Putting the RANK in CRANK: DefendingContending Separates From John Piper

Heretic! Heretic! Heretic!

My blogging – both in terms of writing and surfing – has been nonexistent since this past winter.  However, for some reason the Spirit moved me in my boredom a few days ago to visit the dudes at DefendingContending.  I really shouldn’t have…

On 11/5/2009 Desert Pastor published this post: Piper – The Slope to Heresy?! [Sigh]  Well… Team DefCon never has been very keen on subtlety.

[Full Disclosure: I have been shaped by very few men in my life more than I have been by John Piper.  I am a member at Bethlehem Baptist Church.  I love and admire John Piper.]

Desert Pastor (DP) says in this post that Team DefCon “can no longer endorse any teachings by Piper.”  (I would interpret this move as a ringing endorsement for Pastor Piper.)  DP claims Piper’s “downhill slide” has consisted in the following:

1) Mixing oxymorons for many years such as “Christian hedonism”
2) Openly endorsing Mark Driscoll (the vulgar, sewer-mouthed talker) with no known retractions
3) Blasphemously claiming the Lord of Glory was damned upon the cross
4) Openly endorsing the Federal Vision heresy as proclaimed by men like Douglas Wilson, and clearly indicating that Douglas Wilson is NOT preaching another or false gospel
5) Openly endorsing the New Perspective on Paul heresy as proclaimed by men like N.T. Wright, and clearly stating that N.T. Wright is also NOT preaching another or false gospel, but that the NPP is merely a “confusing gospel!

Let’s take these one at a time.

1) DP doesn’t like the term Christian hedonism.  OK.  It wasn’t my favorite phrase when I first encountered it either.  I can live without it.   Of course, I’m certain DP is aware that there is an entire system of thought lying underneath this phrase that finds its roots in the theological writings of men like Augustine, the Puritans, Jonathan Edwards and C.S. Lewis (I know, I know… another heretic).  DP doesn’t spend any time explaining why this term is an oxymoron indicative of a “downhill slide” away from orthodoxy, but hey, Team DefCon has never been very keen on rigorous thought or charity either.

Is this really an issue over which to separate?  And why has Team DefCon only begun to harp on this issue now?  Desiring God was written almost 23 years ago.  This feels like a last minute gripe that’s been less-than-thoughtfully tacked on to the real issues (2-5) that are chapping the collective DefCon hide.

(I wonder how long before the untouchable John MacArthur will be thrown under the bus to perdition with Piper?  I wonder if DP is aware of MacArthur’s front cover endorsement of Desiring God – the book in which Christian hedonism is introduced and explained?  Well, here it is: “A soul-stirring celebration of the pleasures of knowing God… A must-read for every Christian and a feast for the spiritually hungry.”  Uh-oh…  Did he say pleasures?  Celebration?  Wipe that smile off your face, Dr. MacArthur!  This is heresy we’re talkin’ ’bout, here!)

2) Yep.  Me too.  (I’ve posted on the Driscoll controversy here, here, here and here.)

3) This is a completely vacuous charge based on a silly semantic argument.   I discussed it briefly here.

4) This is really despicable stuff.  DP is basing this allegation on a 3 1/2 minute Resurgence video:

I won’t pretend here to know a lot about the Federal Vision (FV) controversy, because I don’t.  I do know that Wilson’s views on this issue are not easily packaged and labeled – for better and worse.  I would agree with Piper that every time I’ve read Wilson on his controversial views that, while I don’t agree with them, they are not capital-H-Heretical.  I’d wager my next month’s wages that no one at Team DefCon could give and accurate, intelligent and nuanced description of what Wilson actually believes regarding the FV controversy.  They just know that FV is bad and Wilson is associated with FV.  That’s all the information needed – and all the intellectual energy expended – by Team DefCon to affix the label Heretic to a professing brother in Christ (a brother in Christ with whom they would be in 99% theological agreement).

Either way (my aim here is not to enter the FV fracas), how does one come from this brief video clip to the conclusion that Piper endorses FV?  Doesn’t Piper explicitly state here that he doesn’t endorse, adhere to or embrace it?  Facts, schmacts… right, DP?

[Ugh... this actually gets worse.]

5) What?!?!  Please read DP’s comment again.  DP accuses Piper of “Openly endorsing the New Perspective on Paul (NPP).”  The very same Piper who wrote The Future of Justification: A Response to NT Wright – a critique of N.T. Wright’s work on NPP!  Click on the above link and read some of the one-star reviews, and then tell me Piper endorses NPP.

Also consider these articles at DesiringGod:

Jesus, Islam, Pharisees, and the New Perspective on Paul

Antidote to New Perspective on Paul

It seems the Team DefCon chaps reside in some sort of parallel universe where up is down and they wield the power to create realities – where none existed before – with a mere blog post.

DP is either colossally ignorant or he is a liar and a slanderer.  He unbelievably construes Piper’s unwillingness to say in this brief video clip that Wright “preaches a different gospel” (and therefore his unwillingness to proclaim Wright a capital-H-Heretic and cast him into the fires of hell) as an endorsement of NPP.  In what kind of logic-free world does that work?  John Piper is arguably the most visible and well known critic of NPP! Good grief…

This is truly rank stuff.  This is dishonest and slanderous.  This is sin.  Boys, you’re playing with hellfire.  Please stop.

—————————

For a laughably over-the-top example of the foaming-at-the-mouth, ignorant hysteria that defines Team DefCon’s rantings, check out Coram Deo’s beaut from 11/5/2009 at 9:28 PM.  (Coram was an official contributor at Team DefCon, but is no longer listed as such on the site.)