12
Jul

much ado about nothing

   Posted by: Brendt   in theological rants

In his book, When I Don’t Desire God, Dr John Piper quotes Dallas Willard regarding Scripture memorization:

Bible memorization is absolutely fundamental to spiritual formation. If I had to choose between all the disciplines of the spiritual life, I would choose Bible memorization, because it is a fundamental way of filling our mind with what it needs. This book of the law shall not depart out of your mouth. That’s where you need it! How does it get in your mouth? Memorization.

OK, so far I’d think that everyone who claimed to be a serious Christian would be in agreement.

Whoa! Wait a second. You’re over-generalizing, Brendt.

Over on Emergent No*, the leading blog in extending its middle finger to Galatians 6:1, this quote is noted and then followed by nearly 1500 words explaining how Willard is just shy of being the anti-Christ largely because he likes or is liked by people of dubious theology. The conclusion of this entry is that Piper has used poor judgment and a lack of discernment, because the less-informed will think that one brief quotation is a wholesale endorsement by Piper of everything that Willard has ever said or written.

This is wrong in so many ways.

First, it’s a flat-out denial that God is capable of using Willard for anything good. I covered the ludicrous nature of such thinking here. Frankly, I’m getting more than a little weary of people who claim to serve an impotent God.

Second, there’s the whole “baby with the bathwater / everything is black and white / there is no middle ground” mentality. Talked about that one here.

Third, and possibly most dangerous, is the inference that must be drawn. If Piper’s citation of Willard may confuse some into thinking that Willard is 100% OK, the only way that this idea can be reached is if the reader takes every word from the pen of Piper as being perfect. Luke praised the Bereans for examining Scripture to check what Paul was saying. I’m sure that Dr Piper would have the same attitude, but apparently there are those who hold him to an even higher standard than the guy who wrote about 2/3 of the New Testament.

HT to iMonk for pointing this out and to Ochuk for an even more in-depth analysis.

* UPDATE: The blog has disappeared, but one of its contributors was kind enough to provide me with an archived link.

This entry was posted on Wednesday, July 12th, 2006 at 1:38 am and is filed under theological rants. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

6 comments so far

noisedoctor
 1 

“I?m sure that Dr Piper would have the same attitude…”

Dr. Piper has said exactly that during his radio preaching program–that we need to take his words and test them against the Bible and not just accept them blindly [my paraphrase of his words.]

July 12th, 2006 at 7:15 am
 2 

Well said. May I suggest a fourth? It’s sort of a counterpart to your first “wrong way.” It’s this: the patronizing attitude towards those supposedly “less informed,” we poor unwashed, ignorant sheep who need their excellencies to protect us. Utterly ridiculous. Such unapologetic paternalism might be understandable in an age (a) when very few people were literate and (b) when information-gathering required weeks and months instead of minutes and hours. Along with the ever-expanding Index Librorum Prohibitorum it would be helpful to have a Discerned! imprimatur for pastors and authors that have measured up. That would save all us morons a lot of time.

August 9th, 2006 at 10:40 am
Brendt
 3 

Also well said. (And your original essay — which I linked to yesterday — was brilliant)

I think I missed this one because patronization from that crowd is so over-obvious. Forest for the trees, and all that.

August 9th, 2006 at 11:06 am
Brendt
 4 

It occurs to me that the imprimatur (for the other ignoramuses out there, I had to look it up too) would need constant revision. I would imagine that a year ago, Piper would have been approved. But between quoting Willard and supping with Driscoll, there’s no way he’d be approved now.

August 9th, 2006 at 11:20 am
 5 

Thanks, Brendt. As for revision, this is where the Lords of Discernment could help themselves by adopting the Catholic model. The censor takes the first pass with the author to get to the point where she can stamp the work Nihil obstat (”nothing stands in the way”). The bishop then gives the final clear signal for the work to be printed, Imprimatur (”let it be printed”). (I’m hearing Captain Picard in my head at the moment…I don’t know why.)

It should be pointed out that Imprimatur does not mean the authorities approve of the author’s work. They can be revoked. So, yes, under the right system, Piper could be struck off the guest list.

What the Catholics have going for them that the Lords of Discernment do not, however, is the admission that this is all man-made authority designed to regulate religious teaching. The LoDs do not recognize such ecclesiastical structures. Instead it’s just them, their KJV and the Holy Ghost. Much easier to make a very lengthy Index Librorum Prohibitorum (guilt by association is a real time-saver!). One’s threshold for odium theologicum can be set very low indeed.

August 9th, 2006 at 12:43 pm
Brendt
 6 

Are you implying that the Lords of Discernment actually believe in the Holy Ghost? ;-)

You hear Captain Picard. I hear Petra’s “Witch Hunt“.

August 9th, 2006 at 1:16 pm

2 Trackbacks/Pings

  1. Musings from Two-Sheds Gomer » Blog Archive » guilty by association    Aug 21 2006 / 4pm:

    [...] Phil doesn’t cite the watcher who was guilty of ridiculous GBA charges or her first victim, but a lot of it smells like the Slice of Piper incident (and even if this isn’t the case, it’s just as applicable). [...]

  2. Musings from Two-Sheds Gomer » Blog Archive » must be a big bus    Mar 01 2008 / 11pm:

    [...] that same post, Camp then bolsters his “point” with an article written by Carla “Slice of Piper” Rolfe. Tags: Steve Camp, Mark Driscoll, John Piper, D.A. Carson, C.J. Mahaney, Mark Dever [...]

Leave a reply

Name (*)
Mail (will not be published) (*)
URI
Comment