• Reuben

Exposing John Piper: Reformed Calvinist, Neo-Evangelical, False Teacher, Wolf in Sheep's Clothing

Updated: Jun 18


"John Stephen Piper (born Jan 11, 1946) is a Reformed theologian, pastor, and chancellor of Bethlehem College and Seminary in Minneapolis, MN. He taught at Bethel University for six years (1974-1980), before serving as pastor for preaching and vision of Bethlehem Baptist Church in Minneapolis for 33 years (1980-2013)." (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Piper). Piper is the founder and senior teacher of desiringGod.org, named for his book Desiring God: Meditations of a Christian Hedonist (1986), and has written a number of other books.


Beyond what is written above, John Piper is also a hedonistic neo-Reformed Calvinist and neo-evangelical. He is in fact an absolute apostate who has argued that Roman Catholic Mother Theresa (who embraced a works gospel and massive amounts of heresy and died unsaved) is a perfect example of Christian sanctification, loves ungodly worldly rap music claiming it is acceptable for worship (wow!), loves Charismatic / Pentecostal heresy (even took his people to the ungodly Toronto-Blessing), loves modern "Bible" perversions, is closely associated with the massive she-wolf in sheep’s clothing Rick Warren, claims Bruce Metzger is a godly Christian man (despite denying the inerrancy of God's Word) and so much more, some of which I will cover in some detail below.


Abundantly, these are the marks of a wolf in sheep's clothing (Matt 7:15-20). If you aren’t convinced, read more below. The command isn't to listen or watch or read him, just because he is a reformed Calvinist or part of your BFF Gospel Coalition; the command of God is to separate. Period. And then warn about him. Yes, like I am doing here.

"Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter: Fear God, and keep his commandments: for this is the whole duty of man." (Ecc 12:13).
“Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them. For they that are such serve not our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly; and by good words and fair speeches deceive the hearts of the simple.” (Rom 16:17-18)

Some men, like John MacArthur, give out somewhat of a warning about Piper, even writing books that make his beliefs look bad, but then don't do what Scripture teaches about men who believe such doctrine. They, he, still yoke with him, positively contribute to books written about him (e.g. a Festschrift, "For the Fame of God's Name: Essays in Honor of John Piper"), preach in conferences with him, even have him over for a conference. Conference is fellowship. Fellowship is working together in common ministry (2 Cor 6:14). If conference isn't ministry, then do away with conferences. So the way of life for these men is give out half hearted and vague "warnings" but retain fellowship and don't call out for clear separation. Sure, have discernment. Great. Why is practicing separation against discernment? It isn't. You can have both and you must have both, or you are just a hypocrite, since Scripture is loaded with the command to separate, and all truly saved people will separate (Rom 16:17-18; 2 Cor 6:14-18; 1 Tim 6:2-5; 2 Jn 1:9-11; Eph 5:5-11; etc). Separation isn't throwing people under the bus. It is a loving practice of loving God and loving the truth, revealed by obeying the truth. Not practicing is a form of sentimentalism that is devaluing the truth. People who don't want to separate have to call it throwing someone under the bus. Piper's false doctrine offends God and affects him and others, and portrays him as a wolf in sheep's clothing (Matt 7:15-20) and not separating is to practice something that might be more warm and fuzzy, but it isn't love and it isn't Biblical and it isn't the mark of a true convert but rather a certain mark of a counterfeit hypocrite. Not separating actually pushes someone in front of the bus in bus tragedy metaphor. Separation is gracious. God is always gracious and He still separates. Stating your opinion without separation is not more gracious, but rebellious and revealing of something wrong internally. Dreadfully wrong. Grace works toward separation. It is grace to you (gty). If only the "grace" of gty was like the grace of God.


1. Piper is the pastor of a Heretical Church.


As senior pastor, Piper leads the heavily compromised, heretical and wishy washy Bethlehem Baptist Church, which entertains its share of heresy, even paedobaptism. He embraces seriously corrupt contemporary evangelicalism (including attending the heretical Fuller Theological Seminary and Wheaton) and major heretical personalities within this movement (e.g., Harold Ockenga, Francis Schaeffer, C.S. Lewis, and Daniel Fuller) and has never renounced new evangelicalism and its heresies, which makes him a false teacher on its own.


