UPDATE: Desiring God has pulled the suggestion from its website regarding the practice of Lectio Divina. They state: “Update: Formerly I listed Lectio Divina as a third system for prayer. I’ve since removed it for the confusion it has caused. We do not endorse contemplative spirituality. The main point I’d like to recommend is using the text of Scripture as an organizer for our prayers — prayers that are exegetically faithful and gospel rich. I’m sorry for introducing the category.“
This is great news and I’m glad to see some accountability whatever the reason for removing this suggestion.
For some folks my intention was not clear when posting yesterday’s article titled, On John Piper and Lectio Divina…. For two or three days after I first heard about the Ephesians reading at Passion 2012 and had seen a few blogs about it, I contemplated (no pun intended) whether I should post anything. Yet, it was when I saw Lectio Divina being suggested on the Desiring God website that I decided to pose yesterday’s questions.
Many people are concerned with John Piper lately based on his associations and endorsements of quite questionable men and their ministries (Rick Warren for example), so when his website suggests a mystical, Catholic prayer practice, it is reasonable for people to be concerned.
With this in mind and considering Beth Moore’s dabbling in contemplative spirituality, it is not unreasonable to see knee-jerk reactions regarding what took place at Passion. I wanted to avoid this type of reaction, which was why I hesitated to post about the situation, but in posting, I sought to ask questions to open things up for discussion in a safe and open forum.
It is my hope we can continue this conversation in truth and love so we might learn together and determine what God would have for us in light of what He has already revealed to us in the written Word.
So with this background, I’d like to move forward. In further investigating what John Piper could have desired with the petition to God to “speak” to those in attendance at Passion, I came across the following article from March 2007 titled, The Morning I Heard the Voice of God. It has helped me understand better where John Piper might be coming from.
Firstly, the type of language in the opening paragraph is the very type of language that gives rise to confusion in the Body of Christ:
Let me tell you about a most wonderful experience I had early Monday morning, March 19, 2007, a little after six o’clock. God actually spoke to me. There is no doubt that it was God. I heard the words in my head just as clearly as when a memory of a conversation passes across your consciousness. The words were in English, but they had about them an absolutely self-authenticating ring of truth. I know beyond the shadow of a doubt that God still speaks today.
Piper continues,
As I prayed and mused, suddenly it happened. God said, “Come and see what I have done.” There was not the slightest doubt in my mind that these were the very words of God. In this very moment. At this very place in the twenty-first century, 2007, God was speaking to me with absolute authority and self-evidencing reality. I paused to let this sink in. There was a sweetness about it. Time seemed to matter little. God was near. He had me in his sights. He had something to say to me. When God draws near, hurry ceases. Time slows down.
It wasn’t until near the end of the article that I better understood where Piper was going. He expounds,
And best of all, they are available to all. If you would like to hear the very same words I heard on the couch in northern Minnesota, read Psalm 66:5-7. That is where I heard them. O how precious is the Bible. It is the very word of God. In it God speaks in the twenty-first century. This is the very voice of God. By this voice, he speaks with absolute truth and personal force. By this voice, he reveals his all-surpassing beauty. By this voice, he reveals the deepest secrets of our hearts. No voice anywhere anytime can reach as deep or lift as high or carry as far as the voice of God that we hear in the Bible.
It is a great wonder that God still speaks today through the Bible with greater force and greater glory and greater assurance and greater sweetness and greater hope and greater guidance and greater transforming power and greater Christ-exalting truth than can be heard through any voice in any human soul on the planet from outside the Bible.
Though I don’t necessarily agree with everything in the article (for instance, his reference to a Christianity Today post and openness to the story being true), I did appreciate reading Piper’s heart on intimacy with God through the written Word of God. In fact, I recommend reading the whole article.
Perhaps this was the very intention of Piper during the Passion 2012 conference. Perhaps he did hope the attendees would hear the resonating Word of God in their minds after they heard the text spoken through their ears.
So the question is whether this was made clear to those in attendance. Based on one person’s account in yesterday’s article’s comment section, no such instruction was given. If that is the case, then it seems the attendees were left to their own discernment as to what Louie Giglio meant when asking,
How many of you heard the voice of God speak specifically, clearly, directly, and personally, to you? Can you just put a hand up?
