TWW Jumps Into the Fire By Discussing Barnabas Piper Because He Keeps Talking

“No man has a good enough memory to be a successful liar”  ― Abraham Lincoln link

Secrets and friends or friends of Barnabas Piper

In the past three days, we have received several emails from either friends of Barnabas Piper or friends of friends of Barnabas Piper. We have been told that continuing to discuss this matter will hurt our ministry, ruin the goodwill that we have built up and even call into question our integrity. We were asked to take the post down and given some purported details about his wife that casts her in a very, very bad light. Barnabas was portrayed as the innocent one while she was the problem.

Is this possible? Of course it is. Is it the whole case, the Deebs are not so sure. Yes, we removed the tweets by Barbara Roberts discussing the potential for abuse. We agreed that those were in poor taste, given what little any of us know and we are sorry about that.

However, none of the folks who communicated with us lived in the same community as he did and none could be considered his "best friend." Yet, although someone was his best friend, difficult secrets can still be hidden.

I learned this lesson in a hard way. When I lived in Dallas, my husband and I ran a Bible study that went on for about 7 years. We were all in the same church and we were all friends. Towards the end of our time in Dallas, I was shocked when I learned a couple of stories of those within out group.

One woman was a woman ministry leader. Her husband was quite involved with various church activities. She contracted a serious cancer that had spread and was placed on chemotherapy. I went to visit her when she came home and noticed bruising on her arms when she reached for something. I asked if she had some bleeding problems due the the chemo. She started to cry and said her husband had been physically abusing her for a long time. How could I have missed it? I felt awful and helped her to get the assistance that she needed.

Our blog is different than others

We are here to help the abused while warning others of church abuse and churchianity. By that I mean the truth and not the cover up or public face of churches, pastors, and Christian writers. We take no money for anything we do, including Amazon kickbacks, etc. There is nothing wrong with that but we want people to know that we are not in this for monetary reasons.

Because we actively discuss the failures of the *it* churches and affiliated groups, we are often blocked or criticized. We are not in this for our own self aggrandizement. We look at stories that we find of interest to us because they reveal the underbelly of the church. We slap around the status quo and don't give a hoot what *so and so* celebrity pastor boss thinks of us. We serve the Truth, even when it is awkward because we believe that cover ups bring dishonor to the name of Christ.

We are also here to help those who are hurting. I think we have hit a need because if the hurting did not respond to us, this blog would eventually fold because we are here to try to help, even when overwhelmed. We are concerned more about what the Marie Notcheva's of the world think about us as opposed to what The Gospel Coalition Council.(They blocked us years ago.) She is far more interesting to the two of us than another lecture on being a worm in the eyes of God.

We try to be forthright and give good information so that people can form their own opinions and conclusions. We think our readers are intelligent and they can figure things out. We do not expect people to agree with us all the time. We expect people, instead, to get smart and insist on integrity in the church universal. That is why we provide so many links, etc.I f this blog didn't exist, the two of us would probably be serving in soup kitchens, etc. Neither one of us into the glitz.

That is why we can write about Barnabas Piper, son of the worshipped John Piper ,and not fear what anyone thinks of us. If we were worried about what certain people think of us, we would not be writing this blog. 

Barnabas Piper once again advertises/discusses his divorce.

Deb called me early this morning, asking if I had heard the latest interview with Piper about his divorce. My response: "What, you mean he is still talking to the public? Good night!" The Bad Christian Podcast featured Barnabas Piper and His Recent DivorceOnce the audio starts playing, fast forward to around the 28 minute mark and begin to listen to Piper discuss his divorce. Several people contacted us today about this podcast because it gives some further insight into what went on.

Warning: The guys who run this podcast really like to use strong language. They even believe that cussing is not a sin. They were interviewed about their penchant for imprecations here.

People who want to know what happened are voyeuristic.

I disagree. Piper comes from the ultimate Christian home as the son of John Piper who holds rigid views on gender roles, divorce, remarriage (only after a former spouse dies), men as leaders, etc. Barely a day goes by on Christian social media that John Piper isn't venerated in some fashion.  (PS, if one more self assured male informs me that he is a Christian hedonist thinking he is being deep, I am going to whop him upside the head.) Barnabas writes Christian books and works for LifeWay. He is in the *business* 

If Barnabas was Barnie Smith, son of a small parish pastor, I doubt anyone would be discussing this. Barnabas gets perks in the Christian community by being John's boy and he must learn to accept that his difficulties will be discussed. He has other siblings who are not in Christian industry. If one of them divorced, it would not be well known.

Barnabas says he wants us to accept that his post about his divorce is honest. Shouldn't we ask questions? Cognitive dissonance is apparent.

Why should I believe what he says ? John Piper is a Calvinist and he loves to talk about sin. I am not a Calvinist but I happen to know Christian people, from the best of homes, can be sinners and present things that make them look good. There was a bit of cognitive dissonance in this interview. Once again, Piper discussed his soon to be released book The Curious Christian: How Discovering Wonder Enriches Every Part of Life.

Without curiosity a Christian’s life is incomplete. His relationship with God is incomplete. His connections to others are incomplete. He doesn’t know how to interact with the world around him—politics, media, art, entertainment, science, and so much more simply fly past or overwhelm him. Without curiosity he can never discover deep things, deep connections God tucked below the banal surface of life.
 
Author Barnabas Piper explores what curiosity is, and how it affects relationships. What if people so sought to learn about each other that the most unlikely people became advocates and friends?

In the podcast he said we need to ask questions about what is going on around us. He even reiterates this need to ask lots of question in one of the ads for his book. So, I guess asking questions about lots of things is good unless it deals with what he says about his personal life. 

Barnabas admits he lied 6 years ago which led to his wife turning away from him.

In the podcast, it appears the Piper is now blaming the beginning of the end of his divorce on something he did 6 years ago. This is very important to the narrative and I wonder how many of the friends of friends were aware of this. I said this in the previous post.

Barnabas Piper admits he has a history of lying, which is why people might question his account.

In this interview, he was asked if he had been arrested or was involved in any pregnancies as a teen.

 I was a pretty good kid growing up, at least in terms of illegal activity and the like. The big things I got in trouble for were mainly being argumentative–with everyone–and lying. I got myself in some sticky spots both ways. My biggest struggles came after I moved out of the house when the little lies of childhood stopped being so little.

Six years ago Barnabas was fired because he was dumb and dishonest. He didn't say specifically what he did but said that this was the time that his wife began turning away from him. He claims that he got better and he aimed to be whole.

Folks, he has admitted to a chronic habit of lying which started in childhood and carried it over into adulthood when there were children in the picture. In other words, he lied for a long time. I truly hope he has overcome this habit. It is very difficult. Here is an interesting article on compulsive lying.

He claims his wife was not spiteful or vengeful; merely done.

Apparently they both live in Nashville and share joint custody of their two children.

Once again, he claims that his wife was unhappy and that her heart was not in the marriage. He claimed he was the one who wanted to make it work. Then he said a curious thing. I am not quoting him exactly. He seemed to say that if one is dead set in making the marriage work, that person may be prone to overlook more serious things going on since the main goal was to stay married.

Pete Wilson should have confessed his marriage was in trouble but Piper is not required to do so.

He believes that Pete Wilson, as a church leader, should have told his church that he was resigning and that he had serious marriage problems since he is accountable to his church. Piper claims that the same rule does not apply to him because he is not a pastor and does not intend to work in a church.

I disagree with Piper because I don't like parsing Scripture so finely. One of his books, The Pastor's Kid: Finding Your Own Faith and Identity had a forward written by his Dad. That, in itself, is an endorsement by a church leaders. James 3:1:

Not many of you should become teachers, my fellow believers, because you know that we who teach will be judged more strictly.  NIV Bible Gateway

Here is a link to books Piper as written. When one writes books, blogs, speaks at conferences, or does a podcast, one is teaching others in some fashion. I know people love to put things into the context of the local church with roles defined within the church. I take a far broader view of that verse. When we are writing this blog and providing information, we are, in some respects, teaching. We get criticized behind the scenes and we consider those words seriously. We are quite concerned that we will mislead people and that would weigh on our consciences. When I write, I often think about what God might say about what I have written.

Look at this one comment on Amazon. Does this sound like she views him as a teacher? 

Every Christian needs to read this book. Every non-Christian needs to read this book. Every person on this planet needs to read this book. And I thank God that He inspired Barnabas Piper to write this book.

…I found Barnabas to be refreshing and very wise. If reading a book by his father, John Piper, is like drinking from a fire hose, then a book by Barnabas is like drinking from a water fountain with really, really good water pressure.

He addresses the verse that states "You believe? Good for you! Even the demons believe and they shudder!" If you think about it, the demons probably understand far more about God and His Word more than any of us do.

A few final thoughts

1. If you are teaching the public with your Christian writings, then you are a teacher.

2. If you crave public attention, you will get it but you cannot say what should be seen or asked and not seen or asked.

3. Piper admits he has struggled with lying. He must bear the consequences of discussing this in public. It causes me to question his account of his marriage.

4. After pondering this over the weekend, I do believe that Piper's confessions are worthy of discussion. 

5. He is a young man. It will be interesting if he follows his father's proscriptions on remarriage.

6. I am so sorry that his family split up. They join the many other failed marriages in the evangelical church. I hope that this will further the discussions on the issues of marriage, divorce and remarriage. I do wonder if John Piper might view things differently now that it involves his son. 

6. I bet there are some people really irritated that I wrote this post. I truly felt it was worth the effort.

We would be delighted to interview Lesley Piper if she is interested.

PS: Unless we have really screwed up and provided erroneous information or someone is dying, we will not take down this post.


Comments

TWW Jumps Into the Fire By Discussing Barnabas Piper Because He Keeps Talking — 429 Comments

  1. oh my …..
    In the podcast, he sounds so YOUNG, like early twenties or younger, but he isn’t of course

    and I read the link about his lies …. very sad

    then I came to this strange portion: “BP: I thought I was close to God because I knew all the answers. I could answer every question small group leaders or youth pastors threw at me about relationship with God. But I had fooled myself into thinking that was the same as relationship with Jesus. I still struggle with this to a degree. The difference is that now I have a relationship with Christ, so those hollow or dry aspects of knowing God are easier to spot and repair or repent of.”

    all I could think of was ‘does he see Christ as God?’ because the way this is worded doesn’t make that clear

    I think he needs to stop the PUBLIC speaking about his divorce …. he obviously needs to talk, but that can be done among private friends who know him and care about him

    The PUBLIC ???? not good …. does he want some kind of public response? good or bad? …. has he lived his life in the PK limelight so much that his own understanding of what should be kept private among close friends and family has been warped???

    questions, yes, but it is a tragedy and his vulnerability in public is painful to watch …. he needs to have some dignity and self-worth guidelines so that he doesn’t ‘put it all out there’ publicly, at least for the sake of his ex-wife and their children’s privacy which he should want to guard

    immature? I think so …. I’ve seen enough of it to recognize it 🙂

  2. Interesting to ask if writing is teaching. It seems he says no?

    I do respect that for the most part he doesn’t come off like Tullian striking at his wife. He just seems to have thought she would stay regardless. That lie of six years ago could not have been merely dumb and harmless if he lost his job and ultimately his wife over it.

    But if you start telling everyone about your divorce in blog posts and podcasts people are going to pay attention, evaluate, etc. that’s not voyurism, that’s curiosity about what is missing from the things being shared. Curiosity is natural, as he himself seems to understand in other contexts.

  3. I will listen to the podcast later tonight, when time permits. Thank you for the update. I applaud your firm stand on keeping your posts up and only removing parts that you have reconsidered as unwise. As long as BP keeps talking about the subject, others will, too.

    I have found it helpful that you so often say that when a person makes his or her living telling other people how to live, and guaranteeing success if all the hoops are jumped through, then it’s quite reasonable to discuss any associated issues. I come from an entrenched background of being shushed. Don’t gossip. That’s slander. We mustn’t question the authorities God has put over us. It reaffirms to me that asking questions is just fine. Barnabas agrees. Sometimes.

  4. Christiane wrote:

    : “BP: … now I have a relationship with Christ, so those hollow or dry aspects of knowing God are easier to spot and repair or repent of.”

    What a strange thing to say! He’s repenting ‘dry’ or hollow aspects of knowing God? Why not repent of lying instead? I think God would appreciate that more.

    Also, he should probably stop talking about this stuff now, but if he’s promoting a book i guess that’s doubtful..

  5. I agree that he’s inviting scrutiny to some extent by talking about his divorce publicly (and in conjunction with his new book. Don’t even get me started on the trend of “instant comeback/let me explain my failure that happened five minutes ago” books. Does every setback needs to commodified? ). HOWEVER…I have to be honest- I am not seeing the smoking gun that warrants the insinuations of potential abuse being floated. It appears that his father’s troubling views on marriage roles and divorce are being projected onto him, which seems not entirely fair. Maybe he shares his father’s views, but I would not assume that he does.

  6. He does seem to keep talking about this issue. Is it me or is it that these people want to be the center of attention why they are complaining that people are talking about what they want private, but they are not keeping it private.

  7. brian wrote:

    Is it me or is it that these people want to be the center of attention why they are complaining that people are talking about what they want private, but they are not keeping it private.

    … the drive to be the center of attention AND control the narrative. In other words, everyone else is audience. Only.

  8. I think it deserves mention that while this is all seems so hot and fresh for the rest of us, for him it kind of isn’t. It’s finalized. The custody is figured out and the gavel has sounded. That doesn’t happen overnight. To him the process is over, and his new life is beginning. For us observers, it’s like the papers were served this weekend, cuz that’s when we found out about it.
    I also wonder if there’d be just as much wild speculation if word of his divorce leaked out and he’d said nothing. I suspect there would be. It seems like it doesn’t take much evidence to conjure up all sort of theories of how lousy of a person he must be. If he says anything, that’s a sign of him being a bad person. If he says nothing, I bet there’d be comparisons to the silence of Mahaney. So I feel bad for him, cuz whatever the facts are, he’s screwed either way, if for no other reason than his last name is Piper.

  9. Joe Reed wrote:

    So I feel bad for him, cuz whatever the facts are, he’s screwed either way, if for no other reason than his last name is Piper.

    Poor pitiful Barnabas Piper according to Joe Reed.

  10. @ mot:
    Yes, poor dude.

    From the podcast linked, BP wondered about his dad’s followers, “…because followers are always crazier than their leaders.”

    Really? Got that, followers?

  11. JYJames wrote:

    @ mot:
    Yes, poor dude.

    From the podcast linked, BP wondered about his dad’s followers, “…because followers are always crazier than their leaders.”

    Really? Got that, followers?

    Joe is definitely one of BP’s buddies.

  12. “He believes that Pete Wilson, as a church leader, should have told his church that he was resigning and that he had serious marriage problems since he is accountable to his church. Piper claims that the same rule does not apply to him because he is not a pastor and does not intend to work in a church.”

    Barnabas Piper is indeed in “ministry”! He is one of the biggest evangelists for New Calvinism out there; he is a prominent teacher in the reformed movement; he is called upon to develop leaders. In reformed ranks, he is known as an “influencer.” He has disciples following him (TWW has heard from some of them). Yep, he’s in ministry and is subject to the same scrutiny and accountability as any church leader. As a Christian teacher, he is scheduled to speak in a couple of weeks at “The Parent’s Summit.” It’s a church-sponsored conference “to change the way you look at parenting and marriage”; should he be doing that right now? http://parentssummit.com/

  13. Joe Reed wrote:

    cuz whatever the facts are, he’s screwed either way, if for no other reason than his last name is Piper.

    Actually, the dad’s name – Piper – probably served BP well to get hired even after he lied and was subsequently fired – by a Christian ministry, no less.