2. Piper embraces and propagates a false gospel.


Pipers gospel is terribly confused and perverted noted in his Calvinistic heresy. John Piper writes,

“The doctrines of grace (Total depravity, Unconditional election, Limited atonement, Irresistible grace, Perseverance of the saints) are the warp and woof of the biblical gospel cherished by so many saints for centuries.” (John Piper, TULIP: The Pursuit of God’s Glory in Salvation, 2000, back cover).

Piper is very confused about salvation. The TULIP is heretical for the most part, and completely corrupts the gospel, which means he is "accursed" (Gal 1:8-9).


Pipers corrupted “you must be born again before you believe” "gospel" is the heresy that regeneration precedes faith:

". . . when we hear the gospel, we will never respond positively unless God performs the miracle of regeneration. . . . We must first experience the regenerating work of the Holy Spirit. . . . John teaches most clearly that regeneration precedes and enables faith. . . . Faith is the effect of new birth, not the cause of it. . . . New birth comes first and enables the repentance and faith of conversion. Before new birth we are dead, and dead men don’t meet conditions. Regeneration is totally unconditional. It is owing solely to the free grace of God” (Desiring God, Kindle location 1007-1067).

Piper has a seriously perverted view on the new birth, regeneration and faith, all of which certainly brings about an accursed gospel (Gal. 1:6-9), which means he is false teacher (Gal. 2:4-5), a wolf in sheep’s clothing (Matt. 7:15; Ac. 20:29-30). All the other things mentioned here, will collaborate that Biblical assessment. Pipers heretical philosophy is based entirely on human reasoning with zero Scriptural support, which goes as follows: Men are dead in sins; therefore, they can’t believe and they can’t believe unless they are regenerated. On the other hand, while the Bible does teach that the unsaved are dead in trespasses and sins (Eph. 2:1), it also says these lost men can believe and lost men are commanded to seek after God (e.g. Is. 55:6; 2 Ch. 7:14; 15:12; 19:13 Ps. 10:4; 14:2; 27:8; 53:2; 119:155; Pr. 1:28; 8:17; Ecc. 7:25; Is. 9:13; Lk. 12:31; Matt. 13:44; 45-46). Nowhere does the Bible say that men are born again before they believe. Everywhere in the NT men are commanded to repent and believe, and salvation is said to follow faith. The best proof text that Piper offers for his heretical doctrine and accursed gospel is out of the very ungodly New Revised Standard Version translation of 1 Jn. 5:1, “Everyone who believes that Jesus is the Christ has been born of God” (Desiring God, location 1055). Practically every other version reads the same as the KJV, which says: “Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God . . .” It’s a serious perversion to change “is” (esti) to “has” (echo — never found in the Greek manuscript), and obvious that Piper did some searching to find the perverted version that would best support his heresy. Such happens to be the practice of most "pastors" today in Reformed and Evangelical churches. Again, the mark of a ravening wolf. But it actually doesn’t support his heresy at all. Even if the NRSV’s translation of 1 Jn. 5:1 was legitimate, which it isn’t, it doesn’t say that regeneration precedes faith. One has to read that into the verse, and it’s also contrary to the teaching of many clear passages of Scripture, such as the following, which clearly teach that faith is not preceded by regeneration: Jn. 1:12; 3:15-18; Ac. 8:36-37; 10:43; 16:30-31; Rom. 1:16; 3:21-22; 4:5; 5:1;10:8-13; Eph. 1:13; etc. So he also doesn't know how to rightly divide the word of God (2 Tim 2:15), which further establishes he is an imposter. Piper’s Calvinist idea that faith itself is a work is heretical and not based on Scripture, which says faith is the opposite of works (Eph. 2:8-9).


Pipers repentance is also out to lunch, further revealing his false gospel, which means he is "accursed" (Gal 1:8-9).