Others may disagree with me, but this type of language is confusing at best. Also confusing, at best, is why Desiring God is suggesting Lectio Divina on its website. Why is this recommendation based on a book by Kenneth Boa, who advocates contemplative prayer ala Catholic mystic (and Buddhist) Thomas Merton and considers the Roman Catholic Church to be the “largest segment of Christianity“?
As I was considering these things today, an article came through my Google reader (via Apprising) that was very timely, helpful, and expressed some of my very thoughts on the matter. I highly recommend reading the whole article, but here is the latter half:
In my view, John Piper knows better then this. I have read his books as well and there is nothing like this form of contemplative extra-biblical thinking in it at all. In fact in his book “Think”, which is that latest one I have read, he confronts postmodernism, subjective thinking, and anti-intellectualism. This does not sound like a guy who spends his time waiting for the Spirit to put his imagination to work.
Yet there he is on the stage with people who are most definitely caught up in this mystical world of God-speak. He reads the Bible and tells people to then listen for Christ’s words. I have no doubt that he means listen to them from the scripture and gain your knowledge that way, if not then he has contradicted his own writings and articulated beliefs. However that is not all his stage partners did. Listen to Louis Giglio close out the readings after John Piper, Beth Moore, and others were finished reading.
This is the kind of language that is pious and disturbing. It tells the people out in the audience that God is speaking to them, and if they don’t hear it and raise their hand then they are less then the person next to them that did. There was no preparation or serious study that led to a deeper knowledge of the scripture that I know Piper wants people to have. It is an appeal to emotion and extra-biblical feelings that is nothing like what Piper or his contemporaries support or write about.
So here is the problem. It is not that Piper is joining the emergent movement, or that it discounts all of the great preaching and teaching he does like some in the reformed faith have charged him with. It is that Piper does not repudiate a practice that he has to know is not Biblical. Even later on his website as I referred to above he reinforces Lectio Divina with this description for the 4th contemplative point.
Contemplatio (contemplation). For the most of us, this will be the most difficult part, since it consists of silence and yieldedness in the presence of God. Comtemplation is the fruit of the dialogue of the first three elements; it is the communion that is born out of our reception of divine truth in our minds and hearts.
This is not what Giglio presented at the conference but Piper has nothing to say about it.
With all do respect to Piper who I have learned a great deal from, he seems to be on a mission to bring all forms of faith together by participating in events like these, sitting down with Rick Warren, and not drawing the lines where they are needed. This causes great confusion with his own flock and others that listen to him that now think that in order to be spiritual they have to hear the voice of God after reading a passage at a conference. He does a disservice to those he disciples by not calling these things out, but instead propping them up in the name of friendship.
This is not an attempt to bash John Piper, there is enough of that going on, but if he is going to continue down this road of “finding common ground” then he needs to point out the areas where the ground is not so common and repudiate error and false teaching when he interacts with it. Anything less then that is irresponsible on his part (original source).
So, with all things considered, I am still in a “wait and see” mode with John Piper. I believe him to be irresponsible in not more clearly distinguishing himself and his beliefs from mystical characters and their teachings (not to mention a semi-Pelagian pragmatist like Rick Warren). The lines are a bit fuzzy, and I, for one, would appreciate if he would not dance so close to the edge.
Are these reasonable questions? What are your thoughts?
bearkiller777
January 10, 2012
I’d have to agree with you here I’d not embrace any practice like Lectio Divina myself. Not sure if i mentioned this in your first post I commented on and maybe it was glossed over as I was there as an attendee at Passion this year (and it was full of God’s presence) I had not been aware of this practice until it was brought up I however did not participate in this.
One of the messages that Francis Chan gave at the conference I’d bring up in this comment was that we have to discern what is being said what is true and that we have to know the Bible (Biblical Discernment) with that being said we have to apply that to people like Piper or Giglio or others including what we think we have been taught as correct, ect.
I’d guess I’d be in the same boat I’d be wary of any extra-biblical teaching not supported by the Bible as well as I have seen some of Piper’s sermons were pretty biblical also.
