# What do you think of this John Piper sermon?



## Pergamum (Jul 12, 2009)

What Man Does in the New Birth :: Desiring God Christian Resource Library


Aside from the title possibly being what it is to draw people's attention, what do you think of this sermon. 

I had a man at my church charge Piper with unothodoxy due to demanding faith as a duty, and he stated that he would not step foot in Piper's church ever due to this sermon, which shows Piper to be in error.

What think ye?


----------



## Grillsy (Jul 12, 2009)

Joshua said:


> Tell him to see WLC 153 wherein it says that both repentance and faith are required of us. God has commanded that all men everywhere should repent (which requires faith). Faith is the empty instrument by which God justifies the Elect. Even the faith by which




You speak the truth.


----------



## Pergamum (Jul 12, 2009)

Does Piper deny this? Piper says that the ultimate actor is God.


----------



## ChristianHedonist (Jul 12, 2009)

2 Thessalonians 1:3-10 makes it pretty clear that faith is a duty:



> We ought always to give thanks to God for you, brothers, as is right, because your faith is growing abundantly, and the love of every one of you for one another is increasing. Therefore we ourselves boast about you in the churches of God for your steadfastness and faith in all your persecutions and in the afflictions that you are enduring. This is evidence of the righteous judgment of God, that you may be considered worthy of the kingdom of God, for which you are also suffering--since indeed God considers it just to repay with affliction those who afflict you, and to grant relief to you who are afflicted as well as to us, when the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven with his mighty angels in flaming fire, *inflicting vengeance on those who do not know God and on those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus*. They will suffer the punishment of eternal destruction, away from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of his might, when he comes on that day to be glorified in his saints, and to be marveled at among all who have believed, because our testimony to you was believed.



I didn't notice any errors by Piper when skimming through the sermon. He is clear that it is God who begets faith in us.


----------



## Pergamum (Jul 12, 2009)

Yes, I guess this man was just put off by the (perhaps purposely) provocative title.


----------



## Jesus is my friend (Jul 13, 2009)

No problems here either,I Love Piper,God has used him massively in my life,do I agree with everything he teaches,no,of course not,he's a man also,however I will not be among the lot looking for ways to nail him rather than speaking the truth in love about him and looking for ways to correct and encourage as there is much to be thankful for


----------



## Jimmy the Greek (Jul 13, 2009)

I haven't listened to the sermon, but the man's objection to Piper's Sermon may be telling. The two fundamental errors of hyper Calvinism ar (1) a denial of duty-faith and (2) a resultant denial of the universal call of the gospel. 

Tom Nettles sees the essence of hyper-Calvinism as the denial of duty-faith. Cf. _By His Grace and for His Glory, A Historical, Theological, and Practical Study of the Doctrines of Grace in Baptist Life _(Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1986), p. 391.


----------



## lynnie (Jul 13, 2009)

I don't have time to listen to this sermon but I've heard tons of Piper tapes. He seems to run into an extraordinary number of people who are so sure of their election and perseverance that it doen't matter that they are in adultery, or that they show no pursuit of God in prayer/bible/church/giving. I would say Gomarus is correct that he is reacting to hyper Calvinism ( or antinomians).

When I look at my kids and their (very nice) friends brought up Christian, and I see the way they are sure they are Christians for life while being passive about things of the kingdom (and enthusiastic about anything electronic and entertaining) I tend to think a good dose of Piper on this subject won't hurt anybody like that.


----------



## Reforming (Jul 13, 2009)

Jesus is my friend said:


> No problems here either,I Love Piper,God has used him massively in my life,do I agree with everything he teaches,no,of course not,he's a man also,however I will not be among the lot looking for ways to nail him rather than speaking the truth in love about him and looking for ways to correct and encourage as there is much to be thankful for



John Piper is a gifted leader and teacher. He has been an encouragement to me on countless situations.


----------



## Spinningplates2 (Jul 13, 2009)

Pergamum said:


> What Man Does in the New Birth :: Desiring God Christian Resource Library
> 
> 
> Aside from the title possibly being what it is to draw people's attention, what do you think of this sermon.
> ...



Did you listen to this sermon? Could you please give us some of what you think are the more questionable statements? What do you think the common definition of hyper-calvinism. I'm only a little confused about what I thought Hyper Calvinism really is.


----------



## Pergamum (Jul 13, 2009)

Ok, so I gave my comments to this man (that I had read the sermon and that Piper said nothing wrong) and he ended up walking away and calling Piper a heretic. 

So much for dialogue and discussion.


----------



## Semper Fidelis (Jul 13, 2009)

Pergamum said:


> Ok, so I gave my comments to this man (that I had read the sermon and that Piper said nothing wrong) and he ended up walking away and calling Piper a heretic.
> 
> So much for dialogue and discussion.



I wonder if the number of Abraham's descendants, in this fellow's estimation, are as numerous as the sands on the sea.


----------



## Pergamum (Jul 16, 2009)

Semper Fidelis said:


> Pergamum said:
> 
> 
> > Ok, so I gave my comments to this man (that I had read the sermon and that Piper said nothing wrong) and he ended up walking away and calling Piper a heretic.
> ...



He himself said that the Way was "More narrow than we might think" in the parking lot as he walked off.