3. Piper embraces and propagates “Christian” hedonism heresy.


By his own testimony throughout his heretical but popular book Desiring God, the central principle of John Piper’s theology is “Christian Hedonism.” Consider one example, where he quotes the apostate Augustine: “If I were to ask you why you have believed in Christ, why you have become Christians, every man will answer truly, ‘For the sake of happiness’” (Augustine, quoted at beginning of Desiring God, chapter 2). The same heresy is seen in that of other apostates such as C.S. Lewis: “It is a Christian duty, as you know, for everyone to be as happy as he can” (C.S. Lewis, cited in Desiring God, location 1615). Piper quotes C.S. Lewis frequently and is an unabashed Lewis disciple. Piper says, “C.S. Lewis . . . walked up over the horizon of my little brown path in 1964 with such blazing brightness that it is hard to overstate the impact he had on my life” (Don’t Waste Your Life, p. 19). He says that “for the next five or six years I was almost never without a Lewis book near at hand” (p. 20). He says that Lewis “helped me become live to life” (p. 19). In the Preface of Desiring God, Piper lists Lewis as one of the “heroes of this book.” Piper also calls Lewis “the man who taught me to see” (Don’t Waste Your Life, p. 18). Wow! Just. Wow. It’s not Gods Word that opened his eyes, but CS Lewis! What other evidence does one need to see the blatantly hopeless and lost estate of Piper; indeed a wolf in sheep’s clothing! Even the unBiblical and ungodly Christianity Today, which is absolutely loaded with almost every sort of heresy and evil practice imaginable, admitted that Lewis “was anything but a classic evangelical, socially or theologically. . . . he didn’t subscribe to biblical inerrancy or penal substitution. He believed in purgatory and baptismal regeneration” (“C.S. Lewis Superstar,” Christianity Today, Dec. 2005).


Consider a brief overview of Lewis’s heresies. Lewis denied and rejected the penal substitutionary blood atonement of Christ and the true gospel of Christ, believing instead in a works “salvation” of baptismal regeneration and taught that the “Christ-life” is spread to men through baptism, belief, and the eucharist (Mere Christianity, p. 61); he denied and rejected the sole Mediatorship of Christ and believed in prayers for the dead (Letters to Malcolm, p. 109) and regularly confessed his sins to a priest and was given the sacrament of last rites on July 16, 1963 (Roger Lancelyn Green and Walter Hooper, C.S. Lewis: A Biography, 1974, pp. 198, 301); he denied and rejected the existence of heaven and hell and believed in an intermediate stage faith, that of purgatory (Letters to Malcolm, pp. 110-111); he rejected and denied the literal six-day creation which is at the very heart of the gospel (e.g., the literal fall of man, Christ’s genealogy traced from Adam) and instead believed in theistic evolution (e.g. he also considered the Genesis creation account a “Hebrew folk tale” and in The Problem of Pain Lewis said “man is physically descended from animals” and claims that man “may have existed for ages in this state before it became man.”); he rejected the finality of death and taught a second chance and the possibility of repentance beyond this life, which is the theme of The Great Divorce (where he also taught that questions such as the finality of men’s destiny and purgatory cannot be understood in this present life and we should not worry about them); he denied and rejected salvation exclusively through the name of Christ and instead claimed that it would not be wrong to pray to Apollo, because to do so would be to “address Christ sub specie Apollonius” (C.S. Lewis to Chad Walsh, May 23, 1960, cited from George Sayer, Jack: A Life of C.S. Lewis, 1994, p. 378), and elsewhere claimed that followers of pagan religions can be saved without personal faith in Jesus Christ (Mere Christianity, 2001, pp. 64, 208, 209). Etc. It is very obvious that C.S. Lewis was a rank and evil heretic who held to truly damnable heresies, yet Piper freely admits that his doctrine of Christian Hedonism was derived in large part from Lewis’ writings. Instead of fleeing from ungodly apostates such as Lewis when he discovered his heresies, instead of marking and avoiding him as commanded in Rom. 16:17 and other Scriptures, Piper embraced him. And that speaks volumes as to Pipers own false profession and wolf status (Am. 3:3; Rom. 16:17-18; Pr. 9:6; 2 Cor. 6:14-18).


