"Piper is Down. Repeat, We Have a Piper Down"

Status
Not open for further replies.
I just finished reading the article, and I commend you for it. Although Piper has many good things to say, I do not agree with him on his use of hedonism, and he has a dangerous view of justification.

Our bible study is moving from a 2.5 year study on the WCF to the WLC/WSC, so this was helpful in understanding the first question.

Thanks!
 
Originally posted by Jeff_Bartel
I just finished reading the article, and I commend you for it. Although Piper has many good things to say, I do not agree with him on his use of hedonism, and he has a dangerous view of justification.

Our bible study is moving from a 2.5 year study on the WCF to the WLC/WSC, so this was helpful in understanding the first question.

Thanks!
Click to expand...

Thanks Jeff. The study was an eye opener for me as well.

Kind regards,

Jerrold
 
Originally posted by Jeff_Bartel
I just finished reading the article, and I commend you for it. Although Piper has many good things to say, I do not agree with him on his use of hedonism, and he has a dangerous view of justification.
Click to expand...


Dangerous?

.

.

.

Can you explain?
 
I don't want to speak for Jeff, but I suspect he means some of Dr. Piper's confusing and inconsistant language in defining Justification at times. I'm not certain if it is because he tends to go for shock value and in doing so has a loose rein on his language. Or if it is a momentary lapse of reason.

l
 
Originally posted by Rick Larson
Originally posted by Jeff_Bartel
I just finished reading the article, and I commend you for it. Although Piper has many good things to say, I do not agree with him on his use of hedonism, and he has a dangerous view of justification.
Click to expand...


Dangerous?
.

.

.

Can you explain?
Click to expand...

Even though justification was mentioned in passing the article wasn't about justification. Piper is very solid on justification.


[Edited on 4-16-2005 by puritancovenanter]
 
Originally posted by JOwen
Originally posted by Rick Larson
Piper is trying to make a point, at a popular level, and I will concede that he makes statements that are misguided, and definitely open to criticism. (especially in suggesting that the Westminster Q#1 should be altered, which is silly) I agree with his basic point, "God is most glorified in us, when we are most satisfied in Him", but this gets misinterpreted by his popularizing style. This is why he has had to write papers to deflect such criticisms, when if he had been more careful he would not have to.

If Piper is read only critically, to find fault, we can easily do so. We can do the same for any author. We are wise if we take the point he is making and subject it to Scripture, correct it where it is misguided, and strip it of unhelpful "slogans"---if they are unhelpful to us. "Christian Hedonism" is used by Piper for its shock value. The fact that it is an oxymoron is its intended irony. It's merely Piper's attempt to get across the point Jonathon Edwards makes in his first of seventy resolutions... "Resolved, that I will do whatsoever I think to be most to God' s glory, and my own good, profit and pleasure..." We could easily take this statement of Edwards and be misled, but since we know his theology in total, we are not. The same is true of Piper. Anyone who knows Piper's theology knows he does not advocate a type of secular hedonism.

A Response to Richard Mouw Here he addresses most of the main criticisms put forth in this paper.

Was Jonathon Edwards a Christian Hedonist?
Click to expand...

Thank you Rick for your thoughts. I am not above criticism, and neither is Piper:D. The point of my paper was not that we should not seek pleasure in God, but that is should not be our "ism". Ism's have the great tendency to overismplify and create doctrines of imbalance. "Shock value" ought not to enter the fray (In my humble opinion) when it comes to the chief end of man. The Puritans believed that enjoying God was a subordinate result of glorifying God. Piper does not. I agree with the Puritans.
I must admit that a mainline baptist, criticizing my Confession and Catechism in such a flippant way might have exercised me to investigate Piper's thesis in a critical way, but we should remember that in 40 pages, Piper is only mentioned in three places.

Kind regards,

Jerrold
Click to expand...

To follow up and secure the point -

-have you ever heard of a Puritan creating a short catch phrase that sums up "the Christian life?" Catchy, pithy?

And the peanut gallery says - nope! :book2:
 
Originally posted by Rick Larson
Originally posted by Jeff_Bartel
I just finished reading the article, and I commend you for it. Although Piper has many good things to say, I do not agree with him on his use of hedonism, and he has a dangerous view of justification.
Click to expand...


Dangerous?

.

.

.

Can you explain?
Click to expand...

On another thread here in the Puritan Board, someone directed me to Vincent Cheung's blog where I read about Piper's "less than clear" termonology. I think they may have a point.

I think Vincent Cheung's blog will explain it better than I can! ;)

Click Here
 
[/quote]


Dangerous?

.

.

.

Can you explain? [/quote]

On another thread here in the Puritan Board, someone directed me to Vincent Cheung's blog where I read about Piper's "less than clear" termonology. I think they may have a point.

I think Vincent Cheung's blog will explain it better than I can! ;)

Click Here [/quote]

I thought Cheung's critique was spot on. Piper needs to be careful.

Kind regards,

Jerrold
 
Just to let everyone know, my Piper paper was accepted, graded, and passed on to the Assembly for ordination requirements along with the other written requirements (Greek, Hebrew etc). Thanks for the interaction and feedback folks. Now, OFF TO SCOTLAND!!!

Kind regards,

Jerrold H. Lewis
Soon to be ex-student of the Scottish Presbytery.
 