    And, it’s a gift that keeps on giving, now that he is still publishing Christian words of wisdom to a crowd that does not believe in divorce – even after his own divorce. Lucrative.

  14. Joe Reed wrote:

    it doesn’t take much evidence to conjure up all sort of theories of how lousy of a person he must be

    My chief theory was ‘that guy rambles’ and my evidence was his rambling article.

    And now ‘wonder what that guy lied about that lost him a job and a wife (six years later) and my evidence is his podcast where he told us that that happened.

    Wild. Speculation.

  15. Max wrote:

    “He believes that Pete Wilson, as a church leader, should have told his church that he was resigning and that he had serious marriage problems since he is accountable to his church. Piper claims that the same rule does not apply to him because he is not a pastor and does not intend to work in a church.”

    Barnabas Piper is indeed in “ministry”! He is one of the biggest evangelists for New Calvinism out there; he is a prominent teacher in the reformed movement; he is called upon to develop leaders. In reformed ranks, he is known as an “influencer.” He has disciples following him (TWW has heard from some of them). Yep, he’s in ministry and is subject to the same scrutiny and accountability as any church leader. As a Christian teacher, he is scheduled to speak in a couple of weeks at “The Parent’s Summit.” It’s a church-sponsored conference “to change the way you look at parenting and marriage”; should he be doing that right now? http://parentssummit.com/

    Max: BP is playing the hypocrite quite well. For better or worse he is divorced.

  16. Max wrote:

    Barnabas Piper is indeed in “ministry”! He is one of the biggest evangelists for New Calvinism out there; he is a prominent teacher in the reformed movement; he is called upon to develop leaders. In reformed ranks, he is known as an “influencer.” He has disciples following him (TWW has heard from some of them). Yep, he’s in ministry and is subject to the same scrutiny and accountability as any church leader

    What would happen if a well known evangelical woman such as Priscilla Shirer, Mary Kassian, or Beth Moore got a divorce? Would she still be booking speaking engagements, retreats, and book deals?

  17. Nancy2 wrote:

    Would she still be booking speaking engagements, retreats, and book deals?

    And, as an “expert on marriage”?

  18. Lea wrote:

    And now ‘wonder what that guy lied about that lost him a job and a wife (six years later) and my evidence is his podcast where he told us that that happened.

    He did say that that was the turning point for his wife. How serious were the lie(s)?

  19. JYJames wrote:

    Nancy2 wrote:

    Would she still be booking speaking engagements, retreats, and book deals?

    And, as an “expert on marriage”?

    What is an “expert” on marriage? What are the qualifications?

  20. Nancy2 wrote:

    What would happen if a well known evangelical woman such as Priscilla Shirer, Mary Kassian, or Beth Moore got a divorce? Would she still be booking speaking engagements, retreats, and book deals?

    Nope! No covering . . .

  21. we are here to try to help, even when overwhelmed. We are concerned more about what the Marie Notcheva’s of the world think about us as opposed to what The Gospel Coalition Council.(They blocked us years ago.) She is far more interesting to the two of us than another lecture on being a worm in the eyes of God.

    Thank you!! 🙂

    Personally, I think Barnabas should just put a sock in it already, because he’s just making himself look foolish and undoubtedly just making his own, ex-wife’s, and children’s lives more difficult.

    Speaking from experience, if Heritage Bible Chapel (Tim Cochrell in particular) hadn’t stirred up strife and talked and had secret elders meetings and driven the wedge between me and my ex ever deeper, things would have been MUCH more civil – and less tense for our kids. If he’s “in ministry”, he should have a bit more sense.

  22. “The Bad Christian Podcast featured Barnabas Piper and His Recent Divorce.”

    Good Lord! What a terrible forum to discuss his divorce! I suppose “The Bad Christians” have a huge following of New Calvinists and is a good place to spread his side of the story across cyberspace, but this just adds weird to weird. If any of BP’s counselors are reading this, you might advise him to steer clear of such media.

    Speaking of Bad Christians, I’ve been concerned for some time that New Calvinism will lead to antinomianism. Dee warns that “The guys who run this podcast really like to use strong language. They even believe that cussing is not a sin.” They must have really loved Driscoll in his heyday! “Let no filthy talk be heard from your mouths” must not be in their daily devotions.

  23. JYJames wrote:

    Nancy2 wrote:
    How serious were the lie(s)?
    Lose job, marriage ended…
    Serious.

    Sounds like. But not serious to be an immediate marriage ender? IDK. I’m curious what he said specifically, but not curious enough to listen 🙂

  24. Max wrote:

    “The Bad Christian Podcast featured Barnabas Piper and His Recent Divorce.”

    When a marriage dies – especially a Christian one – grief should follow, not interviews with Bad Christians.

  25. Joe Reed wrote:

    o I feel bad for him, cuz whatever the facts are, he’s screwed either way, if for no other reason than his last name is Piper.

    I disagree. Because his last name is Piper, the world is his oyster if he sticks to the Calvinists set.

  26. Edward wrote:

    I am not seeing the smoking gun that warrants the insinuations of potential abuse being floated.

    TWW is certainly not floating that. We apologized for featuring those tweets.

  27. Max wrote:

    Max wrote:

    “The Bad Christian Podcast featured Barnabas Piper and His Recent Divorce.”

    When a marriage dies – especially a Christian one – grief should follow, not interviews with Bad Christians.

    Amen. What has Christianity come to?

    http://badchristianmedia.com/about/

    Because of our careers in Music and ministry we have spent the last twelve years in bars, churches, tour buses, counseling sessions, wild parties, prayer circles, and circles of people doing drugs. It’s given us a perspective that’s too interesting to keep to ourselves, so we write about it on this Blog, and talk about it on this Podcast. We also have a Store with great music, books and clothing.

    BadChristian is a thriving community that focuses on interacting with culture from an alternative Christian point of view. We do this by being transparent, entertaining, honest, and artistic. The BadChristian community has grown rapidly because of partnerships with independent artists, podcasters, and writers, who by fueling the BadChristian movement, are able to build and sustain their careers.

    With more resources we can develop more real content like articles, books, web projects, counseling programs, speaking, and who knows, maybe even TV shows and movies. We want to innovate new ways for the church to operate and exist.

    Our aim is to create, to interact with, and change the culture that we live in. We want everything we do to be free and available to everyone. For this to be possible, we ask you pay what you want or what you think it our stuff is worth. Essentially, we ask you to join us.

  28. Marie O’Toole wrote:

    Personally, I think Barnabas should just put a sock in it already, because he’s just making himself look foolish and undoubtedly just making his own, ex-wife’s, and children’s lives more difficult.

    He has reminded us that he is only 33 years old. Unfortunately, a LOT of New Calvinist leaders are in their 20s-30s … the youth group is darn near running the Southern Baptist Convention right now!

  29. dee wrote:

    I disagree. Because his last name is Piper, the world is his oyster if he sticks to the Calvinists set.

    That kind of makes my point. Who cares if the world is his oyster or why? He didn’t pick his family. Besides, what difference does it make regarding the unknown truth of the matter at hand?
    The hostility toward John is clearly being transferred to Barnabas, and so much criticism is not even trying to hide that.
    $20 says if this was Pastor Wade’s son (and I like him, and don’t know if he has a son), this whole thread would sound different.

  30. Deb wrote:

    Essentially, we ask you to join us.

    Essentially the model of multiple mainstream or traditional churches where the plebs pay their dues for the leader boys to have all of the fun?

    – Not so “alternative” after all?

  31. The irony of his book being about curiosity while his supporters are trying to shut all inquiry down. Smh

  32. Deb wrote:

    What has Christianity come to?

    This is not Christianity. No matter how you spin being “culturally relevant”, such behavior does not approach the Christlikeness all believers are called to. Labeling yourself a “Christian”, even a bad one, does not make it so. When the dust finally settles from the New Calvinist movement, one of the greatest mission fields of lost souls on planet earth will be among the disillusioned followers of the new reformation.

    Speaking of bad Christians, I just had a vision of SBC seminarians sitting in their dorm rooms tonight listening to “The Bad Christian Podcast.” Yep, what has Christianity come to?

  33. Joe Reed wrote:

    $20 says if this was Pastor Wade’s son (and I like him, and don’t know if he has a son), this whole thread would sound different.

    You do not know us very well here at TWW, do you Joe? Barnabas has to appreciate your stirring the pot here.

  34. dee wrote:

    TWW is certainly not floating that. We apologized for featuring those tweets.

    I really respect that. I’ve seen so many people, even (especially?) those I more closely align with theologically, double down in a case like that and refuse to admit any fault, and it makes me mad.

  35. Max wrote:

    He has reminded us that he is only 33 years old. Unfortunately, a LOT of New Calvinist leaders are in their 20s-30s … the youth group is darn near running the Southern Baptist Convention right now!

    And they are destroying the SBC IMO.

  36. mot wrote:

    Barnabas has to appreciate your stirring the pot here.

    Oh I’m sure he’s gleeful beyond belief to have such a clumsy ox as me polishing his boots! 🙂

    Maybe all the speculation is true, I don’t know. I’ve never met him, and I think he almost certainly carries a fair amount of blame, but I don’t know and neither do you.

  37. Max wrote:

    , aLOT of New Calvinist leaders are in their 20s-30s … the youth group is darn near running the Southern Baptist Convention right now!

    I’m not SBC, and I’m Calvinist, not Neo. I totally agree with you here. Youth is high on energy, low on wisdom, and in power often makes massive and costly errors. I have a friend who only reads “dead guys” cuz he doesn’t trust anyone who doesn’t “finish well,” and I think that’s probably pretty wise.

  38. Joe Reed wrote:

    Maybe all the speculation is true, I don’t know. I’ve never met him, and I think he almost certainly carries a fair amount of blame, but I don’t know and neither do you.

    Oh, my friend life is full of speculation. You say he almost certainly carries a fair amount of blame–how do you know that?

  39. mot wrote:

    Joe Reed wrote:
    You say he almost certainly carries a fair amount of blame–how do you know that?

    As the old saw says, “it takes two to tango.” There are exceptions, (Haggai, for instance. Ezekiel 16, for another) but old proverbs exist because they’re generally true. So I’m guessing he was part of the dance, but I didn’t watch it, so can’t say how it went.

  40. Joe Reed wrote:

    As the old saw says, “it takes two to tango.” There are exceptions, (Haggai, for instance. Ezekiel 16, for another) but old proverbs exist because they’re generally true. So I’m guessing he was part of the dance, but I didn’t watch it, so can’t say how it went.

    I am afraid you are missing the point. Why is BP airing his dirty laundry to the world?

  41. If they do not like being the heat, they need to get out of the frying pan. I actually think it is quite amusing when the Christian Celebrities use the media to their benefit, and then scream up a storm when it turns on them… Mark Driscoll comes to mind…

    As the OP points out, we would not have heard of him if he did not use the media, just like we do not know much about his siblings..

  42. Max wrote:

    As a Christian teacher, he is scheduled to speak in a couple of weeks at “The Parent’s Summit.” It’s a church-sponsored conference “to change the way you look at parenting and marriage”; should he be doing that right now? http://parentssummit.com/

    maybe as an example of what DOESN’T work in neo-Cal male-headship marriages

  43. So I did another informal poll at work. Had anybody heard of Barnabas Piper? No one had. Not entirely true. Someone asked if he was a professional wrestler. I said no, that’s Rowdy Roddy Piper.
    Do these guys seriously have that much pull that this blog would take static over them? I find myself amazed, and informed all at the same time.

  44. Max wrote:

    He has reminded us that he is only 33 years old.

    Isn’t that the traditional age for Jesus?

  45. This podcast is hard to take. Geez he’s making himself out to be a hero. It’s like he’s courageously breaking the barrier of divorce. Everyone is being so wonderful and supportive towards him (except that tiny contingent of people who don’t count). Nobody’s shaming him. Isn’t life great for him? (I wish Karen Hinkley and Maria Notcheva had met with such wonderful support!)

    I don’t hear any clue in his voice that he’s sad or is in a lot of pain.

    The lying angle is interesting to me. He’s had ongoing issues with being dishonest. He’s emphasized a number of times now how he wants to be seen as honest. Well, guess what. Honest people don’t think about or say that. He works in brand management. Marketing. Yeah, I’m skeptical. I gave him the benefit of the doubt after reading his post. After listening to him talk, my opinion is changed. He’s marketing himself. He’s spinning the narrative, and he’s working overtime.

    My father was a compulsive liar. I know what it’s like to live with.

    In my life, I want truth. I don’t want something that seems true, I don’t want something that’s as good as true. I want truth, even if it hurts, I want truth. I crave truth. I guess that’s why marketing never has much effect on me. And that is why I love the Deebs and this site. If I had found their attitude and transparency in church, I’d still be attending.

  46. siteseer wrote:

    In my life, I want truth. I don’t want something that seems true, I don’t want something that’s as good as true. I want truth, even if it hurts, I want truth. I crave truth … And that is why I love the Deebs and this site.

    Well said. Thanks. So many of us feel the same way, for many different reasons, but we feel this way, too, and keep coming back to TWW as an oasis. Moreover, truth takes courage and the TWW Deebs are highly courageous.

  47. Joe Reed wrote:

    Youth is high on energy, low on wisdom, and in power often makes massive and costly errors.

    The Church needs the energy of youth coupled with the wisdom of age … young folks to speed things up, old guys to slow it down. We are losing that balance as the generations clash on how to do church in the 21st century. An inexperienced “lead pastor” in his 20s-30s, with a hand-picked “elder” team in their 20s-30s is an accident waiting to happen. I suppose it could work if these folks were spiritually mature, but the reports continue to stream in about flesh ruling, not spirit.

  48. mot wrote:

    Joe is definitely one of BP’s buddies.

    I think Joe put forward a defensible view and see no reason to impugn his motives I’d prefer to see counterpoint.

    I thought Joe’s point useful, having well known parents is a mixed blessing. You inherit their critics if you follow their footsteps and you reap a pre-assembled jury of his followers if you diverge. It would be very hard to be your own person. You would always be judged in the context of your better known parent, useful if you are a clone but a pain otherwise.

    In the case of Piper you also inherit some bad theology that could make life difficult for others and yourself by repercussion.

  49. siteseer wrote:

    In my life, I want truth. I don’t want something that seems true, I don’t want something that’s as good as true. I want truth, even if it hurts, I want truth. I crave truth.

    Thank you siteseer. May this be our prayer – all of us. Help us Lord to know you more and give us the ability by the Holy Spirit to sort through the noise around us to find Truth. Help us to comprehend more fully that Jesus is the Way, the Truth, and the Life.

  50. Jack wrote:

    Someone asked if he was a professional wrestler. I said no, that’s Rowdy Roddy Piper.

    I don’t follow professional wrestling, is Rowdy Roddy more coherent than John Piper?

  51. Max wrote:

    An inexperienced “lead pastor” in his 20s-30s, with a hand-picked “elder” team in their 20s-30s is an accident waiting to happen. I suppose it could work if these folks were spiritually mature…

    Totally agree. And I say that as someone under 40. Maturity matters big time

  52. “We have been told that continuing to discuss this matter will hurt our ministry, ruin the goodwill that we have built up and even call into question our integrity.”

    I have no idea who told you ladies this, but it’s certainly not true of me. I know that this blog is a sacrifice, and a labor of love, and I hope you continue. And since you followed that comment by doing exactly what they warned you against, I’m confident that you will continue.

    Who are these people, who think they can ruin your reputation? I think they would be shocked to discover how little their opinions matter outside of their own little bubble.

    “Just when they think they got the answers, I change the questions.”
    “Real men wear kilts.”
    Rowdy Roddy Piper

  53. @ Bill M:

    In this case, no one is making Barnabas take to the airwaves. Using Twitter and the Bad Christian Podcast to air your statement about your divorce is beyond strange/foolish.

