnorth
heretic.
Roger David
He’s a Calvinist so of course he’s a heretic.
Varnel Watson
About as bad as MacArthur. One of our readers writes “There is no verse in the New Testament that suggests that the supernatural gifts of the Spirit have ceased or will pass away *before* Christ’s second coming.” http://www.pentecostaltheology.com/dr-craig-s-keeners-review-of-macarthurs-book-strange-fire/
Varnel Watson
Ify Divine Nsoha Ima take you and the other on this one
How can a calvinist believe in tongues?
Video is clear Piper denies prophetic gifts – Timothy Carter will agree https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VrEd6ssvLsM
Timothy Carter
In this video I do not hear John Piper deny the spiritual gifts. He says more than once that the Bible tells us that we should “earnestly desire spiritual gifts.”
Varnel Watson
Again, Piper shared from experience. “I have been prophesied over numerous times, and two of them were just whacko. It was so hard in those [early ministry] days to take prophecy seriously. I resonated with the folks who were starting to ‘despise prophecies.’ https://www.desiringgod.org/articles/piper-addresses-strange-fire-and-charismatic-chaos
Derrick Stokes
Where in this video does he deny prophecy?
Derrick Stokes
Here’s also Matt Chandler say that he is Reformed and believes in the sign gifts.
Derrick Stokes
https://youtu.be/QFojKyynEI4
Derrick Stokes
Just because Macarthur and many other Calvinists are cessationists doesn’t mean all are.
Varnel Watson
Again, Piper shared from experience. “I have been prophesied over numerous times, and two of them were just whacko. It was so hard in those [early ministry] days to take prophecy seriously. I resonated with the folks who were starting to ‘despise prophecies.’ https://www.desiringgod.org/articles/piper-addresses-strange-fire-and-charismatic-chaos
Derrick Stokes
No disrespect but I don’t think you thoroughly read the article. He was “characterized” by the Strange Fire conference. He prayed for the gift of tongues in his video. He said that prophecy has been abused in this article and His video.
No where. At all. Does he reject or deny true charismatic gifts.
Derrick Stokes
This is a misunderstanding, says Piper. “I advocate obedience to 1 Corinthians 12:31, ‘earnestly desire the higher gifts.’ And I advocate obedience to 1 Corinthians 14:1, ‘earnestly desire the spiritual gifts, especially that you might prophesy.’ And I advocate obedience to 1 Corinthians 14:39, ‘earnestly desire to prophesy, and do not forbid speaking in tongues.’ I want Christians today to obey those texts.”
Derrick Stokes
“A sampling from his ministry shows Piper’s consistency both in his definition of prophecy and in his encouragement that others pursue the gift (see resources from 1981, 1990, 1991, 2004, and 2013).”
Varnel Watson
OK – what gifts does Piper operate under?
Does he speak in tongues?
Does he have a video with a prophecy out there?
Does he even anoint the sick with oil?
Derrick Stokes
Troy Day If you watched his video on gifts he said that he doesn’t speak in tongues but he desires to and has prayed for this gift.
Starting at 4:50 In his prophecy video he gives a story where he spoke prophetically.
Derrick Stokes
Correction: if you watched his video on *tongues
Varnel Watson
exactly – piper is JUST talk
Timothy Carter
I have also experienced times when people tried to prophesied to me but gave bad information.
I strongly dislike the attempt at prophecy when Holy Spirit is not directing.
When people have a bad idea and blame it on God it makes the true spiritual gifts look foolish.
Derrick Stokes
Troy Day how do you define a cessationist?
Derrick Stokes
Timothy Carter I’ve also had “whacky” prophecies spoken over me. But I don’t believe the gifts have ceased. Some people aren’t speaking from the spirit but from their flesh or some imagination.
Timothy Carter
Derrick Stokes you are correct. Understandably, sometimes the person is sincere but in mature.
I don’t feel as bad about the immature person genuinely trying as I do towards the truly Faults Prophet.
Derrick Stokes
Troy Day If you’re looking for a bone to pick with John Piper his soteriology might be an easier target but not his stance on the spiritual gifts.
Timothy Carter
Derrick Stokes I don’t know much about Piper. I have read only parts from a few of his books, and watched this video.
