John Piper explaining his invitation to Doug Wilson...

(Tim) When John invited Doug Wilson to speak at one of his big conferences, I sent him an e-mail commending him for his courage. Like those who paid dearly for inviting Dad to speak after he publicly rebuked Bill Gothard in the pages of Eternity, John will pay for escorting Doug into the Reformed big top.

But like Doug, John has some courage and those who specialize in anti-Wilson bile should take note that, among men who are reformed pastors of national reputation, John stands with Doug. Why?

John released this video explaining his invitation. Forget the first three minutes or so. Just listen to the last few seconds and you'll get the straight dope. (And by the way, I do wish men would release a transcript of such video talks so we weren't forced to spend the time watching video to get their message.)

Comments

"straight dope"

Oh my.

Tim,

There's no link to the video showing up on my screen.

Thanks,

I hate to be cantankerous, but is there something to the notion that Piper is actually looking for some kind of street cred being associated with a minister who is actually faithful to the full covenantal system of Calvin?

Piper is not a true Calvinist. Can we say that yet? The baptists would have been tossed out of Geneva. I don't doubt Piper's love for Christ, but there is something cockeyed about the Baptist claims to Calvin as their homey. It is, frankly, bizarre.

Perhaps Mr. Wilson might give them some food for thought, along with their unbaptized children.

Um . . . what?

If Piper wants to be accepted by reformed folks, wouldn't R.C. Sproul be a less controversial choice? News flash: Piper has street cred with the reformed world. The same cockeyed logic Piper uses in embracing Calvin and Edwards is shared by the droves of reformed folks that buy Piper's books.

But throw me out of Geneva, I'm a baptist that named my third son Calvin . . . after naming son #2 after one of the baby sprinklers pictured above. (For the record, I have not "unbaptized" these or any of my children.)

>Piper is not a true Calvinist.

Piper is a Calvinist in his soteriology. And while I admire Doug Wilson greatly I think it a bit humourous to assert that Piper wants to boost himself by associating himself with Wilson. It is a pleasant rebuke to rabid folk like Pastor Duncan.

Dear Christopher,

Cantankerous is the word. I cannot help but think your comment is less about a true concern for Piper and his motives and more about getting a quick jab at Baptists and our unreformed ways.

I would like to say that the old “Johnny-come-lately” routine many Paedobaptists like to tease with no longer get under my skin, but I probably would not have bothered to respond to your comment if that were entirely true. I’m afraid you have no more a corner on Calvin than Calvin had a corner on Scripture. I will both disagree with Calvin over baptism and love and admire him as a brother in Christ. You tend to think I’d forget Baptists would have been altogether unwelcome in Geneva or that Calvin was a faithful man who knew (and knows) many many times what I ever will about Scripture. The conviction in the heart of a Baptist (or a Paedobaptist for that matter), after humbly and prayerfully approaching the Word of God, should not be broken by a desire to be in the “in” crowd of reformed circles. Instead, let a brother convince another brother by that same Word. You should consider whether or not you tempt others against their consciences with your words.

With Love,

Benjamin

>"... is there something to the notion that Piper is actually looking for some kind of street cred being associated with a minister who is actually faithful to the full covenantal system of Calvin?"

I smile trying to imagine a name for a street where dwells the "full covenantal" creature that Pastor Piper would like to have "cred" with.

Perhaps Covenantal Court or Paedo Place? How about Succession Circle?

Piper is such an upstart, trying to get invited to the garden party when everyone knows he lives in Anabaptist Alley.

>"The baptists would have been tossed out of Geneva."

So would the Presbyterians of today but for a whole different reason.

OK, I once again feel dense, but I understood everything BUT the last few seconds.

"This Biblical script called the Bible"

?

I don't know what he was talking about in the last few seconds.

Will somebody help me out?

It would make sense if I were the only one here seeing humor in calling Calvinistic baptists "unreformed" because they don't do to their infants what Rome does to theirs.

>It would make sense if I were the only one here seeing humor in calling Calvinistic baptists "unreformed" because they don't do to their infants what Rome does to theirs.

Yes and neither Muslims nor Baptists baptize their children. Makes about as much sense as the above.

I suppose if you don't know anything about either, it might.

@Adam

They've been playing with this metaphor of Calvin's that calls the world or the created order the "theater of God," in a section of the Institutes.

It clearly sparked Piper's imagination, so the name of the DG conference is "With Calvin in the Theater of God." Wilson's topic title: "The Sacred Script in the Theater of God: Calvin, The Bible, and the Western World."

Other titles follow the same pattern:

"The Secular Script in the Theater..."
"The Broken Stage in the Theater..."
"The Final Act in the Theater..."
"Jesus Christ as Denouement in the Theater..."

Classic Piper. What a goofy baptist. ;)

@ Max

Hilarious.

Calling Baptists "Reformed," and then insisting that the only difference between Baptists and Paedo's is that Baptists don't baptize their babies is like calling Madonna chaste and then insisting the only difference between Madonna and chaste women is that Madonna sleeps around a lot.