    It has occurred to me that he has a new book coming out and he certainly is drawing attention to himself.

  54. Edward wrote:

    HOWEVER…I have to be honest- I am not seeing the smoking gun that warrants the insinuations of potential abuse being floated.

    How about abuse of the truth.

    It appears that his father’s troubling views on marriage roles and divorce are being projected onto him, which seems not entirely fair.

    According to the podcast, he’s not getting any shaming from his father.

  55. Once a person is confirmed as a liar I stop asking that person questions. If the matter has an effect on a number of people, including myself, there are ways to question the lie and find out the person saying them should be disregarded. G_d, in the word, refers to Satan as the father of lies. Also, the act of spreading lies or causing dissension is considered abomination in the Bible. One suggestion: it appears the former wife doesn't want to share her story as this could bring lifetime problems for the children and there are probably many other problems that the public doesn't need to know; therefore, if she wants to speak out, let her do it in her timing, need and will rather than suggest she goes public with info that could be shackling to some.

  56. Edward wrote:

    I agree that he’s inviting scrutiny to some extent by talking about his divorce publicly (and in conjunction with his new book. Don’t even get me started on the trend of “instant comeback/let me explain my failure that happened five minutes ago” books. Does every setback needs to commodified? ). HOWEVER…I have to be honest- I am not seeing the smoking gun that warrants the insinuations of potential abuse being floated. It appears that his father’s troubling views on marriage roles and divorce are being projected onto him, which seems not entirely fair. Maybe he shares his father’s views, but I would not assume that he does.

    It just may be that Barnabas Piper is a victim of Complementarianism. He is between a rock and a hard place if he questions his father’s views on marriage/remarriage. Perhaps deep down he is questioning his father’s views and knows that if he expresses how he feels, that could strain his relationship with his father. I can’t even relate to how it must be to be the child of a well-known preacher/pastor. It must become stressful at times to keep up with appearances. Although I do think Barnabas has broken the mold somewhat in the book he wrote about what it was like growing up as a kid of a famous preacher. Whatever the real truth is about his divorce, I do think it would be to his advantage to be quiet about it. To keep on bringing up the subject only causes folks to be…well…curious, as Barnabas would say. 😉

  57. mot wrote:

    Joe Reed wrote:
    So I feel bad for him, cuz whatever the facts are, he’s screwed either way, if for no other reason than his last name is Piper.
    Poor pitiful Barnabas Piper according to Joe Reed.

    Well, one thing I would bet, it cannot be easy being the son of John Piper. Now that Barnabas is divorced, if he begins struggling with his father’s views on marriage/remarriage, that will be a strain on his relationship with his father. If I could give him some advice I’d tell him to get out of the Christian Industrial Complex. Just get a job without any publicity attached to it. Live a quiet, peaceful life of prayer and be kind toward others. So much of what can drive a person who makes their living in a Christian organization is fear of losing their job because of some scandal or bad press. Barnabas: Just leave it all and move on with your life!

  58. JYJames wrote:

    @ mot:
    Yes, poor dude.
    From the podcast linked, BP wondered about his dad’s followers, “…because followers are always crazier than their leaders.”
    Really? Got that, followers?

    Oh my, I suppose I should listen to that podcast. If followers are crazier that their leaders, does that mean Barnabas thinks his father is crazy? Albeit not as crazy as those who follow him. 😉

  59. Max wrote:

    he is scheduled to speak in a couple of weeks at “The Parent’s Summit.” It’s a church-sponsored conference “to change the way you look at parenting and marriage”; should he be doing that right now? http://parentssummit.com/

    “Should he being doing that right now?” I sure hope not. But if he does, we know the strings are being pulled in his favor because of being the son of J.P.

  60. Bridget wrote:

    In this case, no one is making Barnabas take to the airwaves.

    Sorry, I did not mean to imply support of his post concerning his divorce.

  61. Darlene wrote:

    So much of what can drive a person who makes their living in a Christian organization is fear of losing their job because of some scandal or bad press. Barnabas: Just leave it all and move on with your life!

    Good advice.

  62. Nancy2 wrote:

    What would happen if a well known evangelical woman such as Priscilla Shirer, Mary Kassian, or Beth Moore got a divorce? Would she still be booking speaking engagements, retreats, and book deals?

    I think we all know the answer to this question. 😉

  63. Okay, I’m going to say it. What is the prospect of never likely being able to have S_X again is the driving force behind Barnabas Piper’s actions? Perhaps this reality has sunk in and fear (among other things) has affected his thinking. He has two choices as I see it. He can abandon the views of his father on marriage/remarriage, which will obviously offend/hurt John Piper. But Barnabas would be able to at least consider the idea of remarriage, which would alleviate the stress of never being able to have S_X again. And his dad might just come around eventually. Or, Barnabas can uphold his father’s views on marriage/remarriage and resign himself to living the single life. Now, maybe he’s actually prepared to do that. But with all the focus that the Neo-Cal crowd has on marriage – to the point of idolizing it – I wonder how he would be able to survive in that culture as a single person, knowing that he can never marry again. I would think that would be quite difficult. And even though he is a guy, there would always be a tinge of disrepute attached to his name. Either way, Barnabas Piper has some serious challenges ahead of him.

  64. Nancy2 wrote:

    What would happen if a well known evangelical woman such as Priscilla Shirer, Mary Kassian, or Beth Moore got a divorce?

    I dare say just changing your view on the the atonement from the post reformation view to that held by the church for first 1,500 years could lose you your backers. Monetizing your faith can be akin to putting on a theological straight-jacket, better to be a brick layer.

  65. Every neo-Calvinist I’ve ever known believed that if they just talked long enough, I would be struck by their immense logic and wisdom and biblical knowledge, and dramatically prostrate myself in sorrow over my lack of acceptance over their word.

    It’s never worked.

    Whenever the Deebs get threats, that makes me believe that they are probably onto something. We know a lot of the things the Calvinistas do, and it’s all about keeping money and power. What they are protecting is not of God. They should get on their knees right now and repent.

    At least B.Piper has now admitted he was initially at fault. He probably didn’t mean it that way, but whatever it was he lied about had to be pretty big for him to lose his job and make his wife weary of him. I distrust his word still, and the fact that he chose the Bad Christians podcast to speak on doesn’t really seem like a good choice, either.

    And I’m sorry, but this isn’t just about him being John Piper’s son. He’s got a good amount of clout on his own. He doesn’t need to be in ministry (which he is). He’s chosen that path on his own, and he’s used his name to get people to listen to him, buy his books, and pay him to speak.

    These guys can never talk their way out of things and have everybody believe them, because the things they say are often wrong. Christians should be questioning what they say.

  66. Darlene wrote:

    Or, Barnabas can uphold his father’s views on marriage/remarriage and resign himself to living the single life. Now, maybe he’s actually prepared to do that. But with all the focus that the Neo-Cal crowd has on marriage – to the point of idolizing it – I wonder how he would be able to survive in that culture as a single person, knowing that he can never marry again.

    I think he’d have to totally abandon his job and books and speaking to walk away from being single the rest of his life. That crowd doesn’t have many shades of grey. Though it’s not just John Piper that would keep him from that, TCG has so depended on Piper to color their theology and “Doctrine” that there’s very little that deviates from it (and what does is more extreme, such as Ware’s group that believes women are not made in the image of God).

  67. Lea wrote:

    JYJames wrote:
    Nancy2 wrote:
    How serious were the lie(s)?
    Lose job, marriage ended…
    Serious.
    Sounds like. But not serious to be an immediate marriage ender? IDK. I’m curious what he said specifically, but not curious enough to listen

    I listened and I’m just curious…is this what defines Evangelicalism among the 40 and younger crowd these days? Those Bad Christians seem to take delight in pushing the envelope. They remind me of left overs from the Emergent Church scene. They want Christianity to be hip, cool, and relevant. What a cast of characters.

  68. ishy wrote:

    Darlene wrote:
    Or, Barnabas can uphold his father’s views on marriage/remarriage and resign himself to living the single life. Now, maybe he’s actually prepared to do that. But with all the focus that the Neo-Cal crowd has on marriage – to the point of idolizing it – I wonder how he would be able to survive in that culture as a single person, knowing that he can never marry again.
    I think he’d have to totally abandon his job and books and speaking to walk away from being single the rest of his life. That crowd doesn’t have many shades of grey. Though it’s not just John Piper that would keep him from that, TCG has so depended on Piper to color their theology and “Doctrine” that there’s very little that deviates from it (and what does is more extreme, such as Ware’s group that believes women are not made in the image of God).

    Well, after listening to Barnabas Piper on that Bad Christian show, I’m wondering if this isn’t the beginning of him distancing himself from the Comp./no remarriage crowd. Those guys aren’t conservative evangelicals, although they may claim to be with their words.

  69. Bill M wrote:

    mot wrote:
    Joe is definitely one of BP’s buddies.
    I think Joe put forward a defensible view and see no reason to impugn his motives I’d prefer to see counterpoint.
    I thought Joe’s point useful, having well known parents is a mixed blessing. You inherit their critics if you follow their footsteps and you reap a pre-assembled jury of his followers if you diverge. It would be very hard to be your own person. You would always be judged in the context of your better known parent, useful if you are a clone but a pain otherwise.
    In the case of Piper you also inherit some bad theology that could make life difficult for others and yourself by repercussion.

    I agree with your take, Bill M. I wouldn’t be surprised if Barnabas is unable to remain in the Neo-Cal camp. After listening to him on that video, I’m inclined to think he is questioning his evangelical roots, at least with regard to his father’s views on marriage/remarriage.

  70. Darlene wrote:

    I listened and I’m just curious…is this what defines Evangelicalism among the 40 and younger crowd these days? Those Bad Christians seem to take delight in pushing the envelope. They remind me of left overs from the Emergent Church scene. They want Christianity to be hip, cool, and relevant. What a cast of characters.

    I don’t think the neo-Calvinists can be called evangelicals. I don’t even consider them Christians. As most of their tactics are cult-based, I think it’s all about gaining as young as followers as possible so they can be indoctrinated more easily.

  71. Darlene wrote:

    Okay, I’m going to say it. What is the prospect of never likely being able to have S_X again is the driving force behind Barnabas Piper’s actions

    Darlene, you are so right. That lot is obsessed with sexy time and all its different disgusting variants. Now if silly Piper Boy is a true worshiper of Calvin and his movement’s/church’s/male club’s Book of Laws, he probably has an appointment yet to “see” one of those infamous “certified” ACBC counselors who, no doubt, will give him some kinky and disgusting sexual advice. As they did to my friend.

    ishy wrote:

    I don’t think the neo-Calvinists can be called evangelicals. I don’t even consider them Christians. As most of their tactics are cult-based, I think it’s all about gaining as young as followers as possible so they can be indoctrinated more easily.

    Ishy, again I agree with you completely. As an aside, I visited the BadChristian site and found…NOTHING Christian there at all. Christ is not there.

  72. @ Joe Reed:
    That is the result of seeking to be a paid celebrity Christian. They might as well get used to the scrutiny. They don’t get to be the gatekeepers anymore. He could have chosen a small church somewhere.

    Do you realize how big it is the Piper ministry son is divorced? it means what Piper lectured people and said was verboten for decades is a crock. It did not even work in his own family yet people in his church were spiritually abused with discipline over divorce from abuse when they needed support. So young Piper gets a pass as a career ministry celeb hawking books and consulting to churches. But not under discipline at his church and gets to keep his high paying LifeWay ministry job which most likely came from his last name.

    That whole movement is a phoney crock of beans.

    The list of hypocrisy grows. If Barnabas wants a private life, he knows what to do.

  73. @ Marie O’Toole:
    The internet is forever. Just wait for his kids to grow up and see how dads celebrity ministry works. It is obvious he wants to sell books but has to get the divorce message crafted and out to fans, too.

    Lifeway could not pull the book launch? In fact the timing is just too interesting. It just comes off me, me, me.

  74. Joe Reed wrote:

    The divorce is a fact, the dirtiness of it is what’s being speculated.

    The price of being a paid celebrity Christian.

    So. According to what the SBC teaches and his Dad, should Barnabas Piper be a highly paid Lifeway church consultant? Is there one rule for the celebs and one for pew sitters?

  75. Jack wrote:

    So I did another informal poll at work. Had anybody heard of Barnabas Piper? No one had. Not entirely true. Someone asked if he was a professional wrestler. I said no, that’s Rowdy Roddy Piper.
    Do these guys seriously have that much pull that this blog would take static over them? I find myself amazed, and informed all at the same time.

    Yeah, it’s interesting isn’t it, Jack? I hadn’t heard of Barnabas Piper before Dee tweeted her first post on him.

    One of the things I’ve been somewhat amazed about in all this, is how Dee and Deb got so much pushback on their first post. [Yes, I know some of that pushback was due to my tweets, and I appreciate Dee removing some of my tweets from her first post when she updated it. And I’ve already noted in my comments on the first post that some of my tweets were unwise in that I wrote them before reading Barnabas’s post.]

    But what I find intriguing in the pushback Dee and Deb received was how people were telling her that her blog would lose credibility and it would affect TWW’s ministry with that post. So they KNEW here blog, generally speaking, had credibility and was a valid ministry.

    I may be wrong, but it seems likely to me that the pushback came from folks who follow and appreciate TWW but never comment on it, maybe because they don’t want to be known as part of the TWW community.

    I would like some of the folks who pushed back at Dee to be bold enough to come out publicly, using their own names, and say to all the readers of this blog that they believe The Wartburg Watch DOES have a valid and important ministry.

    Appreciating TWW, but not saying so publicly, strikes me as somewhat disingenuous.

  76. JYJames wrote:

    Actually, the dad’s name – Piper – probably served BP well to get hired even after he lied and was subsequently fired – by a Christian ministry, no less.

    Know how this works…Seen it many times. We are to believe Lifeway had no other good candidates or options but the then Presbyterian Barnabas Piper for a high paying job in the SBC entity. Right.

  77. Bill M wrote:

    Jack wrote:

    Someone asked if he was a professional wrestler. I said no, that’s Rowdy Roddy Piper.

    I don’t follow professional wrestling, is Rowdy Roddy more coherent than John Piper?

    Lol! Is he as flowery and passionate?

  78. Lydia wrote:

    @ Joe Reed:
    That is the result of seeking to be a paid celebrity Christian. They might as well get used to the scrutiny. They don’t get to be the gatekeepers anymore. He could have chosen a small church somewhere.

    Do you realize how big it is the Piper ministry son is divorced? it means what Piper lectured people and said was verboten for decades is a crock. It did not even work in his own family yet people in his church were spiritually abused with discipline over divorce from abuse when they needed support. So young Piper gets a pass as a career ministry celeb hawking books and consulting to churches. But not under discipline at his church and gets to keep his high paying LifeWay ministry job which most likely came from his last name.

    That whole movement is a phoney crock of beans.

    The list of hypocrisy grows. If Barnabas wants a private life, he knows what to do.

    Sounds to me that Joe Reed supports hypocrisy by BP. How sad.

  79. Bill M wrote:

    mot wrote:

    Joe is definitely one of BP’s buddies.

    I think Joe put forward a defensible view and see no reason to impugn his motives I’d prefer to see counterpoint.

    I thought Joe’s point useful, having well known parents is a mixed blessing. You inherit their critics if you follow their footsteps and you reap a pre-assembled jury of his followers if you diverge. It would be very hard to be your own person. You would always be judged in the context of your better known parent, useful if you are a clone but a pain otherwise.

    In the case of Piper you also inherit some bad theology that could make life difficult for others and yourself by repercussion.

    I disagree with you, but that is ok at TWW.