NEW DEVELOPMENT: Another man in my church read the sermon and these are his comments:

HIS WORDS AREBELOW:

_"About Piper's article you gave me:

I've only read a little so for, but I say his title is a bit misleading . 
2nd, I see faith, & repentance as a Response to life (the new birth). He seems to say faith plays a part in the New Birth. 

A dead man needs life first to act. So his actions (faithand repentance) are life's response. 

Actually he said " His doing is the decisive cause ' ??? 

Well then if it is God that does the ' Decisive " cause our doing must be secondary."_




How should I respond? Are this man's critiques true? I still see nothing wrong with the article.


----------



## jandrusk (Jul 16, 2009)

As has been addressed in other comments the premise is valid upon scriptural basis. I do have a problem with Piper in relation to his support of Douglas Wilson, Mark Driscoll, and Paul Tripp, but that's another topic.


----------



## Pergamum (Jul 16, 2009)

jandrusk said:


> As has been addressed in other comments the premise is valid upon scriptural basis. I do have a problem with Piper in relation to his support of Douglas Wilson, Mark Driscoll, and Paul Tripp, but that's another topic.



Yep, that IS another topic and I am only concerned with the content of this one sermon. 

I think since some in my church do not like Piper for these other reasons, they are being overly hard on his preaching and looking for "Gotcha Statements" in his sermons.


----------



## Jimmy the Greek (Jul 16, 2009)

OK, I scanned through the text of Piper's message in the OP. 

First of all, Piper never uses the word "duty" to describe faith, although the concept of "duty-faith" is consistent with the WCF and Reformed thinking (as mentioned above). 

Secondly, regarding "our part" in the process, Piper is simply saying that man does the believing, God does not believe for us. Faith (and believing) issue forth from the new birth, but we do the believing. I see this as completely orthodox and Reformed thinking.

The detractor in the OP condemned Piper for apparently treating Faith as a duty. To clarify my earlier response, the detractor's opinion therefore borders on hyper Calvinism, which denies duty-faith.


----------



## Pergamum (Jul 16, 2009)

Here is my response to my friend's comment:

_Yes, the title is provocative. Maybe Piper titled the sermon this on purpose.



About the content, Piper says nothing contrary to the Reformers and Jonathan Edwards who speak of "closing with Christ." This is also very Biblical.





Piper says: Your act of believing and God’s act of begetting are simultaneous. You do the one and he does the other at the same instant. And—this is very important—his doing is the decisive cause of your doing. His begetting is the decisive cause of your believing. 



In other words the Bible says that we must have faith to be saved and that Regeneration and Conversion normally occur at the same time, though God's action causes our action. Piper DOES, indeed, say that it is God's actions that are decisive - not man's.



However, man does the believing; it is not God that believes for man. We must never deny the duty of faith, and such denial is one of the chief tenets of hyper-calvinism.



Piper admits that it is hard for people to understand that we can have a simultanous event where one event causes the other, but it's true. Under normal cases (infants and the mentally handicapped would need to be talked about separately)...but in most cases regeneration and conversion happen at the same time. There is not a lapse of time between the two events, they normally occur simultanously, even though (and Piper says this too) regeneration is the cause of the new birth.



Piper titles one of his bold-faced subtitles in this way, "God's begetting causes our believing." This is perfectly correct. Piper is saying just the same thing we are, that we MUST believe and yet we believe out of/because of the new birth, even though these two things (new birth and conversion) are one package.



I have heard some calvinists in their zeal to be "more calvinisitic" minimize the duty of faith and they minimize our actions in salvation. Yet we are to PRESS into the kingdom and to seek salvation, even though the strength of our seeking is even of the Lord. I am afriad that some calvinists are very much in danger of falling part-way into hyper-calvinism due to their zeal in stressing God's sovereignty in salvation and minimize those things that man must do in order to be saved (even when these "doings" are gifts of God). But we must also stress man's responsibility in believing and we must inform our people of their duties before God and we must tell them to seek the Lord, to believe, to repent and to pray for salvation and hope that God grants these things to us as grace-gifts.



I think there may be a psychological reason also for this sermon by Piper's to get a rough hearing. Some of our Grace folks have a bone to pick with John Piper and all are not totally happy with what John Piper represents. There is a tendency to find fault with John Piper and find an ounce of difference rather than rejoice in the TON of agreement that we have with him. And so, when they read a sermon that is, perhaps needlessly, titled in an engaging and maybe provocative way about what WE do in our new birth, then these readers, already prejudiced against Piper, read the sermon with "Gotcha Glasses" looking for any hint of error in Piper. These people are not really reading John Piper to get a benefit, they are out hunting for heresy, and they will make sure that they find some.



Rather than this sermon being an example of heresy, proving that John Piper is a heretic, this sermon is a well-balanced safeguard against hyper-calvinism's denail of duty-faith. He states that we must believe, and states that God's begetting of us in the new birth is the cause of our belief, even if faith is an absolute must, since God will not have a man walking aroun with the New Birth that does not also possess saving faith, right?





Thanks for your comments. Please reread the sermon in light of my comments and let me know what you think._


----------



## Jimmy the Greek (Jul 16, 2009)

Good response, Perg. I saw nothing wrong with Piper's message -- although I didn't study it thoroughly.


----------



## Pergamum (Jul 16, 2009)

I hope it wins my friend over.


----------