Please elaborate on his Soteriology with citation please.
Derrick Stokes
His being a Calvinist which he is quite vocal about. He even has a poem titled “The Calvinist” https://youtu.be/uR5Ph5hDsc8
I’ve watched many of his videos and even if he doesn’t outright say it, you can discern his Reformed theology in his sermons.
Scott Phillips
He is a Calvinist.
Varnel Watson
Can a calvinist have the Holy Ghost ?
Derrick Stokes
Your question assumes that he cannot. What gives you this assumption?
Varnel Watson
does it?
Derrick Stokes
It does, especially when you already asked earlier “How can a Calvinist believe in tongues?” Leading, don’t you think?
Varnel Watson
naah
Derrick Stokes
Troy Day so you believe that a Calvinist CAN believe in the gifts. Good.
Varnel Watson
yes
I believe anyone can believe anything
As far as practicing that’s a whole different conversation
Derrick Stokes
Troy Day so what do you would prevent a Calvinist from “practicing”?
Varnel Watson
Derrick Stokes As John E. Ruffle said in the OP
This is a complete nonsense, because neither Piper (who is way out on right field in this one) nor the blogger make any distinction between civil society and the Ecclessia.
We represent a different kingdom; leadership within the ruke of the Kingdom is not about power or ruling over anyone. It’s servanthood – and I a depth of level civic society can’t even contemplate.
The Church tries to mimic society.
But then again I recently read where John E. Ruffle would like the church to impact society in ways, which I call calvinistic utopia
Derrick Stokes
As per the OP I don’t see anything quoted by Piper. I don’t see anything about spiritual gifts. I see some stuff about women so I’m assuming the thread had more to do with complimentarianism vs. egalitarianism
Varnel Watson
Anything? Here it is Again, Piper shared from experience. “I have been prophesied over numerous times, and two of them were just whacko. It was so hard in those [early ministry] days to take prophecy seriously. I resonated with the folks who were starting to ‘despise prophecies.’ https://www.desiringgod.org/articles/piper-addresses-strange-fire-and-charismatic-chaos
Derrick Stokes
Read that quote. Slowly.
Derrick Stokes
Read the entire article. Slowly. And thoroughly.
Timothy Carter
I agree with Piper in that I can understand why some people are skeptical and even despise prophecy.
The fake attempts for prophesy makes the real thing look bad.
Varnel Watson
Piper still resonats with the folks who were starting to ‘despise prophecies’ like Macarthur #noughsaid
Timothy Carter
John MacArthur seems to HATE Holy Spirit. He has spent most of his ministry making fun of Him.
Christian Errice Mallari Baltazar
As far as i know. John Piper is Reformed Charismatic.
Varnel Watson
what is a Reformed Charismatic?
Christian Errice Mallari Baltazar
Someone who believes in Reformed teaching (Calvinist) and who also believes in speaking in tongues, gift of the Spirit (Continuationist).
Varnel Watson
Reformed teaching (Calvinist) do not believe in Spirit (Continuationist) for starters. Neither they believe in
1) free will sanctification
2) sanctification as second work of grace Weslyan renewal
So HOW do they get to Spirit baptism without all that ?
Timothy Carter
I thought the term “Charismatic” it self meant a type of reformed.
Charismatic are not Pentecostal. Charismatics are often (not always) people who have come to believe in the works of the spirit but remained part of their original tradition.
Charismatic movement is an interdenominational Christian renewal movement within Christianity.
So wouldn’t “Reformed Charismatic” be redundant?
Christian Errice Mallari Baltazar
https://churchleaders.com/pastors/pastor-articles/314103-can-reformed-charismatic-matt-chandler-thinks.html
Here is one topic that describes Reformed Charismatic that I read from church leaders.
Varnel Watson
Does not open on my end Says: This site can’t provide a secure connection
Varnel Watson
This turned to a great discussion Thank you!