Justin Edwards
January 10, 2012
Oh yeah, you are who I was referring to in this article, and thanks again for sharing your experience. It’s very helpful to the discussion, brother.
Ken Silva
January 10, 2012
“[T]his type of language is confusing at best. Also confusing, at best, is why Desiring God is suggesting Lectio Divina on its website.”
A couple of things, which the church visible is going to need to reexamine. There’s no doubt that as a chrismatic Beth Moore seeks extrabiblical revelation: http://apprising.org/2012/01/09/beth-moore-seeking-direct-revelation-from-god-at-passion-2012/
Last I checked John Piper is also considered charismatic. So, by definition, there would be the belief (at some level) that one could “hear” from God apart from Scripture. Lectio Divina is a vehicle used to do so; problematic, at best.
You might also find it interesting that many people who are charismatic, like Beth Moore, consider the apostate Roman Catholic Church is a Christian denomination. Virtually everyone who dabbles in contemplative spirituality does as well.
While that’s not surprising considering it was derived from Roman Catholic mystics, don’t you find it odd that those supposedly receiving fresh words from God tell us He thinks the Church of Rome is part of the Body of Christ?
Now consider 2 Corinthians 11:4. Food for discussion as I see it. 🙂
Justin Edwards
January 11, 2012
I agree, Ken. It seems those who do not hold to a high view of Scripture and are perhaps on the charismatic side are more likely to consider the RCC as part of Christianity. Mystics are a given with regard to this, I believe.
DMG
January 10, 2012
When do we call a spade a spade? God is not the “author of confusion” as 1 Cor 14: 33 . There is confusion regarding John Piper? Does scripture allow additions such as lectio divina? No! Man man methods as “silence” so God may speak? No!
What does God’s word say about those who preach a different gospel?
“I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting him who called you in the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel–not that there is another one, but there are some who trouble you and want to distort the gospel of Christ. But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed.
As we have said before, so now I say again: If anyone is preaching to you a gospel contrary to the one you received, let him be accursed.” Gal. 1:6-9
Rick Warren preaches a different gospel and John Piper calls him “his brother in Christ”!
What IS charismatic-reformed? There isn’t such a thing!
When will men stand BOLD in Christ and call Piper what he is? He is adding to scripture and affirming a different gospel AND FATHER (with brotherhood in Rick Warren). He shares a stage with other teaches of false practices and promotes false practices and authors on his own website! (Ken Boa, Richard Foster..)
Many may view this post and be angered (ie: Oh.. the bashing of Piper is awful..) This is the declaration that Gods Word is AUTHORITY and what is contrary is anathema. What Piper clings to with no remorse or repentance is contrary to scripture.
A popular theologian may be a wolf among us! — Mat. 7:15
“For am I now seeking the approval of man, or of God? Or am I trying to please man? If I were still trying to please man, I would not be a servant of Christ.” Gal. 1:10
Justin Edwards
January 11, 2012
I appreciate your feelings on the matter, DMG, but I don’t think I’m near where you are on the matter. Piper may have questionable associations, and he may be toeing the line regarding disciplines, but I’ve never heard or seen him preach anything other than the unadulterated Gospel of Jesus Christ. If by spade you mean declaring him a heretic, I fall well short of that.
I think we need to be careful and patient to weigh all things. While I am a cessationist, I do believe my clear-thinking charismatic friends (as Justin Peters would call them) are absolutely, and thankfully, my brothers and sisters in Christ. The point of this post was to be as objective as possible. Some things are just not clear, at least not for me, and I want to be careful in how I approach this.
Unless one can see into the heart of John Piper, we need to be careful in passing judgment on him. I, for one, am pleased to see they took down the suggestion of practicing Lectio Divina for whatever the reason. Here is the update:
“Update: Formerly I listed Lectio Divina as a third system for prayer. I’ve since removed it for the confusion it has caused. We do not endorse contemplative spirituality. The main point I’d like to recommend is using the text of Scripture as an organizer for our prayers — prayers that are exegetically faithful and gospel rich. I’m sorry for introducing the category.”
God bless.
