Is Docter Piper really following the footsteps of Edward's

[rembrandt]

How well do you think he is?

I see a horrific gap between Piper's sermons and Edward's. Personaly, I'm not impressed with Piper's, though I enjoy his books. But even his books come nowhere close to the genious intent of Edwards (in my opinion).

I know Edwards was a unique fellow, and no one can mimick his style. But I just think that the substance between the two men is greatly different. One preaches 7th grade level sermons, the other expounds on the great things of Calvinism in such vigor, being mindful of thoroughness of thought, presenting all things of importance to the mind for contemplation. While Piper is over here just saying one word: joy. I'm getting tired of it. I was driving down the road the other day thinking, of course joy is the most vital aspect of our new found relationship with Christ. It's a given! Why so much emphasis here-- we know!

Edwards was much more than a theologian, and to even think he can capture his whole thought in one word... I don't know.

Thoughts?

Rembrandt

[Edited on 4-23-2004 by rembrandt]

[Edited on 5-19-04 by pastorway]

 

[dkicklig]

Edward's is a theological patriarch. He was an absolute genius and one of those people that God won't duplicate. I love Piper, the greatest thing his writings have done for me is re-introduce me to Jonathan Edwards.

I think Piper's greatest contribution is introducing people to Edwards, resurrecting an interest in some of the other historical greats; Luther, Calvin; Augustine; through his Swans are not Silent series, and helping break through the stigma of the frozen chosen (no offense FrozenChosen:biggrin: )

[Edited on 4-23-2004 by dkicklig]

 

[Scott Bushey]

My opinion, you want to know about Edwards; read Edwards. You want a contemporary on the subject, go to Jonathan Gerstner Sr. "The Rational Biblical Theology of Jonathan Edwards"

 

[kceaster]

whew....

I thought you meant Dr. Joey Pipa.

He's probably closer to Edwards than Piper.

 

[rembrandt]

[quote:5a5e0d98e0][i:5a5e0d98e0]Originally posted by kceaster[/i:5a5e0d98e0]
I thought you meant Dr. Joey Pipa.

He's probably closer to Edwards than Piper. [/quote:5a5e0d98e0]

changed the title.

 

[turmeric]

Given how "dumbed down" the average evangelical is nowadays, a little "brain candy" like Piper does little harm, and some good. Most of us in the States have to recover a taste for good theology which we have lost. Piper isn't Edwards, he also isn't Rick Warren, TD Jakes, Arminius or Charles Finney. If Piper doesn't do it for you anymore, read Edwards and Owen and some of those originals.:book:

 

[Bryan]

I like Piper, I like him a lot.

Of course he's not Edwards, but our society right now is so far away from where the Puritians were that to expect us to jump right back to where they were is unrealistic. Lloyd-Jones talked about that a bit in Preaching and Preachers.

I think we will need a lot of Pipers, Sprouls and Lloyd-Jones before we can expect a Edwards to appear.

Bryan
SDG

 

[rembrandt]

attention

Let us not forget that Edwards was one of the only true Calvinistic preachers of his day! By then everybody had fallen into Arminianism. God raises up one man to do the work of thousands. Luther had forerunners, sure. But he was the first of his kind since Augustine!

Rembrandt

 

[C. Matthew McMahon]

Piper is too "bubble gum" to me.

As Scott said, if you want to read Edwards, then read Edwards. And really he is right, there is no better contemporary than John Gerstner on Edwards that can be found. That because Gerstner quotes Edwards and doe snot make up little "religious jingles" to hook people into buying books (i.e. God is most glorified in us when we are most satisfied in Him...etc.)

 

[strictestsect]

[quote:c4539e880b][i:c4539e880b](i.e. God is most glorified in us when we are most satisfied in Him...etc.)[/i:c4539e880b]
[/quote:c4539e880b]

Is this statement contrary to what's taught in scripture?

And could you give me an example of someone who is more "bublegumish" than Piper?

 

[rembrandt]

[quote:24f16a9ba3]And could you give me an example of someone who is more "bublegumish" than Piper?[/quote:24f16a9ba3]

seeker sensitive folks. Rick Warren. All man, if you have ever read any Bill Hybels books... I think he is an expert bubble gum blower. One thing that always got me, was his "bell tower" experience, when he had the epiphany that "the church is the hope of the world." What? I thought Jesus Christ is the hope of the world. Certainly, if anything, the seeker sensitive church is not the hope of the world.