Varnel Watson
Thomas Henry Jr. Nelson Banuchi Paul L. King Piper is a hyper calvinist at best but who knows? Philip Williams THE real issue with Calvinism is the Limited Atonement part of TULIP
Varnel Watson
Joshwa Bedford PIPER is about as bad as MacArthur. One of our readers writes “There is no verse in the New Testament that suggests that the supernatural gifts of the Spirit have ceased or will pass away *before* Christ’s second coming.” http://www.pentecostaltheology.com/dr-craig-s-keeners-review-of-macarthurs-book-strange-fire/
Joshwa Bedford
Troy Day I’m far from a cessationist I believe full heartedly that the gifts are for today.
Philip Williams
https://youtu.be/nbLDQx4Ngxs
RichardAnna Boyce
John Piper is one of the great voices for Jesus Christ in our generation. His desire for the deeper things of the Christian life, while at the same time having a passion for world missions, is truly contagious. Thousands of young people have been drawn to a greater commitment to Christ and giving their lives to reach the lost as a result of his ministry. So it goes without saying that none of the discussion which follows is intended to impugn Piper’s heart for God, or his pursuit of truth. Indeed, this paper (BY PHILIP CONDON) is a direct result of the latter.
Piper “So here I am, and I am looking for criticism – or at least penetrating questions that will help me avoid error and sharpen my biblical thinking.”
Sharing Dr. Piper’s desire to avoid error, I present these thoughts.
In November, 2007, John Piper delivered the Crossway Lecture at the ETS Conference in San Diego, entitled “Justification and the Diminishing Work of Christ.”
His thesis was that some contemporary teaching on the doctrine of justification “diminishes” the grandeur and wonder of the finished work of Christ.
In particular, he pointed to the doctrine of the imputation of Christ’s righteousness, in his words the practical outworking of the inner transformation which takes place in justification. Piper views imputation as “being made righteous” (practically) instead of “being declared righteous” (forensically):
The true believer will demonstrate in his behavior the righteousness of Christ.
Those who do not hold to his view of imputation, he asserts, “diminish the work of Christ” on the cross, inhibit the normal pattern of spiritual growth in the Christian life,
and open themselves up to bondage to sin.
I differ with Piper’s view on the doctrine of justification.
An underlying theme throughout Piper’s presentation is that those who do not interpret the doctrine of justification as he does do not share his passion for missions, do not go on to godliness, and do not pursue holiness. For example, the fact that 20 families from his church had committed to foreign missions was used as anecdotal evidence that his theology was the one which produces such results. But similar results could be shown from groups with very different theology. ……
Varnel Watson
I dont think so – Jesus is no heresy voice
RichardAnna Boyce
Piper in “The Justification Debate: A Primer” (CT, July 23, 2009; see http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2009/june/29.34.html), – “The Gospel”, he writes:
“The heart of the gospel is good news Christ died for our sins and was raised from the dead. What makes this good news is Christ’s death accomplished a perfect righteousness before God and suffered a perfect condemnation from God, both of which are counted as ours through faith alone, so that we have eternal life with God in the new heavens and the new earth”
This is both biblical and clear; and i believe Piper was born again when he believed this. However i also he is confused during his discipling as a believer..
RichardAnna Boyce
Yet two paragraphs later, under the heading “Future Justification,” Piper writes:
“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 Holy Spirit in our lives will be brought forward as the evidence and “…These are just some of the conditions that the New Testament says we must meet in order to be saved in the fullest and final sense. We must believe in Jesus and receive him and turn from our sin and obey him and humble ourselves like little children and love him more than we love our family, our possessions, or our life.
This is what it means to be converted to Christ. This alone is the way of life everlasting.”15
From an evangelical perspective, considering the historical debate between evangelicals and Rome over the role of good works as a means of justification,
we might say that ‘the fox is in the henhouse’!
RichardAnna Boyce
First, a word about the answer to the question “What must I do to be saved?”
The gift of God is eternal life – that is what is at stake.
“Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved.”
Despite explicit biblical statements that justification is not of works (Eph 2:9),
that it is received by those who “do not work, but believe” (Rom 4:5),
and it is “by faith in Christ and not by the works of the Law” (Gal 2:16),
Piper insists on making works part of the equation. If you are a pentecostal who believes that repentance and/or commitment to Jesus as Lord, are conditions of believing, then Piper is your close brother!
RichardAnna Boyce
No matter how Piper couches it in terms of what God is doing through us, the result is this:
Piper: If we do the works, we are saved. If we fail to do the works, we are not saved.