Darrel
January 10, 2012
Why the egg-shell-walk with Piper? How much dabbling in heresy is ok for a Christian? Did everyone forget Piper’s love affair with Federal Vision a few years back? Why should anyone who loves the Lord Jesus give Piper or anyone else a pass on something so far removed from the truth of Scripture as this latest excursion into the occult-yes, occult! One of the first fruits of this evil is spiritual elitism and don’t we have enough of that already? If the new norm is to be “hearing” from (g)od whether audibly or in your head or however why has this only come to light now? Were the saints for the last 2000 years cheated? Yes, they were! If you cannot “hear” him are you being cheated? According to the “folks” you are!!! Titus 3:10 KJV: “A man that is a heretick after the first and second admonition reject”. Terribly plain and unwanted truth for the Piperites. Heresy #1 Federal Vision; heresy #2 Lecto Divina. Is it heresy to give a pass to Piper on this? You decide. My answer is absolutely! 2 John 9, 10, 11. These situations are always telling in that you can tell what a person is made of by the stance taken on such issues: do I protect my favorite preacher or earnestly contend for the faith once for all delivered to the saints? I Cor. 11:19
Justin Edwards
January 11, 2012
Darrel, I’ll refer you to my response to DMG above, and share with you one of my favorite passages of Scripture, which I strive to honor:
James 3:13-18 Who is wise and understanding among you? By his good conduct let him show his works in the meekness of wisdom. 14But if you have bitter jealousy and selfish ambition in your hearts, do not boast and be false to the truth. 15This is not the wisdom that comes down from above, but is earthly, unspiritual, demonic. 16For where jealousy and selfish ambition exist, there will be disorder and every vile practice. 17But the wisdom from above is first pure, then peaceable, gentle, open to reason, full of mercy and good fruits, impartial and sincere. 18And a harvest of righteousness is sown in peace by those who make peace.
Linda Crutchfield
January 11, 2012
Could you tell me how you found Ken Boa’s connection to Thomas Merton? Is this in his book?
http://www.desiringgod.org/resource-library/ask-pastor-john/what-do-you-think-about-contemplative-prayer
Check out Piper’s description of contemplative prayer. He uses the book The Valley of Vision, a book of Puritan prayers as an example of contemplative prayer. But this book in no way describes a Puritan who.read and meditated on the Bible in the way that Piper describes…
“””So there is a spiritual seeing, or what we would call contemplation. This is where, when you read your Bible, you pause and you see in and through the words to the reality with your heart, and you apprehend spiritual reality. And this gives rise to a kind of praying that is spiritual and authentic and personal and warm and strong.
What does in and through the words mean?
Justin Edwards
January 11, 2012
Not sure exactly, Linda, but I might suppose he means marveling at the Words of Scripture and meditating on the reality and application in the heart of the believer.
Regarding Ken Boa, Christine Pack first mentioned Boa’s affinity to Merton, and a search on his website reveals as much: http://www.kenboa.org/search/?q=thomas+merton
Lockyer Laidley
January 11, 2012
I’ve been blessed by some of Piper’s writings and teaching. However I must admit that I’m staying away from him more and more after hearing about him virtually endorsing Rick Warren and now all this. It just doesn’t make sense.
Justin Edwards
January 11, 2012
I know what you mean, Lockyear. Watchful eyes and ears we march on!
Linda Crutchfield
January 11, 2012
Glad to see the removal of this 3rd method of prayer from DG website. Question still remains why it was posted there in the first place. Is Piper himself using this technique? It will become evident if he is.
Even though Piper decried RCC techniques, he endorsed those very techniques as a method of prayer his followers could pursue. His removal because it caused confusion does not fully answer the question. Is he saying that Ken Boa’s Lectio Divina is contemplative spirituality and that he made a mistake by not vetting the man or his book? These are things that we will see.
Tim Keller promotes Lectio Divina at his church and has endorsed a book by a former burnt out pastor who found renewal through this mysticism. This pastor goes on retreats to Trappists monastaries. Keller also endorsed a handbook on spiritual disciplines. This also grieves me greatly.