Rushdoony Ridge, a quiet street filled with homeschooling families just around the corner from Roman Road. Purchasing a residence there can be difficult however as there are infrequent vacancies and no plan for the expansion of the street.

>It would make sense if I were the only one here seeing humor in calling Calvinistic baptists "unreformed" because they don't do to their infants what Rome does to theirs.

It's hard to take "reformed" Baptists seriously at times.

>It's hard to take "reformed" Baptists seriously at times.

I can take them seriously. It is Mr. Phillips that I have trouble taking seriously.

>It's hard to take "reformed" Baptists seriously at times.

I can take them seriously. It is Mr. Phillips that I've have trouble taking seriously.

Baptist byway, a lane that is jig jagged and turns to the left and to the right leading to one dead end after another. Purchasing a residence there is easy since there are houses galore. The problem is that the roads never lead anywhere that anyone who has a destination in mind wants to go.

Men, stop it.

I love my covenantal credo-baptist brothers. There is no question in my mind they are both covenantal and reformed, although I fully understand why you deny it.

Thing is, I have the advantage of having spent many, many hours with them debating these issues, so I know what they believe in a way you don't.

Yes, yes; I know you think otherwise, but please cease and desist. I don't want this blog to devolve to a you-know-what-ing contest between men I'm equally committed to and love.

You have to grant me that, right? Pleease.

>Thing is, I have the advantage of having spent many, many hours with them debating these issues, so I know what they believe in a way you don't.

On the other hand I have the advantage of actually having been one... :)

>On the other hand I have the advantage of actually having been one... :)<

David,

Would you like to wipe the diet Coke off my computer screen?

>You have to grant me that, right? Pleease.

I owe you that and mountains besides, Pastor Bayly.

I have no intention of commenting on this post again without your leave.

>Thing is, I have the advantage of having spent many, many hours with them debating these issues, so I know what they believe in a way you don't.

Identifying Reformed paedo beliefs with the RCC does not indicate a level of understanding necessary for reasonable dialogue/debate.

Besides, I believe Mr. Phillips is not covenantal, but rather quite unapologetically dispensational in his views. It’s what you get when you try to trim the meaning of “reformed” or “Calvinist” down to a mere five points.

>besides, I believe Mr. Phillips is not covenantal...

Sorry, I wasn't referring to Mr. Phillips in my earlier comment. But I appreciate him, also.\

Now, an end to it. Seriously.

With love,

So,

To lighten things up a bit I offer the following in the very best spirit of brotherhood for my Credo brothers. With fond memories of my first 24 years on earth and with apologies to Verduin.........

I no longer smoke and I no longer chew
I don’t do them things even though you still do
I had to quit and not do them no more
Cuz of Anna the Baptist who lives right next door.

He hair is like gold and her eyes are sky blue
Her teeth are like pearls and her posture is true
When she walks by in her jeans I just melt through the floor
I’m crazy for Anna the Baptist next door.

Now I rise in the morning I wash and I shave
And I work like a dog and my money I save
For I’m eyeing a ring that I think she’ll adore
I’m proposing to Anna the Baptist next door.

Now I’m happy to say that I live like a saint
In a cute little bungalow cozy and quaint
And I have no desires to sin anymore
I got married to Anna the Baptist next door

I appreciate you too, Tim. And probably appreciated your dad before some of these kids were born...

...let alone "baptized"!

(ba-dum bum)

(c;

The issue is not a subjective, ad hominem attack. It is a clash between two systems of theology. Can we admit to that? Propositions are at odds with one another between Calvinism and Baptist understanding of the Scriptures. This seems to be so obvious it need not even be said. Baptists are great at reductionism.

I like Dr. Piper. Ironically, it was back in '87 that I read his book Desiring God that set me on the path to reformed theology. I am not some newby, by the way, in terms of reformed understanding. Not everything looks like a nail to me anymore. But, the elephant in the living room is growing rapidly, and before he starts stamping around causing mass confusion in the kingdom, it might be a good idea to get him on a leash, or out the door.

Personally, I despise the use of the term "Calvinism" and I think Calvin would role over in his pine box if he knew that he was being celebrated the way he is this year. He would say, "not I, but Christ".

Brothers,

Let's leave off with the serious arguments as Tim asked.

Mark, what anthology do you find your poetry in? That's twice in as many days that you've waxed poetic here.

Love,

David

Setting aside the business of who is Reformed and who is not, I do know that John Piper preaches the Gospel clearly and with vigor. Yes, pity he doesn't baptize babies, but that is entirely secondary if we have any sense of proportionality.

Let's get this clear - Piper is lending Wilson credibility by inviting him to this conference. Wilson may believe the Gospel himself, but he has been tireless in his defense of teachers who undermine or even deny the Gospel. In light of this it is silly to debate about the relative merits or demerits of Piper's sacramentology. The thing signified is far more important than the sign.

Jacob,

You're a gentleman and a scholar. Many thanks,

Dan Phillips: "It would make sense if I were the only one here seeing humor in calling Calvinistic baptists "unreformed" because they don't do to their infants what Rome does to theirs."