To affirm justification sola gratia, sola fide, solus Christus (by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone) has no real meaning if in the next moment
we declare that “perfect obedience” will demonstrate whether or not you are saved. Whatever degree of holiness is viewed as an inevitable result of justification
(and no standard can be any higher than Christ’s “perfect obedience”),
that holy behavior becomes a requirement for justification.
That Piper’s doctrine of justification includes a requirement of doing good works
is borne out in his preaching and writing. Some examples: “Paul foresees the possibility that some professing believers – in the judgment of charity he calls them brothers, may go to hell… Your works confirm that you are saved.”13
“Getting to heaven in the New Testament involves the use of means…
Your perseverance in faith is a means of attaining heaven; it is necessary… Mutual exhortation is a means by which we…help each other persevere to heaven. It is not automatic…” SURELY MANY PENTECOSTALS TEACH PERSEVERANCE OF FAITH OR YOU GO TO HELL?
Varnel Watson
YES RichardAnna Boyce you copy pasted my work from here https://faithalone.org/journal/2010i/congdon-3.pdf
But that sanctification includes OUR works is a plain heresy for most Pentecostals and pure legalism for all protestants
RichardAnna Boyce
i am Pentecostal and i believe in rewards for faithful works during sanctification, at the Judgment Seat of Christ; to be used as co-heirs with Christ in the Millennium. Otherwise i have to tear out dozens of pages in Bible on Reward Theology.
Varnel Watson
RichardAnna Boyce This is NOT what Piper believes It is ONE thing to state that GOD sanctifies us in order for our faith to produce good works
It is another thing and very heretical to state our works sanctify us as Piper states
RichardAnna Boyce
Troy Day “The Justification Debate: A Primer” (CT, July 23, 2009; see http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2009/june/29.34.html), – “The Gospel”, Piper writes:
“The heart of the gospel is good news Christ died for our sins and was raised from the dead. What makes this good news is Christ’s death accomplished a perfect righteousness before God and suffered a perfect condemnation from God, both of which are counted as ours through faith alone, so that we have eternal life with God in the new heavens and the new earth” By believing this, at some time in his life, i believe he was born again. But during his discipling, i believe he is badly confused, and is a false teacher. But i dont term false teaching by a believing brother, as heresy.
Philip Williams
Troy Day If Piper recognizes and opposes the heresy of legalistic imputation, wonderful! That’s the root of the Reformed heresy.
RichardAnna Boyce
Piper himself evidently also wrestles with a lack of assurance of salvation.
In response to a question in last year’s Crossway Lecture at ETS, he said,
“…why I sin against my wife the same at age sixty-two that I did at age forty-two causes me sometimes to doubt my salvation.”17
Unless this was a case of hyperbole, in which Piper overstated his meaning for effect,
we cannot but conclude that he himself is, because of his own moral failings,
occasionally uncertain of his eternal salvation!
While such comments may seem to exhibit a godly humility which reflects well on one’s spiritual destiny, many will struggle to find comfort in the notion a pastor and Christian leader of Piper’s status is unsure of his eternal destiny!
FG: Dependence on our works for assurance of salvation ultimately and inevitably undermines any real assurance. Even the best of us falls far short of “Christ’s perfect obedience”!
Therefore, we are all left with ever-varying levels of eternal insecurity.
This kind of teaching has spread throughout evangelicalism, resulting in a pandemic lack of assurance.
This cannot help but “diminish” the doctrine of assurance, “by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone” a person is justified, possesses eternal life, and with it assurance of salvation.
But can all of us Pentecostals here say with 100% assurance we are going to heaven? Did we repent enough as a condition of saving faith/ regeneration?
Varnel Watson
Philip Williams 2 heresies dont make it right
Philip Williams
Troy Day Piper’s trying
Varnel Watson
Philip Williams trying what? If he wants to get out of Calvinism – just get out! Dont try to twist and fit things
Philip Williams
Troy Day I agree. ?
RichardAnna Boyce
But can all of us Pentecostals here say with 100% assurance we are going to eternal security with God? Did we repent enough as a condition of saving faith/ regeneration?