From my experience with this kind of mysticism, and from my research into the vast invasion it has made in evangelical circles, I find that the greatest danger is very subtle. The popularizers of the movement, Keating and Manning have said that they do not try to change a person’s doctrine, they simply teach these mystical techniques and the mystical experience itself causes a shift in the theology. Mystical experience produces mystical theology,
That is one reason why Piper’s definition of contemplative meditation, which you felt you had to clarify for me, gives me pause.
I to love John Piper. I am sorely grieved over the things that have recently taken place. God used him to point me in the direction of free grace and I have benefitted from his sermons and his books. And possibly best of all, I met Sinclair Ferguson at one of his conferences who became my pastor via the internet for quite a while as we searched for a reformed church.
Justin Edwards
January 12, 2012
Good words, Linda. Just for clarification, I didn’t feel I needed to clarify things for you, but you asked, “What does in and through the words mean?” so I thought you were asking for my thoughts on the matter.
Linda Crutchfield
January 12, 2012
you are right Justin, I am sorry to imply that you felt the need to explain Piper’s meaning. I did want your input. And I appreciated the kind interpretation you placed upon them. But I was a bit shocked by this very mystical sounding definition. Piper has never had trouble saying what he means.
I agree Jim Kahler, Piper is in my prayers as well as Keller. These brothers have been used by God for His Glory and so many have benefitted from this. That also means that there are many people who would follow them in their wanderings.
Justin Edwards
January 12, 2012
No worries, Linda, and thank you. I suppose I was giving a possible explanation as to what he could have meant if he was not intending to be mystical. Ultimately, I don’t know, but can hope.
Jim Kahler
January 12, 2012
Justin,
You seem to be the calming influence in this discussion. Lord knows we need one. I know nothing about the man but do know bout those he seems to be hanging around with. In my 40 years of learning about that narrow path I have seen many a good man allow his ego to take him off the narrow and down the wide path. There also comes a time when they have gone down that path that nothing anyone says seems to sink in. It may not be too late for Piper and we should keep the man in our prayers till we see for sure.
Justin Edwards
January 12, 2012
Amen, Jim, and thank you for the kind words. It is my hope to offer calm and rational discussion.
Suzanne
January 12, 2012
Great article, well and respectfully put out.
I agree with Jim Kahler..we need all the “calming influences” in these discernment discussions we can get, as well as in the articles themselves. I really appreciate the example of that in your contribution here, Justin. Refreshing.
Justin Edwards
January 12, 2012
Thanks so much, Suzanne.
Linda Crutchfield
January 12, 2012
And what shall we say to this?
http://bbc.mysurpass.net/websafari.exe/detail?sid=8A2A4D89-8EB8-4352-8F42-2A183EAA7B2F&database=database&list=R&rec=1&marc=2224
Linda Crutchfield
January 12, 2012
From Richard Foster’s site Renovare. Concerning the method of Contemplative Prayer he is training others to participate in.
“Guigo is describing a way of reading Scripture which is quite different to the approach many of us have learned. This is not a “study” of Scripture, an attempt to draw out from the Bible eternal principles which we then teach others or apply in our own lives—coming to the Bible as though it were a user’s manual for the Christian life. Guigo assumes that, when Paul writes that “all Scripture is God-breathed” (2 Tim. 3:16), he is speaking less about issues of truth and infallibility, and more about the infusion of divine life itself into the text. So, when practicing lectio, we do not come looking for doctrines to be learned—we come looking for a Presence to be encountered. The Bible is not so much the stone tablets recording the law, as it is the burning bush from which God speaks . . . here and now.”
“Lectio divina begins, of course, with reading. A careful, attentive, prayerful, and open-hearted reading of the Bible. This takes time. We cannot read Scripture the way we read the New York Times or an article on Wikipedia. The Bible is not susceptible to skimming, to summarizing, to speed-reading; there is a fundamental difference between Google and the gospel. Scripture is deep, rich, complex, and multi-layered. It speaks through nuances and details. It yields its fruit slowly and gently. This means we need to find the right environment to practice lectio with prayerful attention. We can, of course, read the Bible anywhere: on a train, in a mall, over a coffee in Starbucks. But some places are more conducive to lectio than others; a good length of time spent reading in uninterrupted quiet is essential. For some, that is hard to achieve. Try not to fret about this: take what time you can, where you can. A good half hour once a week is better than a frantic five minutes every day…” (Renovare, November 2008 – Vol.15, No. 3)
Justin Edwards
January 12, 2012
Yes, that is disturbing. I don’t really know what to say about folks who recommend the likes of Foster and Dallas Willard. The above quote is absurd. To the contrary, anyone can pick up any NYT or Wiki article or any other written text and repeat its words and phrases by mantra, control their breathing, empty their minds, and get to the same state of trance as he’s teaching to do with “Christian mysticism”. This is the very reason why these practices are a bridge for all religions (as Tony Campolo would say).