  80. @ mot:
    I honestly don’t think many get it. Celebrity Christianity is now normal. Especially for younger people. It’s what they know. Because it is the new normal for masses they often don’t see the major problems associated with it.

    One of the things I had to come to grips with were thousands of people in the pews were always delighted when their stage persona was in the media or hailed by other big names. They viewed it as an endorsement of themselves in some way. But the converse is true, too. Negative pushback is often taken personally by fans/followers. I think there is some term for this when people over identify with some leader, guru or celeb they really don’t know personally. :o)

    Instead of looking at the problem with the entire concept of a celeb Christian and where they have placed these people in their brain, they become defensive. I know this well. Part of my job was to present the positive only. It’s even worse if you happen to actually know them up close. The emperor has no clothes.

    Always beware when someone in such a position tells people over and over a personal theme. Like humility. For Barnabas, it’s “trust”. So, Throw out your critical thinking because my goal is to be trusted. Well, isn’t that a given that people, especially Christians, should be trustworthy? He is inviting us to trust him because he claims he wants to be trustworthy but wasn’t once. It’s like he is overdoing it. We see this sort of behavior with politicians, ministry leaders, etc. it’s a red flag.

    These things are impossible to discuss. But sometimes they are familiar patterns to some who have seen it up close.. All one can say is beware.

  81. If i remember correctly Oral Roberts held the same view (divorce but no re-marry) until his son Richard got divorced and things changed after that and of course Richard re-married.

  82. @ Bill M:
    Certainly more entertaining. Unfortunately Roddy Piper is no longer with us. I make light of it but I am reading a biography & history of Joel Osteen’s church. Interesting is that there is a chapter titled “neo Calvinism and the rise of authoritarianism”. It appears that better known celebrity pastors are starting to notice.

  83. @ Barbara Roberts:
    Based on what I’ve read here, I wouldn’t be surprised if there’s a lot of Christians stuck in these authoritarian churches who are encouraged by the words here. Knowledge is power, and it’s power many of these pastors don’t want the rank & file to have. I don’t mean to denigrate the hard work being done here. Certainly I have learned much.

  84. siteseer wrote:

    Everyone is being so wonderful and supportive towards him (except that tiny contingent of people who don’t count). Nobody’s shaming him. Isn’t life great for him? (I wish Karen Hinkley and Maria Notcheva had met with such wonderful support!)
    I don’t hear any clue in his voice that he’s sad or is in a lot of pain.
    The lying angle is interesting to me. He’s had ongoing issues with being dishonest. He’s emphasized a number of times now how he wants to be seen as honest. Well, guess what. Honest people don’t think about or say that. He works in brand management. Marketing. Yeah, I’m skeptical. I gave him the benefit of the doubt after reading his post. After listening to him talk, my opinion is changed. He’s marketing himself. He’s spinning the narrative, and he’s working overtime.

    I second all of that.

    There’s a lot of relief in having let people know [about my divorce].

    BP in the podcast: “It was amazing to me the amount of encouragement that I got. And the tiny number of trollish responses, they were minimal. The majority of people [I tell] are so understanding, not invasive, they’re not trying to dig into my business in a way that is unhelpful or rude.

    He clearly has not experienced the kind of intense judgemental stigma and shunning and even excommunication that the divorced women I know experience, and which many of the male survivors of domestic abuse that I know, experience also.

    How nice for him.

  85. @ Lydia:
    Passionate maybe, flowery not so much. Hey, in a previous post, John “pulverizer” Piper proudly proclaimed he was part of a football game where a guys neck got broken. Don’t underestimate the the “Complementarian Crusher”

  86. BP’s blog post announcing his divorce was perhaps … maybe… fair enough — in that if he didn’t announce it publicly, it would get out somehow and then (because his Dad has such a reputation for his hard line on divorce and remarriage) people might start speculating. So maybe, just maybe, there is some sense in him announcing his divorce in that blog post (minus all the rambling), so that he wouldn’t later be accused by trolls of keeping it hidden.

    In the podcast interview he said, “When I wrote that blog post I was wanting to be transparent but not wanting to reveal anything that is disrespectful to my ex, that shares business of hers. Because it’s not just my story, this is two people’s story, and I only have a right to reveal one part of it. And also wanting to not slant things so that I look better than I am, or that she looks worse than she is.”

    But when the interviewers asked him if he’d seen warning signs of the marriage breaking down, he went on to give more details about the marriage breakdown than he gave in the blog post. He said the tipping point was six or seven years ago when he was fired from his job for dishonesty, and that was a tipping point for his wife because she had trusted him before then. And that in the years after that he was trying his best to love her and make the marriage work.

    His words verbatim from the podcast: “For the last couple of years, that way that our marriage has sort of parted ways, as, to be frank, as, I really wanted it to work but her heart was going in a different direction. And the human heart is not something that another person can fix or can control.”

    So he claims that in his blog post he was very mindful of not giving the sort of details about the marriage breakdown that he only tells his friends, and not giving info that might make him look unduly good and his wife look unduly bad. But then, in the podcast, he gives more details about the marriage breakdown.
    And whether or not the extra detail given makes him look unduly good and his wife look unduly bad, is (I suppose) in the eye of the beholder. But why keep talking about it? He didn’t have to answer that question from the interviewers.

    When they put the question to him about whether he saw serious warning signs before the marriage broke down irretrievably, he could have said “Pass” or “I’ve written my blog post, that’s all the detail I’m going to give.” But no, he seemed to jump at the chance of meeting a need of some of the listeners by sharing his perceptions and responses to the warning signs of the marriage deteriorating.

    Well, I’m sorry, but that doesn’t cut it with me.

    There IS a place for divorced people sharing, in a way that does not identify their Ex, how they now look back after the divorce and reflect on the warning signs of the marriage getting bad and how they responded to those warning signs. Some of what we do at the blog A Cry For Justice is that kind of sharing.

    But in BP’s case, he is identifying himself — and his Ex is therefore identifiable. And how do we know whether in telling his story he is telling the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth about his story? Especially when as he admits he’s not being fully transparent to the public. So his ‘teaching by sharing my experience’ — how much is it worth? Not much, IMO.

    I think BP has shown a lack of wisdom. And it would be naive to think that the podcast’s free publicity for his next book can have nothing to do with his consenting to the interview and answering the interviewers’ questions the way he did.

    I *curiously* wonder whether he will make a ministry out of teaching others how to survive and thrive as a divorced Christian father who shares joint parenting with his Ex…

  87. lynn wrote:

    If i remember correctly Oral Roberts held the same view (divorce but no re-marry) until his son Richard got divorced and things changed after that and of course Richard re-married.

    Hypocrites when it comes to their families.

  88. Joe Reed wrote:

    mot wrote:
    Joe Reed wrote:
    You say he almost certainly carries a fair amount of blame–how do you know that?
    As the old saw says, “it takes two to tango.” There are exceptions, (Haggai, for instance. Ezekiel 16, for another) but old proverbs exist because they’re generally true. So I’m guessing he was part of the dance, but I didn’t watch it, so can’t say how it went.

    Well, he apparently said his lies were the beginning of the end. So you don’t really have to guess on that point.

  89. Jeffrey J . Chalmers wrote:

    If they do not like being the heat, they need to get out of the frying pan. I actually think it is quite amusing when the Christian Celebrities use the media to their benefit, and then scream up a storm when it turns on them…

    I am absolutely baffled when people who went first to the blogs or the washington post or a podcast have followers who pop along and tell everyone not to talk about this stuff that THEY made public! Ditto to the people who say you can’t talk about news articles and arrests because those are supposedly gossip. Nonsense.

  90. siteseer wrote:

    In my life, I want truth. I don’t want something that seems true, I don’t want something that’s as good as true. I want truth, even if it hurts, I want truth.

    Yes. I even expect it, which sometimes mean I trust people to be the same until they prove me wrong.

  91. The Bad Christian Podcast…I admit to having heard possibly as many as 10 episodes in the past…there were these rare occasions where the guys offered observations that were well received…so in that rare moment, it would offset the 95%+ of material that was offensive and they obviously meant it to be offensive. With discernment, listening to these guys for more than a few minutes becomes a chore in how to take a depraved mind and reach an audience of depraved listeners. Not to mention their use of foul language has become more than a statement…it is their signature. So…compared to some of their most recent episodes, these guys now spend the bulk of their time talking about themselves and how depraved they are…so it has become all about them….this show has no legs. If guys claiming they can utter the f word and talk about mastering with themselves think they are innovative, they are not,….and Piper’s appearance on their show indicates a complete lack of discernment and credibility.

  92. Barbara Roberts wrote:

    There’s a lot of relief in having let people know [about my divorce].
    BP in the podcast: “It was amazing to me the amount of encouragement that I got. And the tiny number of trollish responses, they were minimal. The majority of people [I tell] are so understanding, not invasive, they’re not trying to dig into my business in a way that is unhelpful or rude.

    Let me correct my punctuation. It ought to have read:

    BP in the podcast: “ There’s a lot of relief in having let people know [about my divorce]. It was amazing to me the amount of encouragement that I got. And the tiny number of trollish responses, they were minimal. The majority of people [I tell] are so understanding, not invasive, they’re not trying to dig into my business in a way that is unhelpful or rude.”

  93. I forget whether it was Brueggemann or N.T. Wright who said that the reason Pharaoh isn’t named in much of the Bible is because “if you’ve seen one pharaoh you’ve seen them all.” That’s my view on Celebrity Pastors. They are above their own laws. I would be more interested in the BP divorce if it made more of an impact on him. Talking about it, pushing book sales, and speaking at parenting conferences is in really poor taste. This is a major life event that with enough time and contemplation could lead to a new and more nuanced theology of marriage, relationships, and genuine grace than his father had. But he seems more concerned about his immediate image than spiritual contemplation – I don’t think he’s asking enough questions about himself. At least he hasn’t completely maligned his wife in public yet.

    On an unrelated note, a friend of a friend on facebook just said she voted for Trump “to remain in Godly submission to her husband!” I don’t know her so I can’t adequately express my shock with out being rude. I don’t even have the words. If that is what the complementarian crowd expects, I’d be excommunicated the minute I walked in the door.

  94. lynn wrote:

    If i remember correctly Oral Roberts held the same view (divorce but no re-marry) until his son Richard got divorced and things changed after that and of course Richard re-married.

    It’s pretty easy to have these opinions about marriage and women when you think it won’t affect you. If these men could be magically turned into women we’d see all sort of exceptions there too.

  95. Barbara Roberts wrote:

    He said the tipping point was six or seven years ago when he was fired from his job for dishonesty, and that was a tipping point for his wife because she had trusted him before then.

    That I totally get. She probably rethought everything he ever said, wondering what was a lie and what was the truth. And wondered the same going forward. Maybe that’s why it took so long.

  96. Lea wrote:

    If these men could be magically turned into women we’d see all sort of exceptions there too.

    Can you imagine their theology simply if they were women? It would be a radically different movement.

  97. Lydia wrote:

    @ prodinov:
    The offspring of Driscoll?

    Sounds more like “Just Like Shock Jocks, Except CHRISTIAN(TM)!” to me.

  98. mot wrote:

    lynn wrote:

    If i remember correctly Oral Roberts held the same view (divorce but no re-marry) until his son Richard got divorced and things changed after that and of course Richard re-married.

    Hypocrites when it comes to their families.

    Roberts struck me more like a Tywin Lannister wanna-be, Patriarch of a Great House (in his own mind and the Christianese bubble). Here’s an article on Oral & Richard (AKA Oral Junior) and Succession in House Roberts that reads like something out of Game of Thrones:
    https://longreads.com/2014/09/16/oral-roberts-family-history/

  99. Barbara Roberts wrote:

    BP in the podcast: “It was amazing to me the amount of encouragement that I got. And the tiny number of trollish responses, they were minimal. The majority of people [I tell] are so understanding, not invasive, they’re not trying to dig into my business in a way that is unhelpful or rude.

    He clearly has not experienced the kind of intense judgemental stigma and shunning and even excommunication that the divorced women I know experience, and which many of the male survivors of domestic abuse that I know, experience also.

    How nice for him.

    I doubt his wife is experiencing the same support from those circles.

  100. A few interesting comments from the emergentesque bad boy podcast:

    BP states that early on he only told people “who could speak into my life”

    Sound familiar?

    BP said, “followers are always crazier than leaders”

    BP said, “People want to know details for the same reason they read Tabloids”.

    BP implied he gets a divorced ministry pass because he is not accountable as a church leader. (He only gives churches advice?)

    It is almost impossible to communicate how much these celebs resent and look down upon the very people who Ultimately pay their salaries. I saw it a lot backstage. It comes out here and there in bits and pieces in public inbetween the “love” words –over time –but most fans miss it because of all the other fluffy platitudinal stuff.

  101. Darlene wrote:

    Well, after listening to Barnabas Piper on that Bad Christian show, I’m wondering if this isn’t the beginning of him distancing himself from the Comp./no remarriage crowd. Those guys aren’t conservative evangelicals, although they may claim to be with their words.

    Actually, there is a growing cadre of them trying to do an image rehab on the movement that financially projected them into the public sphere. They know it’s in trouble.

  102. lynn wrote:

    If i remember correctly Oral Roberts held the same view (divorce but no re-marry) until his son Richard got divorced and things changed after that and of course Richard re-married.

    amazing how the rules change when money and fame and ‘male’ privilege comes into the picture …. a poor, abused wife would be treated VERY DIFFERENTLY in that world. Therein lies the proof that the dignity of persons is open to discrimination by male-headship sexually scewed ‘rules’ if the human person is notof the ‘privileged’ sex in a troubled marriage.

  103. ishy wrote:

    Lea wrote:
    If these men could be magically turned into women we’d see all sort of exceptions there too.

    Can you imagine their theology simply if they were women? It would be a radically different movement.

    Now I’m imagining John Piper in a quantum leap situation!

  104. The Piper family is a perfect example of what happens when our hearts, minds, and souls are replaced with human idolatry/worship. The void that exists in our being is supposed to be filled with loving and worshiping Jesus in spirit and truth. However, with the intensity of replacing God’s Word with the foolish words of fallen man, the Piper family is just another statistic to add to the growing list of those who are seen as hypocritical regarding visible Christianity.

    As stated in another comment thread, my past pastor portfolio included listening to John Piper’s sermons via the internet. He is regarded as the “man with correct theology” amongst the churches in my area, with leadership and lay people alike, often quoting Piper as well as recommending his books, conferences, and internet sermons. I was easily influenced back in that day of my growing faith, for I was told point blank, that I was a baby Christian and needed discipleship in order to grow. Interestingly, not one church member, whether in leadership or in the pew, ever shared with me, “Read your Bible for yourself.” No, not one. Instead, my instruction was to consist of other folk’s writings, for if I learned the truth from our LORD Himself, I may have been set free!

    Listening to John Piper influenced my life tremendously. I became to unhappy and very, very depressed, as his worm theology took hold of my life. His piety, disguised as humility, which I fell for hook, line, and sinker, was the model for my faith, not Jesus and His Ways or teachings. I could never ever measure up to the holiness and passion that Piper seemed to have regarding the state of the human soul. As so I spiraled downwards. It was a very dark time in my life, listening to a myriad of celebrity preachers and not rightly applying anything they said to the Word of God in conjunction with my life. I believed women were nothing and man was everything. I was not an individual believer, and I was not important to our Savior, but man was.

    I was also told by this lot, that a women should never be allowed to vote, and if she did vote, it should be according to the husband’s choice for he is the head. This is how controlling and manipulative this lot of religion is….and it’s an apostate religion with no life in it. Just death.

