:)

I must wonder, is the problem that the leadership hasn’t pointed out enough of the errors or that they have exhibited so little of the profitable aspects of Piper’s ministry?

On the other hand, I agree that we as older seasoned preachers should be clear with the young men about the positions of ministries of preachers that they want to follow.

One church elder said to me, “We are using Piper’s church material for the children’s ministry.” I said that is good, but do you know Piper’s position on spiritual gifts

We as seasoned pastors hopefully have learned to take the good from all teachers of the Word. But always view what they say with the Word ourselves.

While I have said, your position theologically will come out in your teaching of the Word. How you view Scripture theologically will determine your position on a number of doctrine.

But we do as Elders have a responsibility to the younger men in ministry.

Thanks for your contribution. Good questions.

Well, I am not saying don’t appreciate the good that such men do, although we may debate what is good and what isn’t.

For example, I have been listening this week to a series of messages by Alan Redpath. He is of course old news and a man who I wouldn’t agree with on a number of points. (I think he was very Keswick, for example.) He pastored Moody Church following Harry Ironside through the years in which the Graham controversy heated up. I suspect he made the wrong decisions with respect to that controversy. But I really profited from these messages (in fact, I am planning a blog about them shortly). My point is that I am not against appreciating or using men I disagree with.

Here is what I am against: I am against setting any man up as the ‘hero’ of anyone, except Jesus Christ. We have a situation in our Bible schools today where young men are being enthusiastically encouraged to follow Piper, Mahaney, et al, with NO caution or discerning word being offered. I know this is true because my sons are on the receiving end of this at BJU. It is very troubling.

It is also very troubling to hear professors teaching new versions of fundamentalist history to the youngsters. See my posts on Bauder’s appearance at International Baptist College last fall.

I do think that there is a tendency of older types (I really do feel old these days – body breaking down and all) feel defensive and put upon by the energy and aggression of the young. The young on the other hand feel alienated as you suggest by the way the older types handle it. I think this is part of the process of life. It is extremely doubtful that this can be entirely eliminated. I suggest that you store conversations like this away in your memory banks for thirty years or so and see how you get on with your next generation.

Having said that, we should try to eliminate as much as possible this generational conflict, don’t you think? The young should try to learn patience and should respect the opinions and experience of their elders. The elders should be open to the inquiries and energies of the young. I have no problem with that. I probably fail at that a good deal, but that is the ideal I am striving for. I have two preacher-boys as sons and want them to emulate my thinking as much as possible. (I think that’s also natural. And of course I don’t want them to totally emulate me!)

I am not sure I am answering all your questions! Or your comments!

So bear with me on that. I am going to do some work next week on the comments on this thread and try to summarize what we are all saying and offer my own observations. I appreciate your contribution.

Maranatha!
Don Johnson
Jer 33.3

Hi Charles,

I don’t agree with myself 100%. And remember, if you will, Charles Templeton. An apostate who formerly preached the gospel and saw souls saved under his ministry. So no, just preaching the Gospel isn’t sufficient.

We do need to be discerning and warn the flock of the dangers when the ministry of others might impact them negatively. I don’t disagree with noting and using good materials from some like Piper, but I wouldn’t recommend him to someone else without carefully explaining exactly what the errors were and showing where the pitfalls were.

I have heard of some whose copy of Desiring God is more dog-eared and bookmarked than their own Bible. There is something wrong with that approach.

Maranatha!
Don Johnson
Jer 33.3

Here goes.

1. Fundamentalists think that by speaking nice of Piper, he might move their way.
2. There is a lot of criticism about a lack of criticism of “revivalist” fundamentalism. Why not start with those IFBx who butcher the gospel, before you get to Piper and the like? So, at least Piper gets the gospel right (they would say) [Piper does believe regeneration precedes faith, that is, the new birth precedes faith].
3. Piper is “careful with the text” unlike a wad of fundamentalists and how can we admire that in the midst of the serious exegetical fallacies of fundies? So everything is a matter of degree. If we’re going to admire fundies for their music with their abundant bad exposition, than we can choose to ignore Piper’s music with his abundance of good exposition.
4. Piper lets Noel wear pants. I’m using that in a symbolic way, but he isn’t obsessed with these ridiculous shibboleths that many, many fundies have.
5. If we’re going to put up with the Van Gelderen’s Keswick teaching, then we can sort of overlook Piper’s no tongue-speaking continuationism—they’re kind of similar anyway.

I’ve reasoned it for you. I’d be interested in what Dave would shoot down here.

By the way, this all is continued good evidence for me why I’m not a fundamentalist. I go after everything that I don’t believe is scriptural, equal opportunity—fundamentalists, evangelicals, snake-handlers, all of them.

By the way, if you read my latest Jackhammer on revival, I make the point that MacArthur saw the Jesus Movement as revival and that the Jesus Movement is to the late 60s and early 70s what Driscoll and his group is to the 2000s to 2010s.