Rembrandt

 

[FrozenChosen]

[quote:5ea25b4505][i:5ea25b4505]Originally posted by dkicklig[/i:5ea25b4505]
Edward's is a theological patriarch. He was an absolute genius and one of those people that God won't duplicate. I love Piper, the greatest thing his writings have done for me is re-introduce me to Jonathan Edwards.

I think Piper's greatest contribution is introducing people to Edwards, resurrecting an interest in some of the other historical greats; Luther, Calvin; Augustine; through his Swans are not Silent series, and helping break through the stigma of the frozen chosen (no offense FrozenChosen:biggrin: )

[Edited on 4-23-2004 by dkicklig] [/quote:5ea25b4505]

Haha, no worries amigo. I use the name as a joke and a joke only. I do not fit the stereotype I believe (I have shaggy hair too!) so I don't mind it as a joke!

 

[Radar]

Come on everybody. There are very few people in evangelical America like those represented by the forumites here. There are tens of millions of evan-jelly-cals who think theology is watching Creflo Dollar or reading "The Prayer of Jabez for the Purpose Driven Church that's been Left Behind."

Piper is a bridge that helps people cross from the jelly side to the other. In my walk, James White has helped me be shrewd as a serpent, and Piper has helped me be gentle as a dove. I appreciate them both greatly.

Shrewd meets Gentle ==>

 

[Ianterrell]

I agree with Radar. Piper was a great help for me in understanding Reformed theology early on. He also helped to ween me off of Charismatic preaching, and get into expository method sermons.

I hope he grows past some of his wrong thinking, but I really respect and admire him for introducing calvinism with warmth and passion to so many.

 

[Me Died Blue]

[quote:776c2a30d4][i:776c2a30d4]Originally posted by Radar[/i:776c2a30d4]
Piper is a bridge that helps people cross from the jelly side to the other.[/quote:776c2a30d4]

Agreed. It was basically like that for me in reading him.

Chris

 

[Ranger]

I was actually very surprised to recently read that Rick Warren was both a believer in the doctrines of grace and a believer in monergistic salvation. At least one of those seeker-church leaders are.

Also, when it comes to Piper I have a few thoughts:

1. He would completely agree that he is not a modern Jonathan Edwards. He knows that God has appointed each man a certain amount of grace and that Edwards far exceeded most of us. I think Piper would be content if he did nothing more in his ministry than lead others to the doctrines of grace and to the writings of the great patriarchs of the reformed faith.

2. God used Piper to lead me toward reformed theology. I first heard Piper preach in 1996, and could tell that there was something different about the way he preached. It was extremely passionate and very God-centered. It left me interested in the guy. So, by God's grace as a junior in high school I read both "Desiring God" and "Future Grace." They changed the way I viewed Scripture and understood salvation. This leads me to my next point.

3. I don't mean this to sound cocky, because that's not what I'm implying. Piper is great for less mature readers in reformed theology. I am currently reading through Desiring God with a group of high school juniors from my church right now, and it has opened their eyes to the doctrines of grace. They are much more receptive to Piper's writing style and the fact that he is so well respected today than they are when I have suggested reading the guys that I enjoy who have been dead for 100+ years. I think it is just more appealing to the less mature believer's mindset.

 

[Ianterrell]

I also feel like I began to have a higher view of scripture which lends itself to a more reverential method of interpretation. I also learned quite a bit about God from Piper's Pleasures of God.

 

[fredtgreco]

We ought not to forget that Piper has done the Church two excellent services in the midst of controversy:

1. His book setting forth the biblical case for imputation of Christ's righteousness to the believer, [i:48ad2736ec]Counted Righteous in Christ[/i:48ad2736ec]

2. His book that details the real reasons for the passion of Christ in the midst of "Mel-mania"

 

[KayJay]

I'm curious - b/c personally I love Piper's emphasis on God's love for Himself. I have a sermon of his entitled "The Supremacy of God in the Life of the Mind" and it is fantastic b/c he (like in most of what he does) starts by demonstrating that God is foremost in HIS OWN mind.

I know this is really the fruit of reformed thinking...but I've always found Piper to be unique due to his extreme emphasis on this point. In that way I think he is similar to Edwards...Do you guys know of anyone else (living or dead) who with this idea???