    Fast forward. Today I look at the Piper family with sympathy, great sympathy, for they desire the life of celebrity. While Jesus humbly went to the cross in remission for my/our sins, men and women such as these desire the worship of man, constantly needing their egos stroked with flattering comments, applause from the crowds, and book sales on religion to support themselves. The Bible is never enough for the beginning and ending of their faith. They need to make it better, so to speak. And while the Apostles were martyred for their faith, just about all of them anyway, for standing for truth in Jesus Christ, we/myself included, look to people in this day and age as our lords so to speak, over every aspect of our lives, just to fit in with the crowds. To deviate from the influence of having other Christian lords, lord it over us is absolutely an abomination to the religious industrial complex. My money is important to them, not the condition of my soul.

    I have come to the conclusion that it is so incredibly easy to preach and teach in such piety with an air of perfectionism, until the time comes when the humbling process occurs. And that humble pie isn’t too tasty either.

    I agree whole heartedly with other commenters here regarding the state of Piper the younger. It would be better for him to go out and get a job, repent, pray, heal from his life situation, and move on. What are his true motives in keeping his narration alive?

  105. Bill M wrote:

    Bridget wrote:
    In this case, no one is making Barnabas take to the airwaves.
    Sorry, I did not mean to imply support of his post concerning his divorce.

    Oh, no need to apologize! I was just jumping off your comment, not implying anything about your comment. 🙂

  106. I think you do an amazing job, Deebs, in the exposures of wrong and harm that you research so thoroughly and tell the world about. Hope this isn’t a side issue but I read Patheos blogs. It seems to me that it is mainly evangelical bloggers who will not take any sort of criticism. Patheos pagan, catholic, progressive, non-religious bloggers allow commenters to disagree with them. If you rebut, even in the politest way, something an evangelical blogger says in a post, you are banned or the blogger puts a rude reply in the comments. This Piper issue seems to me to be in that category..evangelicals expect their followers to be sycophants and desperately sweep any hints of impropriety or bad behaviour under the carpet. Some then try to discredit the critics.

  107. Lydia wrote:

    BP said, “People want to know details for the same reason they read Tabloids”.

    This is hilarious because it’s as if he’s some celebrity that people are digging around to find out the latest gossip on, when I never heard of him until a few days. When he was ACTIVELY sharing this long, rambling piece with no details on social media. If I read that from a total stranger I would be curious but without a followup interview I would just shrug it off. So of course he provided that, with more things to be curious about. I’m sure he’ll follow that up as well. That’s what people do when they need to be in the public.

  108. Lydia wrote:

    A few interesting comments from the emergentesque bad boy podcast:

    BP states that early on he only told people “who could speak into my life”

    Sound familiar?

    BP said, “followers are always crazier than leaders”

    BP said, “People want to know details for the same reason they read Tabloids”.

    BP implied he gets a divorced ministry pass because he is not accountable as a church leader. (He only gives churches advice?)

    It is almost impossible to communicate how much these celebs resent and look down upon the very people who Ultimately pay their salaries. I saw it a lot backstage. It comes out here and there in bits and pieces in public inbetween the “love” words –over time –but most fans miss it because of all the other fluffy platitudinal stuff.

    What the hey is “those that can speak into my life?

  109. Lydia wrote:

    BP implied he gets a divorced ministry pass because he is not accountable as a church leader. (He only gives churches advice?)

    He’s only speaking as Max pointed out at a church-sponsored conference “to change the way you look at parenting and marriage”!!!

  110. Lydia wrote:

    JYJames wrote:
    Actually, the dad’s name – Piper – probably served BP well to get hired even after he lied and was subsequently fired – by a Christian ministry, no less.
    Know how this works…Seen it many times. We are to believe Lifeway had no other good candidates or options but the then Presbyterian Barnabas Piper for a high paying job in the SBC entity. Right.

    The name served him well, but now certain people think we should feel sorry for BP because of the name that got him where he is? I don’t think it works that way . . . He is a grown man not a child.

  111. Lydia wrote:

    The offspring of Driscoll?

    If Driscoll wonders about his legacy – his unique signature on the New Calvinist movement – he just needs to tune into “The Bad Christian Podcast.”

  112. Barbara Roberts wrote:

    “For the last couple of years, that way that our marriage has sort of parted ways, as, to be frank, as, I really wanted it to work but her heart was going in a different direction.

    Well, trust lost on a grand scale is difficult to regain. How can you stay married to someone you can’t trust?

  113. @ Karen:
    Thank you, Karen, for sharing your story. Your experience is exactly why this old, reluctant commenter has entered the blogosphere fray. New Calvinism is taking a multitude of folks down a road which will end in despair and disillusionment – they don’t see it now, but they will. Thus, we must warn. Praise God that you have come out on the other side.

  114. Darlene wrote:

    “Should he being doing that right now?” I sure hope not. But if he does, we know the strings are being pulled in his favor because of being the son of J.P.

    Well, it appears that the beat goes on. BP is speaking ‘today’ at Brentwood Academy during their “Spiritual Emphasis Week”. He is listed on the speaker’s list to expose these young folks to as a “former skeptic.” http://www.brentwoodacademy.com/page.cfm?p=4700

    I repeat … Should he be doing that right now?

  115. @ Karen:
    I really appreciated your commentary. Would you consider expanding it in the form of a guest post? I believe MANY here could benefit from your wisdom. 🙂

  116. @ Matilda:
    I have noticed that as well! Scot McKnight is one good guy who allows for great discussions. Some might call him liberal but I wouldn’t.

  117. Max wrote:

    Well, it appears that the beat goes on. BP is speaking ‘today’ at Brentwood Academy during their “Spiritual Emphasis Week”. He is listed on the speaker’s list to expose these young folks to as a “former skeptic.”

    Seriously? Oh good night! His brother may have been a skeptic but I wouldn’t call him one. He has stayed in the Christian community as a place to earn money.

  118. Max wrote:

    Darlene wrote:

    “Should he being doing that right now?” I sure hope not. But if he does, we know the strings are being pulled in his favor because of being the son of J.P.

    Well, it appears that the beat goes on. BP is speaking ‘today’ at Brentwood Academy during their “Spiritual Emphasis Week”. He is listed on the speaker’s list to expose these young folks to as a “former skeptic.” http://www.brentwoodacademy.com/page.cfm?p=4700

    I repeat … Should he be doing that right now?

    Wow. Does BP not get it? Who are these people who keep inviting him to speak?

  119. dee wrote:

    Max wrote:

    Well, it appears that the beat goes on. BP is speaking ‘today’ at Brentwood Academy during their “Spiritual Emphasis Week”. He is listed on the speaker’s list to expose these young folks to as a “former skeptic.”

    Seriously? Oh good night! His brother may have been a skeptic but I wouldn’t call him one. He has stayed in the Christian community as a place to earn money.

    He has no shame, it is obvious by his actions. How confusing it must be to young people following his life as an example of Christianity.

  120. @ Lydia:
    Oh, I have NO idea what it means or how it works. It’s one of those platitudinal cliches that is really meaningless. Wait! Maybe it means….’agrees with me’? :o)

  121. dee wrote:

    Seriously?

    Well, he’s still listed on the link for this conference as of this morning. If so, he will be taking the platform shortly as a former skeptic of something or other.

  122. dee wrote:

    @ Matilda:
    I have noticed that as well! Scot McKnight is one good guy who allows for great discussions. Some might call him liberal but I wouldn’t.

    I’m a regular reader of McKnight’s, and I enjoy his posts. He’s very good about dialoguing with those who disagree, too. I don’t read any other Patheos blogs for the reason Matilda mentioned.

    If you can’t handle disagreement, then you probably don’t believe what you believe because you’ve struggled with it and refined it. And I don’t bother to read anything by people who haven’t struggled with what they believe, even in the secular realm.

  123. .
    Max wrote:

    Darlene wrote:
    “Should he being doing that right now?” I sure hope not. But if he does, we know the strings are being pulled in his favor because of being the son of J.P.
    Well, it appears that the beat goes on. BP is speaking ‘today’ at Brentwood Academy during their “Spiritual Emphasis Week”. He is listed on the speaker’s list to expose these young folks to as a “former skeptic.” http://www.brentwoodacademy.com/page.cfm?p=4700
    I repeat … Should he be doing that right now?

    I wonder if he is there as a LifeWay employee? Or is this a separate paid gig with the BP brand and book promotion? They have such bizarre double dipping going on at SBC entities for some.

  124. Warning! Any famous Christian leaders who read here! Avoid, as you would the plague, ANY assignment or encouragement of your offspring into the professional religious business! Both they and the church will thank you!

  125. dee wrote:

    His brother may have been a skeptic but I wouldn’t call him one. He has stayed in the Christian community as a place to earn money.

    Remember Dustin Boles?

  126. ishy wrote:

    If you can’t handle disagreement, then you probably don’t believe what you believe because you’ve struggled with it and refined it.

    I think it’s a big problem when people feel they have to shut off their brain to other ideas, like it’s going to corrupt their own. You should be able to listen, ponder and still come out with the same opinion, if you’re really correct. If you’re not, don’t you want to know? I think a lot of people are afraid of hearing something that will make them question so they won’t listen. Or maybe they’re just afraid (in the case of ministry ‘leaders’/bloggers) that someone ELSE will hear another opinion and start to disagree with them.

  127. @ Max:
    Oh yes. And I think we will see more claiming the same. It is cool and attracts a new audience. I am thinking a Christian Industrial Complex return policy is in order. No exchanges but money back only. :o)

  128. Lydia wrote:

    I wonder if he is there as a LifeWay employee? Or is this a separate paid gig with the BP brand and book promotion? They have such bizarre double dipping going on at SBC entities for some.

    BP might be listed in the conference program at the meeting re: LifeWay affiliation, but not listed as such on the conference site. LifeWay is doing a good job promoting BP’s books (http://www.lifeway.com/Keyword/piper+barnabas) … along with JP’s vast literary treasure (http://www.lifeway.com/Keyword/piper+john). Which is why I haven’t shopped at LifeWay in years. When non-Calvinist Southern Baptists (still the majority of us) have to stumble over a rack of New Calvinist books at the front door of LifeWay outlets, it’s time to move on. Before you know it, LifeWay will hire the son of New Calvinist royalty as a “Brand Manager” (oh, wait a minute …)

  129. @ prodinov:

    “The Bad Christian Podcast…foul language has become more than a statement…it is their signature. So…compared to some of their most recent episodes, these guys now spend the bulk of their time talking about themselves and how depraved they are…so it has become all about them….this show has no legs. If guys claiming they can utter the f word and talk about mastering with themselves think they are innovative, they are not,”
    +++++++++++++++++++

    sounds like it’s riddled with gimmicks.

    among other integrity-compromisers & soul sellouts, anathema to a true artist.

    really, the rise of self = the proportional decline of artistic inspiration.

  130. Karen wrote:

    I was also told by this lot, that a women should never be allowed to vote, and if she did vote, it should be according to the husband’s choice for he is the head.

    That is the reason Utah had to deny women the vote in order to get Statehood. The fear that Mormon Patriarchs would increase their voting clout through their plural wives.

    As Plunkett of Tammany Hall put it (re New York Machine politics), “I got a friend to vote the same way as me; I now had Two votes instead of just one. Then I got the same agreement from every voter in my tenement — Fifty votes instead of just one or two! That’s when I didn’t need to go to the ward bosses to make a deal — they started coming to me.”

  131. Lea wrote:

    Lydia wrote:
    BP said, “People want to know details for the same reason they read Tabloids”.
    This is hilarious because it’s as if he’s some celebrity that people are digging around to find out the latest gossip on, when I never heard of him until a few days

    Probably because you weren’t immersed in the Piper-Calvinist sub-bubble of the Christianese bubble. Amazing how a smaller pond makes you a bigger fish.

  132. elastigirl wrote:

    @ prodinov:
    “The Bad Christian Podcast…foul language has become more than a statement…it is their signature. So…compared to some of their most recent episodes, these guys now spend the bulk of their time talking about themselves and how depraved they are…so it has become all about them….this show has no legs. If guys claiming they can utter the f word and talk about mastering with themselves think they are innovative, they are not,”

    Shock Jocks playing Can-You-Top-This with themselves on the air.

    Reminds me of a comeback I used to give back in Usenet days:
    “There are 50,000 words in English besides ‘F**k’ and ‘You’. You might want to expand your vocabulary.”
    (The response to this was always a long string of FU-bombs.)

  133. Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

    Probably because you weren’t immersed in the Piper-Calvinist sub-bubble of the Christianese bubble.

    That’s true. I didn’t even know who John Piper was until I started reading this blog! The only ones I was familiar with were Dever and Robert Morris and that was because I had attended both of their churches at one time (CHBC regularly and Gateway as a guest).

  134. Lydia wrote:

    @ Max:
    Oh yes. And I think we will see more claiming the same. It is cool and attracts a new audience.

    In this context, the spelling really should be “KEWL(TM)!”

  135. Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

    Shock Jocks playing Can-You-Top-This with themselves on the air.

    “Comedians” go to this well sometimes too, the more foul or dirty I can be the funnier and more interesting I am. Not so! Meanwhile, sometimes the funniest stuff tends to be about generic things, like sheet thread counts.

    For the ‘Bad Christian’ people, there is a stage when you get out of the strict religious no-cussing/talking about tacky things upbringing when it’s like a huge rebellious to use profanity and be tacky. It sounds like they’re still in that phase maybe? Or they’re appealing to people who are.

  136. Joe Reed wrote:

    but I don’t know and neither do you.

    Joe, that is exactly the point. He is a public figure, somewhat famous in his domain, and insists on publicizing his divorce here and there. He is John Piper’s son, which IS relevant. We know nothing about the background of this situation except what BP himself has publicized, and so naturally, we WANT to know what’s really going on.

    All he would have had to do was keep his mouth shut, and none of this would be happening. But he keeps spouting off.

  137. Lea wrote:

    Just seems like a stupid buzzword phase that means nothing.

    It ranks up there with the stupid buzzword phrase “do life together.” Like nails on a chalkboard…

  138. Amy Smith wrote:

    It ranks up there with the stupid buzzword phrase “do life together.”

    Yeah, that one is silly too. I don’t ‘do life’ with my friends. I do stuff. Or talk. Or whatever. Why the need to be so stupidly unspecific??

  139. Lea wrote:

    Amy Smith wrote:

    It ranks up there with the stupid buzzword phrase “do life together.”

    Yeah, that one is silly too. I don’t ‘do life’ with my friends. I do stuff. Or talk. Or whatever. Why the need to be so stupidly unspecific??

    whatever became of ‘just hanging out’?

  140. Lea wrote:

    Or maybe they’re just afraid (in the case of ministry ‘leaders’/bloggers) that someone ELSE will hear another opinion and start to disagree with them.

    I think that’s definitely the case with the Calvinistas. They are all about carefully controlled narrative, or else they probably wouldn’t have the power and finances that they do.

    I don’t follow any of the Patheos bloggers beyond Scot McKnight, so I don’t know if that’s the case for them. I do think there’s a lot of people out there that believe they can’t handle any sort of disagreement or they will be sunk.

  141. Deb wrote:

    Interesting…

    Oh yes, very interesting that BP is keeping his speaking commitments right now. He even spoke at Barna’s “The State of Pastors” conference last week in Malibu, CA. Speaking on the topic of “Pastors and Family”, he related his life as a pastor’s kid, noting the “chameleon aspect of becoming what you need to be as the situation demands … constantly playing a role.” You can view his presentation beginning at 02:26 on: http://www.barna.com/watchpastors2017/#

  142. Max wrote:

    Deb wrote:

    Interesting…

    Oh yes, very interesting that BP is keeping his speaking commitments right now. He even spoke at Barna’s “The State of Pastors” conference last week in Malibu, CA. Speaking on the topic of “Pastors and Family”, he related his life as a pastor’s kid, noting the “chameleon aspect of becoming what you need to be as the situation demands … constantly playing a role.” You can view his presentation beginning at 02:26 on: http://www.barna.com/watchpastors2017/#

    BP is not only a hypocrite, but unashamedly a hypocrite. How is he qualified to speak about Pastors and their families?