But Lewis is not the only ungodly apostate quoted, there are many others such as the wicked Karl Barth and the Roman Catholic Blaise Pascal and the new evangelical heretic Daniel Fuller (who denies the doctrine of biblical inspiration), and Harold Ockenga (the father of the ungodly neo-evangelicalism, and one who called for “the reexamination of theological problems such as the antiquity of man, the universality of the Flood, God’s method of creation, and others” [foreword to Harold Lindsell’s The Battle for the Bible], wherein he also rejected the doctrine of separation, all of which reveals his rejection of God’s inspired Word and the fact he was an apostate). John Piper and his Christian Hedonism doctrine are products of the new evangelical movement and there was death in that pot from its inception.


In spite of the horrible error and apostasy of these men, Piper has nothing but praise for them. Piper’s recommendation of these ungodly apostates and admission that they had a major impact on his life is a very critical matter and again likely reveals his own probable lost condition. Remember Matt. 7:15-20 and 21-23 and Jn. 2:23-25 and Judas Iscariot. Sure one could cite good statements in his book, but those are interspersed with human reasoning that is contrary to Scripture, verses taken out of context, and citations from heretics in such a manner that the heretic is recommended, whether it’s C.S. Lewis, Dietrich Bonhoeffer (who Piper unbelievably calls “God’s gift to my generation of students”), Daniel Fuller, Karl Barth, Ayn Rand, Augustine, or someone else. These are ungodly apostates, and NO one that actually loves God should be reading them.


Throughout the book Desiring God, Piper presents his teaching as innovative and new, even though he seeks to root his system in the past, at the same time well aware that it is a brand new idea. Frequently, he admits it by using the language of innovation, and saying, in so many words, “This is explosive;” “this is stunning;” “this is radical;” “this is dangerous.” He even uses the term “my vision,” and “my theology” and that is what it is, for however well intended, it is Piper’s personal vision and theology. Even the publisher calls his book a “paradigm-shattering work.” False teachers come up with new things because they do not know the Scriptures nor the God of the Scriptures.


Like all heresies, Christian Hedonism is based on proof texts rather than the whole tenure of Scripture. If Christian Hedonism were so true and so important, there would be many passages in the NT epistles that would lay it out with perfect clarity, but in fact nowhere do the writers of Scripture offer Christian Hedonism as the “essence” or “secret” of Christian living. If the reader of Pipers material accepts that Piper has proven the truth of his doctrine, then they will not properly critique the proof texts he offers. This is how false teachers handle the Bible, and it is very effective because most people are not grounded in the principles of sound interpretation, such as carefully examining the context, grammar and syntax, comparing Scripture with Scripture, and examining doctrine in the light of Scripture as a whole, rightly divided the word of truth.


4. Piper fellowships with any sort of heretic imaginable and promotes apostates.


Piper has not clearly distinguished his “hedonism” from rock and roll Christianity. In fact, his church is deeply involved with this ungodliness and worldliness. He has not reproved the emerging church’s wicked and ungodly “cultural liberalism.” Rather, he has joined hands with Mark Driscoll, the king of cultural liberalism, in a Desiring God Conference. He has not reproved Rick Warren’s many heresies, even though he is a ravening wolf. Rather, he has conducted a Desiring God Conference at Warren’s Saddleback Church. In its fruit and characteristics, John Piper’s Christian Hedonism has far more in common with the apostate Christianity of 2 Tim. 4:3-4 then with Biblical Christianity.

No issues with inviting Rick Warren in 2010 to the Desiring God national conference, and then defending Rick's book in the 2011 regional Desiring God conference. These are all marks of an apostate, and of the wolf in sheep's clothing that Christ warned of (Matt 7:15-20) and Paul warned of (Ac 20:29).


Piper's list of recommended ungodly apostates is very long and I am only privy to some of it. In 2008 Piper promoted the Roman Catholic G.K. Chesterton in an article entitled “How A Roman Catholic Anti-Calvinist Can Serve Today’s Poet-Calvinists.” Piper said, “I celebrate his birthday by recommending his book Orthodoxy.” Piper delights in Chesterton’s “celebration of poetry and paradox.”