Hmmmmmm, the following story is a recently reported ecumenical development:

Nun heading Presbyterian seminary shows 'Reformed ecumenism'

By Peter Kenny

Geneva, 18 June (ENI)--The appointment of a Roman Catholic nun as dean of San Francisco Theological Seminary illustrates the truth of the saying "to be Reformed is to be ecumenical", says the general secretary of the World Alliance of Reformed Churches.

Earlier in June Elizabeth Liebert became the first Catholic sister to be named as dean of a Presbyterian seminary in the United States. San Francisco Theological Seminary is a school of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.).

The Rev. Setri Nyomi, the general secretary of the Geneva-based WARC, told Ecumenical News International, "In April this year, while on an official visit to San Francisco Theological Seminary, I was impressed by the way in which SFTS is committed to ecumenical engagement and justice."

The WARC general secretary said, "This appointment indicates how the SFTS understands the truth of the common saying 'To be Reformed is to be ecumenical'. It will continue to strengthen the formation of a new generation of church leaders and church agents to understand the need to appreciate the gifts of all women and men from the different Christian traditions."

From a blog post titled: "Catholic Nun Appointed Dean of Presbyterian Seminary"

http://merecomments.typepad.com/merecomments/2009/06/catholic-nun-appointed-dean-of-presbyterian-seminary.html

>Mark, what anthology do you find your poetry in? That's twice in as many days that you've waxed poetic here.<

"The Snake" (from the other thread) is an old Oscar Brown tune from the 60's. The silly one above is one I wrote and stuck into a discussion on Verduin's "The Reformers and Their Step Children" when the discussion got to that "My mind's made up, don't confuse me with the facts" point. :)

Yes, I wish it was not so. But has been pointed out, the far greater problem here is Mr. Wilson's theology and leadership of "federal vision."

I can't get past the fact Mr. Wilson was a co-author of "The Federal Vision"- a book that confuses or denies many key parts of Christianity- justification, imputation, the visible/invisible church distinction, eternal security, union with Christ and adds "final verdict of justification" and paedocommunion.

Whether confusing these glorious doctrines or denying them, neither is acceptable for one who would presume to teach God's people.

While he may be biblically correct on some points, and very articulate on some (charitably, I suspect that is what Mr. Piper heard), he is wrong on context- the "federal vision" theology. He supports and defends men whose errors are worse than his own.

It is only with sadness I see Mr. Wilson's influence advancing given his link with this wrong theology. I pray for his repentance, that he may see his error, the harm that it is causing, and come clean of this whole faction-

for the Honor and Glory of our God.

I think its marvelous that P&R included a Baptist author's (Nettles) book on a Baptist theologian (J.P. Boyce) in their American Reformed Biographies. Apparently they don't understand the clearly fundamental divide that makes their inclusion laughable. Do they?

B Hedrick:

Please go to founders.org/blog

Click anywhere on the pictures, then scroll down to the short biography of James P. Boyce.

Yes. Boyce is demonstrably a Baptist theologian as I asserted previously.

> I despise the use of the term "Calvinism"

I've never liked that term much either. I prefer "Reformed" since I follow Christ.

I have to avoid carelessly saying "baptist" when meaning things like "Southern Baptist Convention" - living in Nashville didn't help.

-Clint

B. Hedrick,

They clearly don't.

Out of respect for Mr. Bayly, I have posted an argument at my own site rather than try and make a point here.

In Christ,
Chris

> When she walks by in her jeans I just melt through the floor

I won't disparage the Baptists, but women in jeans is another matter entirely!

"When she walks by in her jeans I just run for the door."

Such a degrading form of attire for such beautiful creatures.

> When she walks by in her jumper I melt through the floor.

That's more *like* it.

"When she walks by in her burqa I melt through the floor."

Piper released a more in-depth, "Why Doug Wilson?" video.

Entitled, "Why so many presbyterian pastors?", this video is really a response to this: "Doug Wilson! Paedocommunion! Post-millenial! Reconstructionist? Federal Vision! Essentials, Piper!"

Sorry, didn't take the time to transcribe it, but there's less fluff than the last one:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YR-a5gSscB0&feature=related

Here's something else that is worthwhile along the same lines.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TLy88cB3gCQ&feature=related

Doug Wilson is a godly man...maybe Pipe will learn something!

I am a Presbyterian ( PCUSA ) not sure what I think of these folks claiming to be Reformed Baptists.

First the discrepancy not only lies in our method of Baptism but it lies in what we view as far as the Eucharist( Communion- The Lords Supper). We believe that Christ is spiritually in the bread in the wine and view that as a sacrament as we view Baptism. We dont not believe its merely and oridinance and memorial.

Other points of doctrine and our liturgy in a traditional Presbyterian service is different.

My thought are this, if you are A Presbyterian Church desiring to become more like Baptist..become one!!

If you are a Baptist minister and or church and wanting to become Reformed or Presbyterian..become one!

Add new comment