  143. Lea wrote:

    For the ‘Bad Christian’ people, there is a stage when you get out of the strict religious no-cussing/talking about tacky things upbringing when it’s like a huge rebellious to use profanity and be tacky. It sounds like they’re still in that phase maybe? Or they’re appealing to people who are.

    Probably. You get stifled in one direction, when the stifling lifts you’ll flip into the complete opposite direction with equal intensity. Communism begets Objectivism.

  144. mot wrote:

    BP is not only a hypocrite, but unashamedly a hypocrite. How is he qualified to speak about Pastors and their families?

    His last name is PIPER(TM).

  145. Christiane wrote:

    Lea wrote:

    Amy Smith wrote:
    It ranks up there with the stupid buzzword phrase “do life together.”

    Yeah, that one is silly too. I don’t ‘do life’ with my friends. I do stuff. Or talk. Or whatever. Why the need to be so stupidly unspecific??
    whatever became of ‘just hanging out’?

    Not DEEP and/or TRENDY enough.

  146. Lydia wrote:

    I think there is some term for this when people over identify with some leader, guru or celeb they really don’t know personally

    “Living vicariously”, perhaps?

  147. Jack wrote:

    Passionate maybe, flowery not so much. Hey, in a previous post, John “pulverizer” Piper proudly proclaimed he was part of a football game where a guys neck got broken. Don’t underestimate the the “Complementarian Crusher”

    I concur. Many of them live in a Braveheart , Rocky IV fantasy world.

  148. Max wrote:

    Joe Reed wrote:
    Youth is high on energy, low on wisdom, and in power often makes massive and costly errors.
    The Church needs the energy of youth coupled with the wisdom of age … young folks to speed things up, old guys to slow it down. We are losing that balance as the generations clash on how to do church in the 21st century. An inexperienced “lead pastor” in his 20s-30s, with a hand-picked “elder” team in their 20s-30s is an accident waiting to happen. I suppose it could work if these folks were spiritually mature, but the reports continue to stream in about flesh ruling, not spirit.

    this site needs a like button!

  149. roebuck wrote:

    All he would have had to do was keep his mouth shut, and none of this would be happening. But he keeps spouting off.

    The more he reveals about the divorce, the less unfair it is to his wife, who remains tight-lipped.

  150. Deb wrote:

    BP’s speaking gigs

    Oh, and did you note that the state of “The State of Pastors” was that they were basking in the sun last week in Malibu! Don’t worry about them – they will be alright.

  151. Jack wrote:

    @ Lydia:
    Passionate maybe, flowery not so much. Hey, in a previous post, John “pulverizer” Piper proudly proclaimed he was part of a football game where a guys neck got broken. Don’t underestimate the the “Complementarian Crusher”

    In the Seventies there was this pop psychology system called “Transactional Analysis” which in a book called Games People Play coined the term “Mind Games”.

    One of the mind games cataloged in the book was “Tough Guy”, where someone hangs out with Hardened Tough Guys (Marines, SEALs, gangsters, etc) and/or brags about being one of them. Usually with the imagery of Violent Hypermaculinity. Said “Tough Guys” could never make it physically or mentally or emotionally to become one of the REAL Tough Guys, so they pose and brag instead.

    In gamer fandom, the type example is the short skinny wet-noodle guy who in his whiny voice announces “I’M A NINJA! I COULD KILL YOU ALL WITH JUST ONE FINGER!”

    In Intellectual(TM) circles, the Goth-pale morbid bookworm who learns all about violence and death so he can lecture everyone around him in full gory detail.

    Piper Sr IRL is a short, skinny man with feminine histrionic mannerisms. And American-rules Football is THE prestige sport for Hypermasculinity in the USA. Think there’s a game of “Tough Guy” going on here?

  152. Muff Potter wrote:

    Jack wrote:
    Passionate maybe, flowery not so much. Hey, in a previous post, John “pulverizer” Piper proudly proclaimed he was part of a football game where a guys neck got broken. Don’t underestimate the the “Complementarian Crusher”

    I concur. Many of them live in a Braveheart , Rocky IV fantasy world.

    Like “William Wallace II” who never seemed to realize that Braveheart was HEAVILY fictionalized?

  153. @ ishy:
    I do feel it is mainly Patheos evangelical bloggers who don’t allow comments other than ones that thoroughly agree with them. I find more integrity in allowing others to politely put a different viewpoint as non-evangelical bloggers do. To rebuff a commenter with rudeness is less than christian IMO. And most bloggers other than evangelicals never comment on their own posts, especially with nasty insults. Maybe they are fearful of others with new opinions, maybe their egos are big and they need adulation and affirmation from everyone. How dare we lesser mortals question their hotline to God. (Sorry Deb, off my soapbox…I’ll creep away…)

  154. When I divorced my mentally/verbally/spiritually abusive husband 6 years ago, I was a basket case. I spent about 3 years going to a couple of different divorce recovery groups. They were very helpful and I’m much better now.

    However, that means I spent a lot of time listening to people who were recently divorced or in the process of divorce. I listened to Barnabas Piper on that podcast, and he didn’t sound like most of the people I met through church-based divorce recovery groups. People who have done something to damage/destroy their marriage are wracked with guilt and shame. They say that it’s understandable to lose the trust of their spouse and they hope they can be forgiven someday. Piper didn’t do that. He blamed his ex-wife for the marriage ending.

    In divorce recovery groups we would occasionally see someone come in who sounded like Piper. They inevitably would let it slip that they had done something awful to their former spouse (usually an affair). Now I’m not claiming that Piper had an affair. Maybe the “only” thing he did was tell a single lie that was so egregious that he lost his job and his marriage over it. But I’m pretty sure there was a LOT more involved than a single lie.

    As far as the abuse allegations…some might say that lying to a point that you lose your job is financial abuse. Did he also lie to his wife? If so, did he lie about important things? Can lying be a factor in emotional abuse? It was in my marriage.

    On his blog, Piper wrote “And strangely I believe more in marriage now than I ever have. I believe it is worth fighting for and investing in. I belief it is worth pain and tears and patience and forgiveness and then doing all of that again and again.” My question: Whose pain and tears and forgiveness? Did he expect to be endlessly forgiven because marriage is more important than people? Also, why didn’t he mention his lie on his blog?

    I feel deep empathy for Piper’s former wife. She cannot say anything about him because his earnings (and therefore her child support) is based on Piper continuing in the “family business” of professional “Christian.”

  155. Serving Kids In Japan wrote:

    Lydia wrote:

    I think there is some term for this when people over identify with some leader, guru or celeb they really don’t know personally

    “Living vicariously”, perhaps?

    Hee hee. Back in my mega days I used to liken it to people who start identifying with soap opera characters or realty show characters as if they really know and understand them beyond the cult of personality.

  156. Lydia wrote:

    Back in my mega days I used to liken it to people who start identifying with soap opera characters or realty show characters as if they really know and understand them beyond the cult of personality.

    Maybe this comes from “growing up Martian” as a poorly-socialized kid genius who speed-read books every waking minute, but I’ve always been able to empathize with fictional characters more than RL people.

  157. Elizabeth Lee wrote:

    As far as the abuse allegations…some might say that lying to a point that you lose your job is financial abuse. Did he also lie to his wife? If so, did he lie about important things? Can lying be a factor in emotional abuse? It was in my marriage.

    So glad you wrote this. Putting his family in that position is serious business.

    Yep, the “gag” order can be financial but also part of custody issues. Charges of Alienation are serious.

  158. Elizabeth Lee wrote:

    Did he also lie to his wife? If so, did he lie about important things? Can lying be a factor in emotional abuse? It was in my marriage.

    Lying is very serious to me. I would be pretty mad even if someone lied about something as simple as saying they had been at McDonalds when they had actually been to target.

    And I agree with you that lying to the point of losing your job has very serious ramifications for a marriage, even if you didn’t lie to your wife.

  159. Karen wrote:

    I was also told by this lot, that a women should never be allowed to vote, and if she did vote, it should be according to the husband’s choice for he is the head. This is how controlling and manipulative this lot of religion is….and it’s an apostate religion with no life in it. Just death

    I went into a downward spiral over what churches in my area teach about women. They are not quite as bad as the church you describe. I realized that, if women are actually human beings who have souls, of those teachings are contrary to what Jesus said. When He said, “do unto others as you would have them do unto you”‘ and when He gave the second of the two greatest commandments, “love thy neighbor as thyself”, He didn’t say, “Now hey y’all. Never mind the wimmenfolk. I’m just talking about men here!” What Jesus said is across the board, no gender or racial boundaries.

  160. It is tough to read about divorce, esp. when about to finally embark upon one (legally) soon, & it can feel like sticking your nose where it shouldn’t go. The problem is that Baby Piper, unless he has clearly rejected complementarian beliefs, is part of a world which has exercised iron control over the theology & practice of marriage, even raising it to be one of the central tenets of the gospel itself. They have sentenced untold women to a life of slavish submission & often abuse. when someone from this world fails leading at this oh-so-sacred task of ‘leading’ his wife, then questions are going to be asked which sound intrusive. Because the entire world he comes from has intruded, unapologetically, into the marriages of many many tens of thousands (or more)to the point of determining people’s behaviour to their spouses, & putting marriage itself above human welfare. It’s tough, but hey, that’s life under the marriagotocracy.

  161. Beakerj wrote:

    The problem is that Baby Piper, unless he has clearly rejected complementarian beliefs, is part of a world which has exercised iron control over the theology & practice of marriage, even raising it to be one of the central tenets of the gospel itself.

    You get what we are trying to do here.

  162. Beakerj wrote:

    Baby Piper

    Heh.

    I’m torn because I don’t to blame the guy for his fathers views, which are ridiculous, but he’s also hitching his wagon to his dad and following in the family business. So.

    His dad has in the past said stuff like “I don’t think the Bible allows divorce and remarriage ever while the spouse is living. That’s my radical, crazy, conservative, narrow, hard-nosed, very needed view in our divorce-happy culture”. So either he’s going to shun his son when he (inevitably) get remarried, or change his tune. I do suspect growing up with this viewpoint, baby piper probably never thought his wife would end it. Because she isn’t allowed.

  163. @ Preacher’s Wife:

    “she voted for Trump “to remain in Godly submission to her husband!””
    +++++++++++++

    sounds like a meme to me!

    (i mean, i think it does — i still don’t quite understand what one is… my kids tried to explain it to me,… i dunno…)

    but it makes a darn good fully fledged *basket* of a good point.

  164. Lea wrote:

    I do suspect growing up with this viewpoint, baby piper probably never thought his wife would end it. Because she isn’t allowed.

    In general, Reality has a way of upsetting all our Perfect Systems.
    Reality throws curveballs.

  165. @ Lea:

    “…dishonesty, and that was a tipping point for his wife

    …She probably rethought everything he ever said, wondering what was a lie and what was the truth. And wondered the same going forward”
    +++++++++++++++++

    darn lying… i tell my kids it’s a relationship killer. a life ruiner. it’s not worth whatever it is you might get out of it (aside from it being plain wrong). you simply cannot truly be trusted again. not completely.

    [actually, the topic of lying is an interesting one. an episode of Red Dwarf [BBC sci-fi comedy illustrated it well. a mechanoid is programmed to always tell the truth — his greatest wish is to be human, but this kind of auto-truth-telling programming makes it impossible for him to have successful relationships with humans. His human companion explained that humans lie all the time so as not to hurt other people’s feelings…

    but of course there’s white lies and there’s deceptive self-serving lie-telling.]

  166. From BP’s coming-soon new book “The Curious Christian”:

    “Love Lost – Marriages are powerful and fragile, and they are incredibly difficult too. Marriage takes remarkable effort because love gives in to the inertia of life. It stalls and stales unless we intentionally, passionately, actively fight to keep it going and living and sparking. Only curiosity will do this because it recognizes the unknown depths of the spouse and the
    relationship and seeks to learn and love it all. Uncuriosity sits idly by
    and lets the love grow still, cold, and dead.” (Barnabas Piper)

  167. Darlene wrote:

    He can abandon the views of his father on marriage/remarriage, which will obviously offend/hurt John Piper. But Barnabas would be able to at least consider the idea of remarriage, which would alleviate the stress of never being able to have S_X again.

    However, one consequence to that is the John Piper zealots might prevent him from having a career in Christian publishing.

  168. elastigirl wrote:

    but of course there’s white lies and there’s deceptive self-serving lie-telling

    I’m going to horribly mangle one of the ted talks I saw on lying, but iirc the speaker basically said that everybody occasionally tells these little white lie/slightly deceptive lies…but NOT everyone tells the real flat out lies. What I took from that is that most people are either basically truthful in the ways that matter, or not. I would not trust a person who is not.

    Max wrote:

    Marriage takes remarkable effort

    At least he assumes it does, because he didn’t actual do the work. Is that what he’s saying here?

  169. Bill M wrote:

    I thought Joe’s point useful, having well known parents is a mixed blessing. You inherit their critics if you follow their footsteps and you reap a pre-assembled jury of his followers if you diverge. It would be very hard to be your own person.

    A couple of his siblings have left the Christian arena. Barnabas is staying in the realm and is getting the benefit of being Piper’s kid.

  170. Elizabeth Lee wrote:

    On his blog, Piper wrote “And strangely I believe more in marriage now than I ever have. I believe it is worth fighting for and investing in. I belief it is worth pain and tears and patience and forgiveness and then doing all of that again and again.” My question: Whose pain and tears and forgiveness? Did he expect to be endlessly forgiven because marriage is more important than people? Also, why didn’t he mention his lie on his blog?

    Yes. He lost trust with his wife. But it sounds like he expects her to put up with whatever. . . “for the marriage.”

  171. @ Deb:
    Deebs: BP was not even on my radar until his odd post popped up. So I’ve been checking out his writing and speaking. I think it would help if he would get over being a PK, but odd seems to be genetic. His interview with those bad Christian dudes to discuss his failed marriage was just darn weird. He needs to go away somewhere with just his Bible.

  172. Joe Reed wrote:

    Maybe all the speculation is true,

    The only speculation going on here is this. He blamed his wife in his original post. In the podcast he admits to lying and losing his job. Therefore, there is more to this story. he wanted it to become public knowledge and this blog is public so he got what he wanted in that regard.

  173. Joe Reed wrote:

    $20 says if this was Pastor Wade’s son (and I like him, and don’t know if he has a son), this whole thread would sound different.

    If he was Pastor Wade’s son, he would not be writing posts to declare his pristine image. Remember, we only responded because he went public with a post, lotsa tweets and now a podcast all regarding his divorce. He got the attention he sought. You truly have us wrong and I am not sure that you get it.

    Also, Wade has critiqued us on one occasion in a post. Both parties are a bit more open than you might imagine. Please feel free to do some searches on me and my family and let me know what you find. I can take it.

  174. Lea wrote:

    “Marriage takes remarkable effort (Barnabas Piper)”

    At least he assumes it does, because he didn’t actual do the work. Is that what he’s saying here?

    The “beauty of complimentarity” just doesn’t seem to be working for some of these folks. When you spend your time and energy forcing marital roles to fit the expectations of reformed belief and practice, it can place a lot of stress on a relationship. Gosh, how many New Calvinist celebrity marriages have come apart just in the last year as reported by TWW?! If the leaders can’t make it work, they don’t need to be preaching this stuff to others!

  175. dee wrote:

    JYJames wrote:

    TWW Deebs are highly courageous.