Piper:

There are living images of sanctification in our world today which are more real, more authentic than all the people put together who think sanctification is passive. Malcolm Muggeridge takes Mother Teresa as an example: I think a person like her comes into the world, not by chance, and radiates the Christian faith at its most simple, most pure, most effective level. She takes any baby that is given to her and looks after it. She brings in dying people from the streets who might live for only a quarter of an hour. When they leave this life with a loving Christian face beside them instead of one of rejection, she would say that it is well worth it. She is diametrically opposed to the spirit of the age—abortion is a horror to her, and all the attitude of mind associated with it." (Eternity, April 1984, p. 27).
"When a young woman living in the security and comfort of middle class Western society moves to Calcutta in obedience to Jesus, that is sanctification, and it is not irrelevant. Don’t let the irrelevance of the word mislead you. The reality is immensely important.” (ibid)

John Piper said that. According to him, his Jesus is the same Jesus as Mother Theresa, a dedicated Roman Catholic nun.


This is an ungodly emerging church concept that is promoted by heretics such as Brian McLaren, who claim that doctrinal stances that appear contradictory can be held together as mutually acceptable. It is syncretism. It is Hegelian dialectics. It is unscriptural and it is completely contrary to the true Christian faith of God’s Word. There is no excuse for Piper to promote Chesterton in any sense whatsoever. Not only did Chesterton preach Rome’s ancient sacramental heresies and Rome's heretics, he accepted theistic evolution (Orthodoxy, p. 30).


It is not surprising that Wheaton and Fuller continue to become more and more apostate through the years (which is what happens to apostates and all false believers), yet Piper continues to speak fondly of them and to praise his old new evangelical teachers. Richard Mouw, president of Fuller Seminary, has even praised Rob Bell’s universalistic wicked book Love Wins. He called it a “fine book” and says, “I basically agree with his theology” (“The Orthodoxy of Rob Bell, Christian Post, Mar. 20, 2011). Mouw does not believe that God sends lost people to hell, and after an unconverted rabbi friend of his died, he “held out the hope that . . . Jesus would welcome him into the heavenly realm.” Thats a lie from the devil, but it is the same false gospel Rob Bell and CS Lewis believed. Mouw has said that those who question Mother Teresa’s salvation just because she believed a false gospel should be ashamed of themselves. I guess, then, the apostle Paul should be ashamed of himself for saying that those who preach a false gospel are accursed of God (Gal. 1:6-9).

Like I said, lost apostates, and evangelicalism is shot right through with damnable heresies, but there is John Piper, right in the midst of the hellish evil.


5. Piper endorses and loves ungodly rock and roll music.


John Piper and Bethlehem Baptist Church have capitulated completely to ungodly and worldly contemporary rock worship. His church is a rock & roll center. He has no issue with inviting the ungodly Lecrea, a rap artist, to Bethlehem Baptist Church while he was pastor. The annual Passion Conference has been heavy on "holy hip-hop" and CCM. This loose principle is enticing to world lovers.


CCM and Rock Music, is entirely of the devil. It is a major building stone of the apostate “one world church” and it is most certainly the music of lost people yet in their flesh. Contemporary worship is very sensual with an emphasis on “feeling” and experience and yielding to the power of the music itself.


6. Piper’s presumptuous and eisegetical false teachings based upon wresting and manipulating Scripture.


Some of his teachings display a frightful presumption. His interpretation is definitely not exegesis but eisegesis, which is typical for the neo-evangelical. Consider the statement, “The chief end of God is to glorify God and to enjoy himself forever.” Piper is claiming that God is a Hedonist in His own right! His first proof for this is Ps. 115:3. “But our God is in the heavens: he hath done whatsoever he hath pleased.” Piper says, “The implication of this text is that God has the right and power to do whatever makes him happy.” But the verse says nothing about God’s happiness. Piper forces that into the verse from his preconceived doctrine. It is presumption and it is wicked, changing in this instance the very character of God. Piper then says: “Think about it for a moment. If God is sovereign and can do anything he pleases, then none of his purposes can be frustrated. . . . and if none of his purposes can be frustrated then he must be the happiest of all beings.” I don’t doubt that God is a happy being, but that is neither here nor there. The passages that Piper cites as evidence for his “God is a Hedonist” doctrine prove no such thing. Nowhere in Scripture are we taught that “The chief end of God is to glorify God and to enjoy himself forever.” It might be true; it might not be true, but we cannot make a doctrine of it because it is not supported by divine Revelation, and Piper’s use of Scripture to prove it is frightfully presumptuous. By his presumptuous “interpretation” and eisegesis, he is aligning with that of a false teacher and at any rate should be marked and avoided in obedience to Scripture, not read or quoted or embraced. Burn his books!