Mitch
January 12, 2012
Brother i just saw the update with DG ministries removing the Lectio Divina from their website. However I might ask why they put it on their website in the first place if Piper does not endorse this teaching and one might ask why did he participate in it at the conference along with Gigleo, Moore, Lecrae, ect?
I am kind of questioning Dr. Piper’s involvement participating in such a ritual if it is Roman Catholic which it appears to be if “We do not endorse contemplative spirituality”
I just don’t know about Piper on this now bro.
Justin Edwards
January 12, 2012
Good questions, bro, although we don’t know whether Piper knew LD was on the DG website since it was Jonathan Parnell’s article. It could very well be it was Piper who had him take it down.
DMG
January 12, 2012
What are the thoughts of Piper calling Warren his “brother in Christ”? He has not changed his comment re: this.
Pastor/ Dr. Gary Gilley brings out his own concerns with some of the more curious teaching of Dr. John Piper:
“Finally, Piper quotes favorably from a very disturbing stable of authors: Dietrich Bonhoeffer (popular liberal theologian, who, by the way, was executed not for his faith in Christ, but for his part in an assassination attempt on Adolf Hitler) (p. 90), Dallas Willard (leader in the unbiblical spiritual formation movement) (p. 119), G.K. Chesterton (Roman Catholic author) (p. 196), and Richard Foster (father and main promoter of the infiltration of Roman Catholic mysticism into evangelical circles) (pp. 192-193). He also speaks twice of the “dark night of the soul” which comes from counter-reformation Catholic mystic St. John of the Cross (pp. 217, 229).
Most disturbing is Foster’s quote calling for “new prophets to arise in our day” to which Piper responds, “And when they arise, one way that we fight for joy in God is to read what they write” (p. 193). After authoring a book which majors on pointing us to the Bible in our fight for joy, it is disconcerting to now read of an encouragement to read the words of modern prophets; and coming from Foster’s perspective and Piper’s theology on prophets, they are both referring to extrabiblical revelation through present-day prophets). “http://www.svchapel.org/resources/book-reviews/4-christian-living/203-when-i-dont-desire-god-by-john-piper
Here is Piper’s link to mystic Richard Foster: http://bbc.mysurpass.net/websafari.exe/detail?sid=8A2A4D89-8EB8-4352-8F42-2A183EAA7B2F&database=database&list=R&rec=1&marc=2224
What do we call someone who adds to God’s Word?
Darrel
January 13, 2012
It doesn’t really matter whether the LD post was removed from the DG website or not. John Piper performed his version of LD in the flesh, on stage, in front of hundreds of young and probably naive people and to top it all off we were treated to the U-Tube clip that started this conversation in the first place. To defend JP in any way for this action means that said defender is complicite with and a partaker of JP’s evil deed.
If defending Piper is more important to you than adhering to the Word of God, you are in more trouble than you realize
Justin Edwards
January 13, 2012
Darrel, I’m not defending Piper at all. Unless you have heard directly from the lips of John Piper that he is a mystic intending to make more mystics through LD, then you are an accuser of the brethren. I have no stake in this except to honestly examine the data to the best of my ability. As I’ve mentioned, I’m not even a huge fan of Piper. I do believe he is in error on couple of issues and I have said as much in multiple articles posted on this website.
If you are so quick to judge Piper and want to declare him a heretic, perhaps you should start a blog and do just that – before the Lord. I refer you back to James 3:13-18.