Philip Williams
RichardAnna Boyce we aren’t saved but waiting on salvation of which we can be assured if we remain faithful.
RichardAnna Boyce
Philip Williams i am sorry your loved ones wont know if you are in heaven or hell at your funeral. And you teach them the same; so their loved ones wont know either etc etc?
Philip Williams
RichardAnna Boyce
Not if they have the Holy Spirit, the Spirit of Truth who knows all things.
RichardAnna Boyce
Philip Williams when you evangelise; do you tell unbelievers they will never know if they are saved?
Philip Williams
RichardAnna Boyce I tell them that they are lost and need to be saved!
Philip Williams
“so Christ was sacrificed once to take away the sins of many; and he will appear a second time, not to bear sin, but to bring salvation to those who are waiting for him.”
Hebrews 9:28
RichardAnna Boyce
Hebrews 9:27-28 All those who believed at one point in time find eternal rest as sons of God (once a son always a son). But those judged at the Bema for faithful works will earn a greater rest.
In this Second-Coming salvation Christ will “smite the nations” (Rev 19:15), deliver the world from the bondage of Satan, and bring in a new order of righteousness in which faithful believers will reign with Him and receive their inheritance in the “greater rest.” Thus they “inherit salvation,” to use the words of Heb 1:14. Part of the secret to faithfully enduring in the Christian life is to be eagerly awaiting the return of our Lord Jesus.
Philip Williams
RichardAnna Boyce you are teaching a damnable lie:
“It is impossible for those who have once been enlightened, who have tasted the heavenly gift, who have shared in the Holy Spirit, who have tasted the goodness of the word of God and the powers of the coming age and who have fallen away, to be brought back to repentance. To their loss they are crucifying the Son of God all over again and subjecting him to public disgrace. Land that drinks in the rain often falling on it and that produces a crop useful to those for whom it is farmed receives the blessing of God. But land that produces thorns and thistles is worthless and is in danger of being cursed. In the end it will be burned.”
Hebrews 6:4-8
RichardAnna Boyce
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ZKD4E9cJvVk&fbclid=IwAR3K5ggW1bqQu1Wvq0_lVblQndwXdZ9MTHwl_Sjl81_driVyQp31n9d9EGk
Link Hudson
Broken link. Is the supposed issue of ‘heresy’ ordaining women? Can’t someone be wrong on that without being a heretic?
Is someone who uses the word heretic a heretic by his own definitionnif he is wrong about the meaning of heretic?
Varnel Watson
NO broken Link – just your bad internets Enough with your false claims already More than enough
Link Hudson
Troy Day ‘bad internets Enough’. Not sure what you are saying. And you haven’t shown any evidence of false claims. Not sure why you want to accuse today.
Link Hudson
Getting a 404 error here from one of the links you posted today:
http://www.pentecostaltheology.com/heaven-or-the-resurrection/
And getting a ‘This page isn’t available
The link you followed may be broken, or the page may have been removed.” on a Facebook page here on this thread when I try to view the original post.
https://www.facebook.com/640123439376008/posts/886647098056973
My Internet works well for just about everything else. If a link is broken, don’t blame me. Does everything have to be fodder for an accusation?
Varnel Watson
RichardAnna Boyce what is Pipers view on all these? He is all for them as any hyper Calvinist like him
RichardAnna Boyce
Piper’s Doctrine of Assurance
Piper identified this issue as a major spiritual problem among his parishioners.
He stated in his presentation: “I deal with this as much as anything, probably, in the people that I’m preaching to. Fears, and doubts, doubts not about objective ‘Did He rise from the dead’ – very few people are wrestling with that –
but ‘Am I in? Am I saved?’ That’s very common for people to wrestle with.”
Piper’s solution to this epidemic of a lack of assurance of salvation within his congregation
is to point to the imputation of Christ’s righteousness –
the practical outworking of the righteousness of Christ in our daily lives.
He states that “there are deficiencies – defects – in the sinful human soul that were meant to be remedied by the achievement of the imputation of Christ’s righteousness to believers. Christ did not perform this great work for nothing.
There was a need for it.
When that achievement is denied, that need languishes without remedy, and the assumption is made that it can be remedied by Christ’s other achievements, like the forgiveness of all our sins.”