    Or masochistic.

    And GreekEpigraph loses a keyboard to spitting coffee everywhere . .

  176. The very fact that thousands are flocking to New Calvinist conferences to hear the likes of the Pipers speak, buying their strange books, or tuning into bad christian podcasts for a fresh scoop on them, is evidence to me that the American church has been taken hostage. Good Lord, we are losing a generation of young folks to this aberration of faith!

  177. Lea wrote:

    I’m torn because I don’t to blame the guy for his fathers views, which are ridiculous, but he’s also hitching his wagon to his dad and following in the family business.

    The bible does say something about the children not having their teeth set on edge for the parents’ eating of sour grapes— just for eating their own.
    I’d like to use this as a jumping off for a bit of a tangent– not about Baby Piper who keeps blabbing about his divorce, but Baby Piper the author of “The Pastor’s Kid”. Has anyone read it? Does he study scripture on the topic, or just relate his experiences? I’m wondering because– the Old Testament says a great deal about the topic— the dozens of kids of patriarchs, prophets, priests, or kings alike hitched their wagons to their dads and followed in the family business. And most often it ended badly. For example, in I Sam 8, “1When Samuel grew old, he appointed his sons as Israel’s leaders. 2The name of his firstborn was Joel and the name of his second was Abijah, and they served at Beersheba. 3But his sons did not follow his ways. They turned aside after dishonest gain and accepted bribes and perverted justice. 4So all the elders of Israel gathered together” (and demanded a king). You’d have thought Samuel would have learned something from Eli and his lads..
    But we see a drastic change in the New Testament. How many early Christian leaders are reported to have had kids who became leaders themselves? I can think of just one— maybe someone can think of more.

  178. @ Max:
    I’m begging you to please, please tell me this is a joke and that no publisher has actually published those words.

  179. Lea wrote:

    baby piper probably never thought his wife would end it. Because she isn’t allowed.

    This is probably true. It is definitely true on PlanetPatriarchy.

  180. Gram3 wrote:

    @ Max:
    I’m begging you to please, please tell me this is a joke and that no publisher has actually published those words.

    Right?! The acorn did not fall far (enough?) from the tree.

  181. Gram3 wrote:

    @ Max:
    I’m begging you to please, please tell me this is a joke and that no publisher has actually published those words.

    maybe BP is telling lies …. again ….. old habits die hard.
    His ability to write in florabundant Piperisms beats all, doesn’t it?

  182. @ Gram3:
    I thought the same thing. Trying not to paint him with Pere Piper’s brush, but I thought about the first thing Pere Piper thought of, that maybe a wife shouldn’t have to joyfully submit to.

  183. Max wrote:

    From BP’s coming-soon new book “The Curious Christian”: …”Uncuriosity sits idly by
    and lets the love grow still, cold, and dead.” (Barnabas Piper)

    Perhaps Barnabas was so uncurious regarding the importance of truthfulness that his wife finally told him to take a hike.

    I can sooo relate.

  184. Max wrote:

    Well, it appears that the beat goes on. BP is speaking ‘today’ at Brentwood Academy during their “Spiritual Emphasis Week”. He is listed on the speaker’s list to expose these young folks to as a “former skeptic.” http://www.brentwoodacademy.com/page.cfm?p=4700

    I repeat … Should he be doing that right now?

    How on earth can he do that? He’s spent his entire life within the church bubble. Maybe this is how BP reinvents himself and keeps up his credibility, but my goodness, the real skeptics out there would eat his lunch if he tried that story. (For the record, not a skeptic and pretty annoyed with the so-called skeptic/atheist community because they have their own problems with women.)

  185. @ Dave A A:

    Wasn't curiosity a problem when it happened down by the river or something? If someone ever invents an Enigma machine to decipher Piper code, we are going to be in trouble, and a lot of Pipettes are going to be very disappointed.

  186. Little did I realize when John Piper listed his “12 Features of New Calvinism” that point number 10 was about his son:

    <blockquote
    10. The New Calvinism is vibrantly engaged in publishing books, and, even more remarkably, in the world of the Internet, with hundreds of energetic bloggers and social media activists, with Twitter as the increasingly-default way of signalling things new and old that should be noticed and read.

  187. I am not a psy* and I am not speaking specifically about BP because I do not know BP. Some personality disorders feature habitual lying, even when lying sabotages the person’s self-interest. In other words, the disordered persons lies even when it is stupid to lie because there is some need that is perceived to be met that overrides the perceived consequence resulting from the lie. That is stated very inelegantly, but relationships cannot flourish(!) under those conditions.

    Regardless of whether that applies to anyone in the larger Piper family, I hope that any and all of them get all available professional help for any needs they have resulting from this. And I mean professional, licensed help that is well beyond so-called nouthetic or ABC-XYZ counseling. Especially the children.

  188. Gram3 wrote:

    @ Max:
    I’m begging you to please, please tell me this is a joke and that no publisher has actually published those words.

    Lol! Like his father, they write like really bad romance novelists. It is just so incongruent with the male leadership meme.

  189. Christiane wrote:

    His ability to write in florabundant Piperisms beats all, doesn’t it?

    It’s a family sickness. Reading their writing is like a being a termite in a yo-yo. Huh?!

    “The point is: a $70,000 salary does not have to be accompanied by a $70,000 lifestyle. God is calling us to be conduits of his grace, not cul-de-sacs. Our great danger today is thinking that the conduit should be lined with gold. It shouldn’t. Copper will do. No matter how grateful we are, gold will not make the work think that our God is good; it will make people think that our God is gold. That is no honor to the supremacy of His worth.” (John Piperism, Let the Nations Be Glad)

  190. Max wrote:

    Pere Piper:God is calling us to be conduits of his grace, not cul-de-sacs.

    Tell me again why people think this guy is brilliant? IT’s like they don’t know the meaning of these words so they think that sounds smart.

    Max wrote:

    Baby Piper: Only curiosity will do this because it recognizes the unknown depths of the spouse and the relationship

    Two comments. One, why were your spouses depths unknown? Did you not bother to get to know them before?

    And two, I don’t like they want they are anthropomorphizing relationships and marriages and they do it all the time. It died. It needs to be learned and has depths. Etc. Maybe that’s part of the problem they’re having where they think they can ignore the people in the relationship when they ‘working’ on the relationship. Thats not going to work.

  191. Max wrote:

    “The point is: a $70,000 salary does not have to be accompanied by a $70,000 lifestyle. God is calling us to be conduits of his grace, not cul-de-sacs. Our great danger today is thinking that the conduit should be lined with gold. It shouldn’t. Copper will do. No matter how grateful we are, gold will not make the work think that our God is good; it will make people think that our God is gold. That is no honor to the supremacy of His worth.” (John Piperism, Let the Nations Be Glad)

    what? what did he say?
    ?????

  192. Gram3 wrote:

    Wasn’t curiosity a problem when it happened down by the river or something?

    Only curiosity will do this because it recognizes the unknown depths of depravity of overly-hormoned teenagers. Uncuriosity sits with the car idling and lets the unsent inane tweets grow still, cold, and dead.

  193. Beakerj wrote:

    the entire world he comes from has intruded, unapologetically, into the marriages of many many tens of thousands (or more)to the point of determining people’s behaviour to their spouses, & putting marriage itself above human welfare.

    I think you pointed out something very important in the intrusiveness of these teachings (or demands, is more like it). They have intruded into the most private aspects of peoples’ lives, putting themselves in a position of control over what people may and may not do, on pain of excommunication. But when the shoe is on the other foot, they want to do as they will and they want their privacy about doing it.

  194. Lea wrote:

    Maybe that’s part of the problem they’re having where they think they can ignore the people in the relationship when they ‘working’

    It’s about the institution of marriage, not the individuals involved. Marriage is holy. Individuals are worms.

  195. Dave A A wrote:

    Gram3 wrote:
    Wasn’t curiosity a problem when it happened down by the river or something?
    Only curiosity will do this because it recognizes the unknown depths of depravity of overly-hormoned teenagers. Uncuriosity sits with the car idling and lets the unsent inane tweets grow still, cold, and dead.

    Lol! Wasn’t there also Psalm about depths linked to plunging necklines?

  196. mot wrote:

    BP is not only a hypocrite, but unashamedly a hypocrite. How is he qualified to speak about Pastors and their families?

    “Do as I say, not as I do”

  197. John Piper in 2007:

    In sum, what I am pleading for here is that Jesus’ standards for marriage were higher than the rabbinic schools. He is radical, not accommodating. The world we live in needs to see a church that is so satisfied in Christ that its marriages are not abandoned for something as amorphous as “emotional neglect.” The deepest meaning of marriage is to display the covenant-keeping faithfulness of Christ and his church (Ephesians 5:25). And Christ will never divorce his wife and take another.

    http://www.desiringgod.org/articles/tragically-widening-the-grounds-of-legitimate-divorce

  198. @ Gram3:
    We usually know when someone is outright lying. Deception. That’s where it takes a while to piece it together. Deception is lying because it leads you to believe things that are not true and requires manipulation. If evil was wearing horns, we would know right away. It presents itself as beautiful,

  199. John Piper in 2014:

    If anything but death is an option for ending a marriage, then don’t say “until death” in your wedding vows. Tell the truth. Promise what is meant. Say something like “until adultery, abandonment, or abuse.” Say what you mean. God never lies (Titus 1:2) and delights in truth-telling and oath-keeping.

    Some disapprove, saying that Jesus allows exceptions — that is, he allows divorce in cases of adultery — but a careful reading of Matthew 5:32 shows that adultery does not nullify or overrule what God has joined together. Rather than adultery being a cause for divorce, it is the divorce and remarriage of divorced parties which causes adultery.

    We are free to divorce when Jesus divorces the Church, which is never. (Even the divorce in Isaiah 50 is not a divorce from those he predestined, called, justified, and glorified, but rather a temporary action taken against ethnic Israel, who was never en masse the true bride in the first place.) We are free to remarry when Jesus remarries a bride other than the elect bride, which is not as long as the spouse lives.

    http://www.desiringgod.org/articles/until-death-do-we-part-for-real

  200. siteseer wrote:

    mot wrote:

    BP is not only a hypocrite, but unashamedly a hypocrite. How is he qualified to speak about Pastors and their families?

    “Do as I say, not as I do”

    I have been sick for years of the church blaming women for everything–‘just because they will not submit.”

  201. Ken F wrote:

    John Piper in 2014:

    Sorry – did not pay enough attention. That was Sam Crabtree on John Piper’s website in 2014.

  202. Max wrote:

    Speaking on the topic of “Pastors and Family”, he related his life as a pastor’s kid, noting the “chameleon aspect of becoming what you need to be as the situation demands … constantly playing a role.” You can view his presentation beginning at 02:26 on: http://www.barna.com/watchpastors2017/#

    I find it very confusing that he speaks of his life as a pastor’s kid in terms of having to “play roles” or “be a chameleon”. He’s speaking of having to play a certain role in front of missionaries, or whoever was visiting, for instance. I am getting the feeling of someone having to pretend they are something they’re not when in front of different people or groups. Now, we all need to learn appropriate manners so we don’t offend people. But I don’t think of this in terms of playing a role. A role is something you slip on and off. Who is the person when not in front of an audience?

  203. Lydia wrote:

    How much did it cost to fly a crew to Geneva to film a retirement video?

    You can rent film crews anywhere. If he flew a crew out instead of making arrangements for a local director, cameraman, sound man and lighting person, then he wasted money. But it wouldn’t surprise me to find out he did this. (It’s not merely the crew that’s expensive, it’s all the equipment, hundreds of pounds.)

  204. mot wrote:

    siteseer wrote:

    mot wrote:

    BP is not only a hypocrite, but unashamedly a hypocrite. How is he qualified to speak about Pastors and their families?

    “Do as I say, not as I do”

    I have been sick for years of the church blaming women for everything–‘just because they will not submit.”

    just immature ‘boys’, trying to act like men, by standing on the backs of women

  205. Blurb for BP’s book:

    “Without curiosity a Christian’s life is incomplete. His relationship with God is incomplete. His connections to others are incomplete.”

    My thoughts:
    1. Daddy Piper says christian hedonism is the preeminent thing, the thing that’s essential if you are being a true Christian.
    2. Sonny Piper says curiosity is the preeminent thing, the thing that’s essential if you want to have a complete relationship with God and with other people.

    Why is curiosity the number one thing for Barnabas Piper? Dare I think that it’s because he has chronically LACKED curiosity, which might have been a large cause of falling short in relating to his wife?

    And now, recently, perhaps he’s had a LIGHT BULB moment alerting him to the fact that perhaps he was never curious enough about things, perhaps that included not being curious enough about how his wife felt and what her views and perceptions were… If so, his light bulb moment might have made him think “AHA, I have found a profound truth that I need to tell to the whole world. Because if it’s new to me, it MUST be new to everyone else… and I’m the guy who can teach them about it!”

    Sounds a lot like Daddy Piper to me. By default, John Piper seems to think that HIS insights are what the rest of the world need to be taught. And that’s true for many others in the celeb leader cohort too…

    The Apostle Paul: “And the leaders of the church had nothing to add to what I was preaching. (By the way, their reputation as great leaders made no difference to me, for God has no favorites.)”
    (Gal 2:6 NLT)

  206. Just been able to listen to the podcast. It bothered me….

    1) Barnabas Piper talks as if the divorce stigma is unrelated to his father’s voice on the matter. Not even a hint is made towards John Piper’s very vocal and very ‘hard-nosed’ stance against divorce, which adds to said stigma in evangelical circles. This is the elephant in the room that is never acknowledged as far as I can tell. That said, I am glad to hear his father approached his son pastorally as opposed to polemically in regards to his divorce.

    2) Not a “church leader.” My old philosophy professor said that there are two ways to get out of a tight corner: A) Change the subject or B) draw a distinction. Barnabas drew a distinction. Obviously, he understands that he is a leader or why bother sharing this news?!

    Urrgh.

  207. Christiane wrote:

    mot wrote:

    siteseer wrote:

    mot wrote:

    BP is not only a hypocrite, but unashamedly a hypocrite. How is he qualified to speak about Pastors and their families?

    “Do as I say, not as I do”

    I have been sick for years of the church blaming women for everything–‘just because they will not submit.”

    just immature ‘boys’, trying to act like men, by standing on the backs of women

    Take the women out of most churches and they would crumble IMO.

  208. Lea wrote:

    I think it’s a big problem when people feel they have to shut off their brain to other ideas, like it’s going to corrupt their own. You should be able to listen, ponder and still come out with the same opinion, if you’re really correct. If you’re not, don’t you want to know? I think a lot of people are afraid of hearing something that will make them question so they won’t listen. Or maybe they’re just afraid (in the case of ministry ‘leaders’/bloggers) that someone ELSE will hear another opinion and start to disagree with them.

    This is such a big thing in the church world. One day I realized that if my faith was real, I didn’t need to fear exposing it to challenging viewpoints. And if it wasn’t real enough to survive that, I wanted to know. I’m embarrassed that it had taken me a long time to come to that realization. I wouldn’t go back to that mindset for anything, it’s a cult mindset, really.

    As far as the leaders, I think it’s a calculated move to keep their losses to a minimum.

  209. Lydia wrote:

    BP said, “followers are always crazier than leaders”

    I chuckled when I heard that. “Followers are always crazier than leaders.” What does that tell you about the leaders?

  210. Lea wrote:

    I’m going to horribly mangle one of the ted talks I saw on lying, but iirc the speaker basically said that everybody occasionally tells these little white lie/slightly deceptive lies…but NOT everyone tells the real flat out lies. What I took from that is that most people are either basically truthful in the ways that matter, or not. I would not trust a person who is not.