His motto for Desiring God is “God is most glorified in us when we are most satisfied in him.” This is a blatant lie. Nowhere to be found in Scripture, where we do find precisely by what means “God is most glorified in us.” Its called obedience, a word not found commonly in Piper’s mouth when it should be, yet a word that is the foundation of a true believers relationship wth God. First obedience of the gospel which is personal salvation through repentance and faith (Rom. 16:25-26; Ac. 5:32), and then secondly, obeying all of God’s Word (Matt. 28:20; Jn. 14:15-24; 1 Jn. 2:3-5; 3:22-24; 5:2-3).


Like typical Calvinism, complicated “theology” is Piper’s theology. Piper admits that his doctrine is not simple. “I know this is perplexing at first glance so I will try to take it apart piece by piece then put it back together.” And “. . . fresh ways of looking at the world . . . do not lend themselves to simple definitions. A whole book is needed so people can begin to catch on.” and “This is a subtle thing.” Perplexing and complicated and subtle “theology” is NOT of God. There is infinite depth to the Scripture, because it is the eternal Word of God, but there is also a practical simplicity to Bible truth, because it is geared to the weak and poor of this present world, whom God has chosen rich in faith (Matt. 11:25; 1 Cor. 1:26-27; Jam. 2:5). The apostle Paul warned that it is the devil who corrupts the simplicity (the singleness, sincerity, bountifulness, liberality) that is in Christ (2 Cor. 11:3) and the end result of that is “another Jesus” and “another gospel” (2 Cor. 11:4).


Piper is a continuationist, though not in the classical Pentecostal sense, believing that supernatural gifts such as prophecy, miracles, healings, and speaking in tongues have not ceased, and should continue to be sought by churches.


Piper also


Massive amounts of other Scripture is corrupted and perverted, misused and abused by Piper. All the scripture for instance that is used to support his false Calvinist TULIP and false gospel, and "Christian" hedonism, and many other salvation and sanctification passages.


6. Piper wrests and corrupts the Word of God.


Not only does he misquote and misuse and misinterpret God’s Word, he does the same with man’s writings as well. For proof of Christian Hedonism, Piper cites Jonathan Edwards, the Westminster Confession, and the Heidelberg Catechism. He claims that the “entire Heidelberg Catechism is structured the way Christian Hedonism would structure it.” He juxtapositions his statements with quotes from Jonathan Edwards, but he takes Edwards out of context of his overall preaching just as he does the Bible. In fact, the Puritans would have sharply reproved him and his Christian rock, charismatic, emerging associations and practices. For Piper to place himself in the lineage of the old Puritans is not only wrong; it is ridiculous; his soft, hedonistic approach is definitely a new type of Protestantism. Peter Masters, who occupies the actual pastorate of that old-time Calvinist Charles Spurgeon and who does stand in the place of the old Puritans, reproved Piper and his Christian Hedonism (Peter Masters, “Christian Hedonism - Is It Right?” Sword & Trowel, 2002, No. 3).


7. Piper is loaded with psychoheresy.


Piper also throws psychoheresy, contemplative mysticism, and many other errors into the theological stew. Psychoheresy is the infiltration of the principles of humanistic psychology into churches through the Christian counseling movement. For example, he treats sin as a disease: “Affluent America has virtually invented a whole new set of diseases: obesity, arteriosclerosis, heart disease, strokes, lung cancer, venereal disease, cirrhosis of the liver, drug addiction, alcoholism, divorce, battered children, suicide, murder” (Desiring God, Kindle location 3633). Drug addiction, alcoholism, child abuse, divorce, suicide, and murder are not diseases!


The influence of psychoheresy is also evident in his exhortation that husbands are to “submit to your wife’s deep desires” (Desiring God, location 3951). The husband is to love his wife (Eph. 5) which is in accordance to truth (1 Cor. 13:6), but to submit to her deep desires is a recipe for frustration and confusion and compromise. It’s unBiblical and ungodly. Considering the extent to which psychoheresy has permeated evangelicalism and Piper’s rejection of “separatism,” I have no doubt that this theme will be evident in his other writings. For more about this see Dr. E.S. Williams’ books Christ or Therapy? and The Dark Side of Christian Counselling. Williams is a medical doctor and a member of the Metropolitan Tabernacle in London, England.