This is a startling statement, and his last point about Pentecostals adding forgiveness of sins to saving faith; begs the question whether us Pentecostals will ever know if we confessed enough sins as a condition of being born again in the first place?
Philip Williams
Problem is that people have too much assurance. False assurance!
RichardAnna Boyce
Philip Williams Hebrews 6:4-9 CONTEXT Verses 4-6 are a complete unit of thought. In the Greek text the emphatic word impossible is placed up front in v 4, while the complement “to renew them again to repentance” follows in v 6. In between is a series of five participles describing those who cannot be renewed to repentance (all governed by one definite article in the Greek). These verses describe a genuine Christian for at least three reasons: (1) the author had expressed concern about his readers earlier (3:12) though calling them “brethren”; (2) 6:4-6 cannot be divorced from what he has said about them at the beginning of the literary unit in 5:11-14, namely, that they are spiritual babies who have not matured; and (3) the terminology in 6:4-5 is most naturally descriptive of Christian experience.
The author’s first description of them is that they were once enlightened. He uses this expression elsewhere in 10:32, pointing out how they had suffered for their faith after being enlightened. This surely points to their regenerate state, for it is hardly imaginable that first-century Jews would suffer persecution for Christ had they not truly come to know Him.
Second, they had tasted the heavenly gift. The word tasted (geusamenous) does not imply a mere sampling (short of regeneration). The same word is used in 2:9 to refer to Christ having “tasted death for everyone” (i.e., He fully experienced it). The readers had truly experienced the heavenly gift of eternal life in Christ (cf. John 4:10; Rom 6:23).
Third, they had become partakers of the Holy Spirit, having received the Spirit at the moment of saving faith (cf. Eph 1:13-14).
6:5. Fourth, they had tasted the good word of God and the powers of the age to come. They had embraced the Christian message, which in turn was accompanied by miraculous confirmations (cf. 2:3-4).
6:6. The final participle fall away indicates that it is possible for a regenerate Christian who has experienced everything described in vv 4-5 to meet with spiritual disaster. The Greek term for fall away (parapipt) is not used elsewhere in the NT (in the LXX it frequently means “to transgress” against the Lord, as in Ezek 20:27). The earlier use of the related cognate form piptœ in Heb 4:11 is insightful. The readers might “fall” through following the same example of disobedience, in contrast to those who were diligent to enter God’s rest. There is also a very close connection with the words “departing from” in 3:12 (with the Kadesh Barnea incident in mind). Though a lexically different word, it is conceptually related to
parapiptœ in 6:6. Thus “falling away” in v 6 is to transgress against the Lord in a way that parallels what happened at Kadesh Barnea when the Hebrews hardened their hearts and rebelled against the Lord in unbelief. In light of the author’s exhortation in 4:14 (and again in 10:23), he is probably thinking of a rebellion involving an abandonment of one’s confession of faith in Christ, and returning to the old, familiar way of doing things.
The author is telling them that there is a point beyond which it is impossible to restore such a rebel to a state of repentance, because this would be tantamount to recrucifying the Savior and publicly humiliating Him. The severity of such an action will be pointedly made later in Heb 10:26-31.
6:7-8. The author follows this somber warning with an apt illustration. In these verses the author is not describing two different grounds, but rather two possible outcomes for the same ground (as is true for every Christian). Regardless of the outcome, the ground has received the rain, which probably speaks of God’s divine care and provision for spiritual growth in the life of a believer. The contrast in vv 7-8 is most likely between a faithful believer who is fruitful and an unfaithful believer who should have produced but did not (consistent with 5:11-14).
Heb 6:8 is a deliberate allusion to Gen 3:17-18 (note the use of thorns and briers, as well as being cursed). The first man Adam received a curse for his disobedience, and the allusion to this brings to mind the temporal judgment that fell on the first man’s disobedience. Elsewhere in the OT the word “curse” signified God’s temporal discipline on His people for their disobedience to the covenant (cf. Deut 28-29). To be rejected (“worthless,” NASB) need not imply loss of eternal life. The Apostle Paul used the Greek term (adokimos) of himself in 1 Cor 9:27 in the sense of being “disqualified” from his reward as a result of not disciplining himself. Thus the unfruitful ground of Heb 6:8 is “rejected,” implying that the offender has not gained God’s approval and is considered unfit. He may be in store for God’s discipline and eventual loss of reward.