Darrel
January 13, 2012
Justin, it is regrettable that you seem to have taken my words as a personal attack on yourself-that is not my intent. It is not my intent to attack anyone on a personal level, not even John Piper. Piper has caused all of his own problems from “Christian hedonism” to “Federal Vision” to endorsing Rick Warren and now he stands in front of hundreds of people and does his rendition of “Lecto Divina”. Does the video evidence good fruit or bad? According to Matt. 7:17-19 it is not possible for a bad tree to bear good fruit and visa-versa. If you wish to consider Piper a “brother in Christ” that is your priviledge. But I would ask: where is the good fruit that says he is my brother in Christ? Past performance, doctrinally correct sermons,etc. is not enough. How many false prophets can you point to right now that have most of their doctrine correct, but err on one or more points that throws in the trash bin all the “truth” they supposedly speak. Classic “angel of light” types. Even Judas walked with Jesus for three years, but all that time he was the son of perdition and never in Christ.
My words are not an attack on anyone, rather a warning to those who still believe that JP spoke by the Holy Spirit in all of his preceding errors and most especially now with this LD garbage. It pains me greatly to see people defend someone who teaches error and calls it truth. Forty years ago I was caught in a similar situation and fell for the lie. I fell for it because I was lost, a lost “church member” who knew all there was to know about the Bible, salvation and God Himself (or so I thought)——-and still lost.
If you still consider my words as an attack, so be it. Isa. 5:20
Justin Edwards
January 14, 2012
Darrel, if you can provide for me where Piper has preached another gospel, denied the divinity of Christ, denied the Triune God of Scripture, denied the virgin birth, or denied the Second Coming that would be great. Thanks. I’m not dismissing his error in this regard, but you seem to not understand the difference between the essentials of the faith and the matter of discussion here. If Piper were to continue down the road of mysticism by openly, unashamedly, and clearly practicing and teaching spiritual formation/disciplines, the fruit of which would likely culminate in a form of universalism, then you and I would be closer to agreement. But, he hasn’t done that, DG pulled the LD from its website (which it is not clear that Piper even knew about it in the first place), and unless Piper came out to say they were indeed practicing a form of LD at Passion, I don’t know that we can 100% say that they were – we can assume that it appeared they were, and perhaps they indeed practiced a form of it, but perhaps it was not intended that way. I simply don’t know. That’s not an apologetic for Piper, but an attempt to be honest with the information and not go over board into sensationalism.
Linda Crutchfield
January 13, 2012
I think these quotes from Jonathan Edwards will help frame our responses and attitudes as Christians to these things, so that our good may not be evil spoken of, and that those outside the Church who are watching out behavior may not have cause from us to blaspheme our Lord and Savior. We certainly don’t want to be guilty of biting and devouring one another.
Zeal is to be exercised against evil, but never against people.
Fervour is always to manifest itself as fervent love.
“An ugly, selfish, angry and contentious spirit” is no sign of the Spirit.
Our goal is to maintain the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace even when we contend for the faith.
I commend you Justin for these very things.
The Lord’s servant must not be quarrelsome, but kind to everyone, able to teach, patiently enduring evil, correcting his opponents with gentleness.
God may perhaps grant them repentance, leading to a knowledge of the truth, and they may escape from the snare of the devil after being captured by him. 2 Timothy 2:24-26
If we find ourselves judging our brothers we may be guilty in attitude or spirit of the very thing we are judging in them. Romans 2 is clear about this.
Do not grumble against one another, brothers, so that you may not be judged; behold the Judge is standing at the door. James 5:9
My brothers, if anyone among you wanders from the truth and someone brings him back, let him know that whoever brings back a sinner from his wandering will save his soul from death and will cover a multitude of sins. James 5:19
“Therefore let anyone who thinks that he stands take heed lest he fall.” I Cor 10:1
Justin Edwards
January 14, 2012
Thank you, Linda – very helpful and applicable to this discussion.
Linda Crutchfield
January 13, 2012
As far as good fruit from Piper’s ministry, God used him to point me to the doctrines of free grace. I will be thanking God forever for John Piper. He is a dear brother.
Bryant
January 29, 2013
Can anyone tell me why Lectio Divina is wrong, without using the genetic fallacy?
Justin Edwards
February 5, 2013
Sure Bryant – did you read the article? Do you hear from God?