Originally posted by JOwen
Just to let everyone know, my Piper paper was accepted, graded, and passed on to the Assembly for ordination requirements along with the other written requirements (Greek, Hebrew etc). Thanks for the interaction and feedback folks. Now, OFF TO SCOTLAND!!!

Kind regards,

Jerrold H. Lewis
Soon to be ex-student of the Scottish Presbytery.
Click to expand...
You mean off to the fatherland? Congrats!
 
Originally posted by NaphtaliPress
Originally posted by JOwen
Just to let everyone know, my Piper paper was accepted, graded, and passed on to the Assembly for ordination requirements along with the other written requirements (Greek, Hebrew etc). Thanks for the interaction and feedback folks. Now, OFF TO SCOTLAND!!!

Kind regards,

Jerrold H. Lewis
Soon to be ex-student of the Scottish Presbytery.
Click to expand...
You mean off to the fatherland? Congrats!
Click to expand...

Yep. I'll be preaching in Inverness, Dundee, Dingwall, Stornoway, and Harris. I plan on visiting M'Cheyne's church and memorabilia (library);
Willison's Church in Dundee; Andrew Bonar's church at Collace; Wishart's
Arch; St Andrews Catherdral with Rutherford and Halliburton's graves, etc; Archbishop Sharp's Magus Moor field of death in Fife; Thomas Chalmer's 1st parish Kilmeny. Digital cam in hand!

Kind regards,

Jerrold
 
Do you need a caddie or porter? I'll be glad to tote you bags. I could drop in on my cousins and get you a fine home cooked meal to boot! Dinna ya ker lad. Weel be takin yoo roun'
 
Originally posted by LawrenceU
Do you need a caddie or porter? I'll be glad to tote you bags. I could drop in on my cousins and get you a fine home cooked meal to boot! Dinna ya ker lad. Weel be takin yoo roun'
Click to expand...

:lol:

Presbytery is paying for my wife and one child to come along and that is all we can afford. Thanks for asking however!:lol:

Kind regards,

Jerrold
 
I cannot access it from the site. Do you have to have membership to that website?

Originally posted by JOwen
Originally posted by Ivan
Although I like much of what Piper has written, I have NEVER like the term "Christian Hedonsim" either. As I have time, and I have precious little these days, I'll be reading your paper, Jerrold.
Click to expand...

Thanks Ivan!

Kind regards,

Jerrold
Click to expand...
 
Thesis

When I clicked on the link it said, "page not found." I would be interested in reading your thesis.
 
Rev. Lewis,

Can you post the link to the article in your blog? I can't find the article there. Thanks!


As for the thread title, I liked it, thought it was funny. I saw it more as tongue in cheek than a shot at Piper. In any case, I don't think there are many people that last more than 6 or 7 posts without being called a heretic by someone. ;)

I'm not really into the Christian Hedonism idea myself (nor the pithy one-liners that attempt to sum up 10 volumes of doctrine).:2cents:
 
kvanlaan said:
Rev. Lewis,

As for the thread title, I liked it, thought it was funny. I saw it more as tongue in cheek than a shot at Piper. In any case, I don't think there are many people that last more than 6 or 7 posts without being called a heretic by someone. ;)
Click to expand...

I have to admit that I found it funny too, but that doesn't make it okay. Perhaps that tells us something if not many can last 6 or 7 posts without being called a heretic. I just would've felt better laughing if the title were saying that the doctrine had been cast down instead of the person, since I'm assuming that's what the paper is about.

Or maybe I'm just sensitive because I'm in the Reformed church because of Desiring God. Sorry if I overreacted.
 
I should send this to all my old friends at Moody Bible. Though they don't agree with everything, I had a lot of discussions about Piper. A lot of the guys there said that Piper was the greatest thelogian of our time!!!

I said respectfully, you better go and expand your reading then!!! Anyway thanks for the paper, I hope to get around to reading it soon!
 
I think Robbins misinterpreted Piper on justification. Then Cheung blogs about it while confessing he is "no expert on Piper." Perhaps Cheung should have found out firsthand what Piper's views on justification were before blogging about it.

Piper teaches faith without works is dead, and if I'm not mistaken that's what N.T. writers such as James taught as well. Anybody that thinks Piper believes we're justified by our subsequent acts of obedience has seriously misrepresented the man. He has written a book entitled Counted Righteous in Christ that deals with the imputation of Christ's righteousness.
 
I may be late in offering this comment, by the term "Christian Hedonism" accomplished Piper's intent which was to cause Christian's to deal with the issue of the "chief end of man."
 
Found the article, Rev Lewis (the search box comes up in Chinese here and I couldn't read it). No need to post the link.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

JM
  • Locked
John Piper is Bad
Replies
1
Views
2K
cwjudyjr
cwjudyjr
G
  • Locked
Is John Piper charismatic
Replies
2
Views
14K
Bryan
B
AnnaBanana
  • Locked
Abraham Piper
2
Replies
44
Views
12K
De Jager
De Jager
Curt
  • Locked
Piper video
Replies
0
Views
2K
Curt
Curt
Scott Bushey
  • Locked
Hunkering Down........
Replies
20
Views
3K
ReformedWretch
ReformedWretch
Back
Top