When the author says whose end is to be burned, he is not thinking of burning in hell. Though the metaphor of fire could be used in that sense, it is also used to speak of God’s scrutinizing judgment of regenerate Christians, as in 1 Cor 3:12-15. In such a case fire is used for revealing the quality of a believer’s works, as a prelude to dispensing rewards. Two things in the following context suggest that the author has the works of believers in mind: (1) he specifically mentions their work in Heb 6:10; and (2) rewards are in view in v 12 (some inherit the promises because of their faith and patience).
6:9. The author, though quite concerned for his readers, apparently does not feel that they have gone to the extreme situation depicted in vv 4-6. Thus he ends on a more encouraging note. Most likely, salvation (sœt¢ria) is being used in the same eschatological sense as earlier in the book (and again in 9:28 in reference to the Second Coming). The author thinks of the time when man will be crowned with glory and honor, ruling jointly with Christ in his resurrected state. This is the glorious destiny of believers who are faithful to Christ in this life (cf. Rev 2:26-27).
RichardAnna Boyce
Piper suggests that a believer who bases his full assurance on the fact that
all his sins have been forgiven will “languish” in a lack of assurance,
while a person who understands the imputation of Christ’s righteousness to mean
that they will exhibit his “perfect righteousness” in their lives
will overcome the “deficiency in the human soul” which undermines our assurance.
Piper offers no biblical or logical explanation why this would be so.
Instead, he simply admonishes us, “Don’t try to be wiser than God.”
Without that validating transformation, there will be no future salvation”. How it can be true “through faith alone…we have eternal life with God in the new heavens and the new earth,” but at the same time also be true that at the “final judgment,” without
the “validating transformation” of our good works, “there will be no future salvation”?
Which is it; “through faith alone,” or only with the “validating transformation” of “our works”?
Since Piper views this as a major spiritual problem within his church, we may assume that he views lack of assurance of salvation as a bad thing. We concur with this view.16
But if the aim is that Christians will have assurance, it is difficult to understand
how basing it on our progressive works of righteousness will produce such a goal.
Indeed, Piper’s own statement would suggest that his theology does not lead to a solution for the problem of a lack of assurance of salvation.
Among those who listen to his teaching each week,
who are in his congregation and most likely to embrace and embody his theology,
it is “very common” for them to wrestle with a lack of assurance.
Beyond this, Piper himself evidently also wrestles with a lack of assurance of salvation.
In response to a question in last year’s Crossway Lecture at ETS, he said,
“…why I sin against my wife the same at age sixty-two that I did at age forty-two causes me sometimes to doubt my salvation.”17
Link Hudson
It could be his interpretation of a good tree bearing good fruit. You comments reminded me of similar things I read about Wesley. He had some problems getting along with his wife.
Varnel Watson
RichardAnna Boyce there is NO 2 truths about it As we’ve pointed out with Philip Williams Piper is trying to get out of his hyper calvinism heresy (yes that’s what it is) but the 5 point TULIP just gives him NO space for sanctification You cannot have eternal security and progressive sanctification working together This has already been tried BY Paul Washer leading to NO avail – at least theologically We can keep on beating around the Piper bush but at the end it is what it is
RichardAnna Boyce
Troy Day we dont get eternal security by progressive sanctification of works; we earn inherited rewards at Bema for Millennium.; and are given eternal security at justification/ regeneration.
Varnel Watson
RichardAnna Boyce Bema Vs. Thronos is not a Pentecostal comparison It is a very calvinist one and falls under open legalism
Varnel Watson
Piper suggest that a saved believer should gain sanctification through own works. Good luck with that being in the BIBLE
Anonymous
Link Hudson Philip Williams William DeArteaga Terry Wiles Joseph D. Absher
https://www.faithwire.com/2023/10/05/theologian-john-piper-sparks-fierce-debate-over-coffee-sipping-in-the-sanctuary/
Anonymous
if a calvinist teaches it Philip Williams Kyle Williams