Thursday, April 08, 2010

Radio shows on the Piper-Warren controversy

Over at Crosstalk Radio, Ingrid Schlueter interviewed Pastor Bob DeWaay on her radio talk show done on April 6th here on the issue of Piper's invitation of Warren to DG2010 conference. As described:

Ingrid reported that Pastor John Piper encountered “Purpose-Driven” Pastor Rick Warren at a funeral and their meeting resulted in a phone call. The result is that last week Pastor Piper sent shock waves through the Christian community after announcing that he was inviting Rick Warren to be one of the speakers at the 2010 Desiring God Conference.

As Pastor DeWaay explains, "Orthodoxy" has to do with what you believe and what you’re willing to say you believe, at least in private. "Orthopraxy", on the other hand, has to do with what you actually practice. As this program proves, Rick Warren, while he may have affirmed orthodox principles to John Piper, has a public record of proclaiming something very different. Ingrid and Pastor DeWaay expose this tension through various sources such as Warren’s own peace plan, an audio clip by John MacArthur on Warren’s omission of repentance, and much more.

In another talk show Iron Sharpens Iron here, Phil R. Johnson, president of Grace to You and the Pyromaniac, did an interview on the Piper-Warren controversy, seeking to give a balanced response.

6 comments:

Lou Martuneac said...

Daniel:

I listened to Part 1 of the interview. Here is an excerpt from Phil,

I can’t explain or defend a bad decision on Piper’s part. People will see this as Piper’s endorsement of Rick Warren if it is bad or dangerous. Nullifies the whole message of T4G. RW is poster boy for opposite approach. If he (JP) has a sounder theology than his practice that is deplorable. Of all the people he could have possibly chosen it is really hard to think of anyone who would cause more confusion.”

These things are reasonable responses.

IMO, however, the high profile men at T4G would really like to see this controversy go away and are highly unlikely to have anything public to say about it.

Phil has made his response at his blog, but I suspect the pattern of tolerance for other disconcerting issues in the ministry of Piper will be the ultimate reaction to his invite of Rick Warren.

Unity, but at what cost; infidelity to the Scriptures that mandate us to admonish and apart from repentance, have no company with him [Piper] that he may be ashamed?


LM

PuritanReformed said...

@Lou:

I guess what we are saying is not that Piper is getting away scot-free so to speak. I do believe there should be steps we should take to separate from Piper so that he may be ashamed at his conduct. That is why I recommend ministers not to allow him to preach in their churches, and they themselves to boycott DG2010 and speak out against it. But beyond that, we should not treat him as our enemy.

Lou Martuneac said...

Danie:

Yes, I've been very clear he (Piper) is not an enemy, but should be dealt with as an erring, disobedient brother so that he may reopent and be recovered.


LM

PuritanReformed said...

@Lou:

that's good. I really do not know who Phil Johnson is referring to, although I have seen one or two over the top comments on Justin Taylor's blog, but surely you would have thought that there was a flood of extreme Fundametalists calling Piper "of the devil", at least that's how it sounds to me.

Lou Martuneac said...

Daniel:

I think Phil is over-stating what is out there; easy to do when you provide no examples. I've seen nothing like "of the devil," although that may be out there.

FWIW, I am an IFB, not of the Hyles faction.

IMO, Phil sees any a defense of the biblical mandates for separation as a threat to the unity the the T4G camp is trying to hold together. Look at what they tolerate already, even before Piper's invite to Warren.

IMO, Phil would view my blog articles on the Piper/Warren issue as extreme.


LM

PuritanReformed said...

@Lou:

I came from a New Evangelical background, now turned Reformed, so I am not too knowledgeable about the happenings in IFB circles.

I have read your latest offering, and while it is stronger than what I would personally have written and preferred, I do not see anything that would be considered as "attacking Piper".

As for whether Phil sees any defense of the biblical madates of separation as threatening unity in T4G, I prefer to withhold my judgment especially since it is essentially making some form of judgment of motives which I do not know.