 

[Bladestunner316]

John Piper by no means is perfect but deep down he is a good guy and does benefit the church and I feel is a great way to ease people into reformed theology.

Im sure he has his faults well hes baptist j/k

but I think he's not that bad,no edwards thats for sure but who is these days??

But works thorugh all of us for his good

blade

 

[rembrandt]

[quote:22f253652a][Edited on 5-19-04 by pastorway][/quote:22f253652a]

Pastorway, why did you change my title? It was originally "Docta Pipa"... but that was misleading because there actually is a "Pipa"...

 

[ChristianasJourney]

I like Piper and I appreciate his view on God. He certainly was a great influence in helping me understand and increasing my value of "the sovereignty of God."

Perhaps he's not right on everything...But then, perhaps he IS right, and we're the ones that are wrong.

I'll continue to weigh what he says, and compare it with scripture. Just like a weigh what people say on this board, and compare it with scripture.

The difference between Piper and Edwards. Well, for one thing, Edwards is dead, and Piper is alive.



[Edited on 5-19-2004 by ChristianasJourney]

 

[Ianterrell]

Edwards wore a powdered wig.

 

[Bladestunner316]

edwards still alive in paradise:bs2:

 

[Irishcat922]

I recently read a good debate on Piper's website he had with an arminian. I thought he did a good job. Personally I like alot of what Piper has written, it has a good calvinistic,
devotional quality about it. I think we need that. I especially like his historical, biographical sketches, very encouraging. But, when it comes to Edwards I prefer Edwards.:book:

 

[Ranger]

I think Piper excels in writing God-centered devotional material. A "Hunger for God" is very good.

 

[DanielC]

Rick Warren, TD Jakes, Arminius or Charles Finney.

Wow Meg... that's quite an all star team there.


You're from Intown Pres in Portland? Stay there - Charles is the man. He used to be my pastor at Decatur Pres. Julie is awesome too... and her GPA in seminary was higher than Charles'. Ask him about it sometime.:thumbup:

 

[turmeric]

[quote:56d68a150d][i:56d68a150d]Originally posted by DanielC[/i:56d68a150d]
Rick Warren, TD Jakes, Arminius or Charles Finney.

Wow Meg... that's quite an all star team there.


You're from Intown Pres in Portland? Stay there - Charles is the man. He used to be my pastor at Decatur Pres. Julie is awesome too... and her GPA in seminary was higher than Charles'. Ask him about it sometime.:thumbup: [/quote:56d68a150d]

I'll tell them you said hello! He's doing an excellent series in Jonah right now.:thumbup:

 

[heartoflesh]

[quote:abc2f9069f][i:abc2f9069f]Originally posted by Ranger[/i:abc2f9069f]
I was actually very surprised to recently read that Rick Warren was both a believer in the doctrines of grace and a believer in monergistic salvation. At least one of those seeker-church leaders are.

Also, when it comes to Piper I have a few thoughts:

1. He would completely agree that he is not a modern Jonathan Edwards. He knows that God has appointed each man a certain amount of grace and that Edwards far exceeded most of us. I think Piper would be content if he did nothing more in his ministry than lead others to the doctrines of grace and to the writings of the great patriarchs of the reformed faith.

2. God used Piper to lead me toward reformed theology. I first heard Piper preach in 1996, and could tell that there was something different about the way he preached. It was extremely passionate and very God-centered. It left me interested in the guy. So, by God's grace as a junior in high school I read both "Desiring God" and "Future Grace." They changed the way I viewed Scripture and understood salvation. This leads me to my next point.

3. I don't mean this to sound cocky, because that's not what I'm implying. Piper is great for less mature readers in reformed theology. I am currently reading through Desiring God with a group of high school juniors from my church right now, and it has opened their eyes to the doctrines of grace. They are much more receptive to Piper's writing style and the fact that he is so well respected today than they are when I have suggested reading the guys that I enjoy who have been dead for 100+ years. I think it is just more appealing to the less mature believer's mindset. [/quote:abc2f9069f]

These are my thoughts exactly, and you have articulated them wonderfully, Ranger.

I've had the privilege of attending several of Piper's seminars, (Bethlehem Institute) and this has been the most edifying, when compared with his books, preaching or radio program. Most edifying was his seminar on Recovering Biblical Manwood and Womanhood or "Sexual Complimentarity". He's one of the few Christian leaders today fighting that battle with any real zeal.