8. Piper is heavily influenced by the unscriptural and ungodly Catholic-Charismatic mysticism.


In Desiring God, Piper mentions Catholic mystic Bernard of Clairvaux and charismatic mystic Graham Kendrick and says the mystics are the most “God-besotted people in the world” (Kindle location 1815-1826). Unbelievable! How heretical! True born again believers warn against wolves in sheep’s clothing, not endorse and commend them! While Piper gives an uncertain sound in the matter of contemplative prayer (hinting, for example, in a blog dated May 22, 2010, that Roman Catholic mysticism might be wrong), the fact remains that he recommends Bernard of Clarivaux, who is a Roman Catholic “saint” and a rabid heretic. Bernard authored the book Homilies in Praise of the Virgin Mother, calling Mary the Queen of Heaven, the Star, the ladder on which sinners may climb to God, the royal road to God, the channel through whom divine life flowes to the whole creation: “Bernard played the leading role in the development of the Virgin cult, which is one of the most important manifestations of the popular piety of the twelfth century” (Norman Cantor, The Civilization of the Middle Ages, 1993, p. 341). Bernard was a fierce opponent of the Bible believers who refused to submit to the pope, persecuting them in southern France. Piper would have us believe that “Saint” Bernard was a “God-besotted person.” It is actually more likely that he was demon possessed.


Piper also recommends Graham Kendrick as a “God-besotted” mystic. Kendrick is a charismatic Christian rocker of the most radical sort and promotes the heretical “kingdom now” theology and Word faith doctrines. He is a member of the Ichthus Christian Fellowship and welcomed the so-called Toronto Blessing with its spirit slaying, hysterical laughing, barking, braying, rolling (where Piper also took his people). Graham claims that he was “baptized with the Holy Spirit” in 1971 after attending a charismatic meeting. One of Kendrick’s objectives is to break down denominational barriers and create the broadest ecumenical unity. He was the co-founder of March for Jesus, which has brought together every type of denomination and cult including Roman Catholic and Mormon. Few things are more unscriptural and spiritually dangerous today than charismatic mysticism, yet Piper recommends one of its chief proponents as a “God-besotted” individual his readers should emulate. Yes, that also makes him a wolf in sheep’s clothing (Jn. 10:1-5).


9. Piper is ecumenical, charismatic and emerging church.


He believes in the freedom to dabble in the pop culture and seems to warn more against “judgmentalism” and “legalism” then against worldliness.


Instead of reproving Billy and Franklin Graham and their ecumenical evangelism, he has praised them and speaks in forums with them. He also linked up (e.g. 2004 National Religious Broadcasters (NRB) conference in Charlotte, NC) with James Dobson, Ted Haggard, and Pat Robertson, all of whom have a close relationship with the Roman Catholic Church. Three RCC organizations were active at the this NRB conference. Dr. Ralph Colas, who wrote an eyewitness report of the meeting, concluded: “This year some speakers, like John Piper, had more Bible content than is usually presented at NRB conventions. However, not one identified the apostates, Roman Catholicism as well as those who embrace extra-biblical revelations and dreams, as being a threat to the people of God. As it is so often at such new evangelical meetings, it is not necessarily what they say--but what they fail to say that creates the confusion and further compromise. The NRB continues to be a hodgepodge of believers and unbelievers, and its broad inclusivism reveals it fits exactly in the center of the new evangelical camp.”


In 1989, Piper attended a John Wimber workshop and spoke of Wimber favorably: “He argued that Matthew 28:19-20 (‘teaching them to observe all I command you’) included the command to heal, and therefore a healing ministry is part of successful world evangelization. .He listed fourteen times in the Book of Acts where preaching of the Word was accompanied by some demonstration of the Spirit’s power followed by people coming to Christ. He said he sees the next 20 to 30 years as the time when more signs and wonders will be done than ever in history and when the secular media will be overwhelmed and have to report it every day as great revival spreads” (Piper, “Thoughts from Lausanne II in Manila,” July 21, 1989, www.desiringgod.org). In this report he said nothing by way of refuting Wimber’s heresy of miracle evangelism, but rather confirmed it favourably. Wimber is a serious heretic, one that is very likely demon possessed, mimicking the behaviour of Satan who is an angel of light and masquerading himself as a “minister of righteousness” (2 Cor. 11:12-15). You can read more about him and the Vineyard Churches here.


Piper also invited a Vineyard Church pastor to minister in a leadership training session and “he just knocked everybody off their seats.” In his support of John Wimber and Charismaticism, Piper displays a serious level of spiritual blindness and shows himself to be a dangerous guide and wolf in sheep’s clothing.


Piper has openly supported the heretical spirit-slaying phenomena. He took his staff to a “Toronto-style” meeting and admitted that “a whole bunch of my staff went down” (“John Piper: Hedonist Theologian?” Faith and Freedom magazine, Dec. 2006). Piper has said: “I simply know of too many people’s lives who have been profoundly helped for good by lying on the ground for forty-five minutes in a kind of laughter or peace” (“Question and Answer Session” — conference in Minneapolis, Jan. 31, 1996).


Perhaps the clearest evidence of Piper’s spiritual blindness and wolf-status is his close and non-critical relationship with Rick Warren, who is a case study in the emerging church and every type of heresy possibly imaginable. (That by the way applies not only to Piper but to all Warren embracers, at any time.) Piper has conducted Desiring God Conferences at Warren’s Saddleback Church and taught at conferences together with him. Warren preaches the heretical “judge not” philosophy; turns the church into a rock & roll entertainment center complete with pelvic thrusts; says God won’t ask about your doctrinal views; continually and approvingly quotes from heretics in his writings and preaching (such as RCC universalists Mother Teresa, Henri Nouwen, and Thomas Merton); promotes Catholic contemplative mysticism; likens Christian fundamentalists to Islamic terrorists; calls for unity between Baptists, Roman Catholics, Pentecostals, Anglicans, etc; promotes the exceedingly liberal Baptist World Alliance; yokes together with New Age practitioners; says that believers should work with unbelievers and pagan religionists to build the kingdom of God; presents Roman Catholic one-worlder Tony Blair with a peace prize (March 2011); does not have the first clue about sound doctrine or Biblical exegesis, and consistently manipulates, misinterprets and butchers God’s Word; etc. He doesn’t reprove Warren for his summer dance parties and nine rock & roll worship venues (including country line dancing and Island hulu) and for singing Jimi Hendrick’s drug-drenched song “Purple Haze” at a church function; just like he doesn’t reprove Driscoll for his New Years Eve champaign dance parties and dance competitions.


If there was ever a wolf in sheep’s clothing whose wolf-like characteristics are clearly exposed by God’s Word, it surely would be Rick Warren. But Piper and "evangelicals" and others have no issue with him. Thats a quick litmus test to your unsaved hypocrisy.


Conclusion.


Not sure how much evidence one needs to know that Piper is a wolf in sheep’s clothing. It makes no difference if he writes some “good” things while teaching rank heresy and ungodly teachings and holds to an accursed false gospel. Doctrine and practice isn’t placed on a balance. The foundational error contaminates everything as well. And most of which he teaches that is supposedly “good” is shallow and watered down and unscriptural. This point alone makes him a wolf in sheep’s clothing, a false brother purveying an accursed gospel (Gal. 1:6-9) to whom no one should be subjected to (Gal. 2:4-5).


What would compel someone to associate with or read the books of rank heretics and wolves in sheep’s clothing like John Piper? What is so attractive about someone who is so contrary to God's Word? His soft, more tolerant stance overall? His warnings being typically framed in a gentle and very generic manner? Not being a separatist? "Warnings" in generalities rather than specifics, which are issued more as suggestions than commandments? No exhortation to ecclesiastical and separation from the world?


All those reasons and more, for all such are equally heretical and unsaved.


"Can two walk together, except they be agreed?" (Am 3:3).

Someone that embraces Piper is void of discernment. They don’t know the Scriptures and cannot tell the difference between someone that is of the truth and someone that is of error. True saved people on the other hand “believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world.” (1 Jn 4:1).

55 views0 comments