    So if BP’s wife asked him the question, “Do I look fat in this dress?” should he tell her the truth? Hypothetically speaking, if she looked really fat should he say so or is a little (perhaps not so little) white lie appropriate because a greater good, such as his wife’s self esteem, may be more important?

  211. Lea wrote:

    Well, he apparently said his lies were the beginning of the end. So you don’t really have to guess on that point.

    The thing about a person who lies is that you can’t trust them.

    When a person has proven prone to falsehood, everything they say gets put in an ‘unknown’ category in your mind. Maybe it’s true; maybe it isn’t. Maybe part of it is; which part? Why are they saying it? What do they have to gain by it? What might they be seeking? What’s the point of holding a conversation?

    When you cannot trust someone, you cannot have a relationship. You can act like there is a relationship, but without trust, it just doesn’t work beyond a superficial level.

  212. Ken G wrote:

    So if BP’s wife asked him the question, “Do I look fat in this dress?”

    Can I ask why this is every man in evangelical lands favorite go to example? Have you seen some of the answers suggested??

    I think you’re missing my point entirely, which is those are not the kind of “lies” we are talking about here.

  213. Ken G wrote:

    So if BP’s wife asked him the question, “Do I look fat in this dress?” should he tell her the truth? Hypothetically speaking, if she looked really fat should he say so or is a little (perhaps not so little) white lie appropriate because a greater good, such as his wife’s self esteem, may be more important?

    I really doubt this is the lie he lost his job and his marriage over. Don’t you? Or are you trying to justify lying about important things by the small concessions people try to make for the sake of good manners?

  214. siteseer wrote:

    When a person has proven prone to falsehood, everything they say gets put in an ‘unknown’ category in your mind.

    Even when a relationship is over, you can look back and think he told me X and I can’t think of any reason he would lie about that but still, I don’t I don’t really know. And you think this about every single thing they ever told you.

    Lies are poison to relationships.

  215. Max wrote:

    From BP’s coming-soon new book “The Curious Christian”:

    “Love Lost – Marriages are powerful and fragile, and they are incredibly difficult too. Marriage takes remarkable effort because love gives in to the inertia of life. It stalls and stales unless we intentionally, passionately, actively fight to keep it going and living and sparking. Only curiosity will do this because it recognizes the unknown depths of the spouse and the
    relationship and seeks to learn and love it all. Uncuriosity sits idly by
    and lets the love grow still, cold, and dead.” (Barnabas Piper)

    ARRGGGGGGHHH!

    The publisher ought to pull the book before it gets out there. That is a disgrace, on two counts. It’s a disgrace a recently divorced man could be permitted to write that and make money from his book. It’s a disgrace that a manuscript which argues such a silly idea could be accepted for publication.

    Dare I attempt a translation of BP’s words?
    Here goes. Perhaps, just perhaps, this is what he ought to have written:

    Love Lost – Marriages are powerful and fragile, and they are incredibly difficult too. For me, I eventually found that my marriage required remarkable effort because I had given in to the inertia of life, and my own propensity to lie and deceive and think I could get away with it. I allowed the marriage to stale because I did not intentionally, [redact ‘passionately’] actively work to keep it going and living and sparking. I lacked curiosity and honesty and did not it recognize the depths of my spouse and and seek to learn about and love her, I did not seek to become increasingly one with her. In my uncuriosity I sat idly by
    and let the love grow still, cold, and dead. I believed that I was fighting and doing my very best to keep the marriage going, but in fact I had failed to deal with my deep seated character flaws, so all my efforts to keep the marriage going were useless.”

    Of course, that’s only my speculation. I could be quite wrong.

    But it’s interesting to think about why BP crafted those words, and what truths might have been disguised below the surface of those words.

    But whether or not my speculative translation is correct, this is the bottom line:
    Any recently divorced man who had wisdom, and had such a paragraph in his about-to-be-published book, would ask the publisher at the very least to REMOVE THAT PARAGRAPH from the text.

  216. mot wrote:

    Take the women out of most churches and they would crumble IMO.

    the whole persona of a ‘male-headship’ male is that he has the woman to order around ….. I wonder if he could stand on his own as a real man or as the Jewish people ‘a real mensch’ in this world without the crutch of a submissive to bully ….. and yes, I do see the words these men use as a form of belittling “graciously submit to her husband” …. and as a form of abuse because of the implied threat of what on earth could happen is the little woman failed to be submissive

    Yes, I agree with you …. without the women to prop them up, these men couldn’t make it …. strong people don’t need for others to kow-tow to them, no

  217. Jack wrote:

    Passionate maybe, flowery not so much. Hey, in a previous post, John “pulverizer” Piper proudly proclaimed he was part of a football game where a guys neck got broken.

    He just forgot to mention that he was that man. Ha, just kidding!

    But, yeah, my husband was listening when I had that one on and he just rolled his eyes and snorted at that part.

  218. Ken G wrote:

    So if BP’s wife asked him the question, “Do I look fat in this dress?” should he tell her the truth? Hypothetically speaking, if she looked really fat should he say so or is a little (perhaps not so little) white lie appropriate because a greater good, such as his wife’s self esteem, may be more important?

    Hi Ken, I’ve have a series of posts on “Is It Always Sinful To Tell An Untruth?”

    https://cryingoutforjustice.com/2015/09/06/is-it-always-sinful-to-tell-an-untruth/

    https://cryingoutforjustice.com/2015/09/07/when-is-it-okay-to-not-tell-the-truth-is-it-always-sinful-to-tell-an-untruth-part-2/

    https://cryingoutforjustice.com/2015/09/27/contriving-a-test-to-probe-whether-a-hardened-heart-has-repented-is-it-always-sinful-to-tell-an-untruth-part-3/

  219. Lea wrote:

    Even when a relationship is over, you can look back and think he told me X and I can’t think of any reason he would lie about that but still, I don’t I don’t really know. And you think this about every single thing they ever told you.
    Lies are poison to relationships.

    Exactly. And if you’ve been married to that liar for 10 or 20 years it’s incredibly jarring. I spent 25 years with a man who felt comfortable lying to me. Every single memory is tainted by that. I know about the one affair, but were there others? How many? That time he acted a little oddly…what was really going on? I don’t know the truth about half of my life.

  220. Ken G wrote:

    Lea wrote:
    I’m going to horribly mangle one of the ted talks I saw on lying, but iirc the speaker basically said that everybody occasionally tells these little white lie/slightly deceptive lies…but NOT everyone tells the real flat out lies. What I took from that is that most people are either basically truthful in the ways that matter, or not. I would not trust a person who is not.
    So if BP’s wife asked him the question, “Do I look fat in this dress?” should he tell her the truth? Hypothetically speaking, if she looked really fat should he say so or is a little (perhaps not so little) white lie appropriate because a greater good, such as his wife’s self esteem, may be more important?

    Lol! Your question reminds of the typical mega church pastor talking about sin and using himself as an example so we would not think he is too perfect. The typical examples were; yelling at the kids, speeding and being short with his wife. They never mentioned the closed strategy meetings to build their personal brand outside the church or the fact they paid for a lot of personal expenses out of some obscure church budgets and so on and so on.

  221. Barbara Roberts wrote:

    Any recently divorced man who had wisdom, and had such a paragraph in his about-to-be-published book, would ask the publisher at the very least to REMOVE THAT PARAGRAPH from the text.

    My thinking exactly. The young, restless and reformed have not been accused of having any wisdom … arrogance, yes … but not wisdom.

  222. BP is speaking on February 11, 2017 – Woodlands Church Parents’ Summit – Plover, WI.
    Website for the event: http://parentssummit.com/#eluide45a5ad5

    Blurb from that website about BP:
    “Author of ‘Help My Unbelief’ and ‘The Pastor’s Kid,’ Barnabas Piper speaks into the uncertainty of this life with whit and candor. You’ll appreciate his style and passion.”

    Clearly whoever wrote that blurb cannot spell ‘wit’.

    And how can a man who according to his own words is deeply hurting from his divorce, be able to deliver a witty presentation to an audience?

    Incongruity? Cognitive dissonance? The habitual and well-honed skill of someone who was trained to put on a role as a child?

  223. @ siteseer:
    You have just described the SBC years after the Neo Cals took over. Now they want unity after years of deception. Why would anyone trust Al Mohlwr and his followers?

  224. Barbara Roberts wrote:

    1. Daddy Piper says christian hedonism is the preeminent thing, the thing that’s essential if you are being a true Christian.
    2. Sonny Piper says curiosity is the preeminent thing, the thing that’s essential if you want to have a complete relationship with God and with other people.

    Well, they are both hedonists and curiosities in my book! Neither would have a platform, if it weren’t for a curious audience of the spiritually immature allowing the hedonists to strut their stuff.

  225. ishy wrote:

    If you can’t handle disagreement, then you probably don’t believe what you believe because you’ve struggled with it and refined it.

    I think it’s worth mentioning that there are more reasons for not allowing disagreement in comments on a blog, other than just the blinkered WE ARE RIGHT mindet.

    At A Cry For Justice we usually don’t publish comments that argue against what we teach about divorce and remarriage, and which blame victims of abuse in any way. We don’t publish such comments because our priority is to keep the blog a safe place for victims of abuse, and we know they can easily be triggered by those kinds of comments, becausae they’ve endured them so much in the churches they’ve been in.

    We occasionally feature a nay-sayers’ comment in a stand-alone post, and ask our readers to identify all the falsehood and manipulative language in it. We do that for educational purposes. It helps our readers hone their skills of identifying the language of abuser and their allies.

  226. siteseer wrote:

    Who is the person when not in front of an audience?

    Yes, the Barna and Bad Christian interviews beg “Will the real Barnabas Piper please stand up!”

  227. Christiane wrote:

    what? what did he say?
    ?????

    Since you enjoyed that one, try this one on:

    “God sends us forth to work as his image-bearers, our ditches are to be dug straight, our pipe-fitting are not to leak, our cabinet corners should be flush, our surgical incisions should be clean, our word processing accurate and appealing, and our meals nutritious and attractive, because God is a God of order and beauty and competence.” (John Piperism, Don’t Waste Your Life)

    Does anyone wonder why one of Piper’s sons was excommunicated for trying to get away, while another still bemoans (at age 33) being a PK and talking about the Piper house as a place of “dysfunction and conflict”?! And these are the folks trying to convince us of that the beauty of complementarity leads to marital bliss?!

  228. siteseer wrote:

    I find it very confusing that he speaks of his life as a pastor’s kid in terms of having to “play roles” or “be a chameleon”. He’s speaking of having to play a certain role in front of missionaries, or whoever was visiting, for instance. I am getting the feeling of someone having to pretend they are something they’re not when in front of different people or groups.

    Makes me wonder who else within the ranks are “playing roles”……. how many more of th gospel glitterati are pretending to be something they’re not?

  229. Lydia wrote:

    @ siteseer:
    You have just described the SBC years after the Neo Cals took over. Now they want unity after years of deception. Why would anyone trust Al Mohlwr and his followers?

    Lydia, I would not trust him or these clones being sent out to “minister”.
    Christian and deception should not go together.

  230. Elizabeth Lee wrote:

    I feel deep empathy for Piper’s former wife. She cannot say anything about him because his earnings (and therefore her child support) is based on Piper continuing in the “family business” of professional “Christian.”

    very moving comment, Elizabeth Lee

    I excerpted a part of it and quoted it because it answers a question I had about why BP’s wife was kept silent …..

    support for the children is important, yes

    so she must continue to be abused in their divorce because now HE will write ‘his’ story from his point of view in order to ‘make money’;
    and to sell his book to his target audience, he must portray her as the responsible party lest he disgrace the family name, the $ource of income ….

    trapped …. or not

    she might get an education, support her daughters herself, and sell her own story or at least be free to share it with no worries of shorting her children of financial security

    some women break free ….
    I’m glad you did, you seem to have ‘endured’ for more than ‘a season’ and been very badly hurt …. may Our Lord heal your heart

  231. Max wrote:

    From BP’s coming-soon new book “The Curious Christian”:

    “Love Lost – Marriages are powerful and fragile, and they are incredibly difficult too.

    I propose a New Orleans style jazz-band funeral for the word ‘incredible’ and all its variants. It’s as worn out as the bald tires on a poorly maintained big-rig.

  232. Max wrote:

    Christiane wrote:
    what? what did he say?
    ?????
    Since you enjoyed that one, try this one on:
    “God sends us forth to work as his image-bearers, our ditches are to be dug straight, our pipe-fitting are not to leak, our cabinet corners should be flush, our surgical incisions should be clean, our word processing accurate and appealing, and our meals nutritious and attractive, because God is a God of order and beauty and competence.” (John Piperism, Don’t Waste Your Life)
    Does anyone wonder why one of Piper’s sons was excommunicated for trying to get away, while another still bemoans (at age 33) being a PK and talking about the Piper house as a place of “dysfunction and conflict”?! And these are the folks trying to convince us of that the beauty of complementarity leads to marital bliss?!

    I’m confused. I thought God controlled every molecule 24/7. Worms can’t be expected to dig straight ditches. So, “we can’t” but are “expected to”. That sums up my problem with his teaching as a professed 7 pointer.

  233. Barbara Roberts wrote:

    Roberts

    ARRGGGGGGHHH!
    The publisher ought to pull the book before it gets out there. That is a disgrace, on two counts. It’s a disgrace a recently divorced man could be permitted to write that and make money from his book. It’s a disgrace that a manuscript which argues such a silly idea could be accepted for publication.

    We are dealing with a movement which let a guy who was a teenager living in some guy’s basement write THE book on dating. I’m talking about Joshua Harris and _I Kissed Dating Goodbye_.

    When I was at Southern Seminary about a dozen years ago, at the ripe old age of 30, there were people in my classes who were significantly younger than me but published authors.

    That should _never_ happen.

    We were expected to accept these guys as authorities but are not allowed to assess their credibility and credentials. THAT is the issue here. The guy is writing a book on marriage. He is holding himself out there as some kind of authority. The second he did that, he opened himself up to this sort of criticism.

  234. I rarely comment here, but I wanted to say–one line in the initial blog post by Barnabas Piper *kinda* seemed to blame his ex-wife, but it didn’t seem very overt. I am not necessarily a Piper fan (John or otherwise), but in my opinion, this is a non-story.

  235. Lydia wrote:

    Like his father, they write like really bad romance novelists.

    It gives me a migraine right down to my formerly naturally gray split ends.

  236. @ FW Rez:

    “…with Twitter as the increasingly-default way of signalling things new and old that should be noticed and read.”
    +++++++++++++

    should they now. 😐

  237. Lydia wrote:

    That sums up my problem with his teaching as a professed 7 pointer.

    Yes, only Piper would claim to be a 7-Point Calvinist in a 5-Point theological grid. He has to top everybody, you know! His extra 2 points earns him “Most Arrogant Theologian” status. (somebody pinch me)

  238. Max wrote:

    Lydia wrote:

    That sums up my problem with his teaching as a professed 7 pointer.

    Yes, only Piper would claim to be a 7-Point Calvinist in a 5-Point theological grid. He has to top everybody, you know! His extra 2 points earns him “Most Arrogant Theologian” status. (somebody pinch me)

    I will only reiterate what I have been saying for years: John Piper is a freak, and I don’t understand how he got to his position atop the NeoCal world. He is a vapid creep, as far as I’m concerned.

    What really saddens me about this whole thing is that it’s totally voluntary – people voluntarily buy into this guy’s brand of sh… stuff. I don’t get it, never have.

    But the world of evangelical ‘Christianity’ is rife with bizzaro, non-Biblical, non-Christian weirdness. People call themselves Christian who don’t even know what it means. It’s all so sad… nothing seems to mean anything any more.

  239. roebuck wrote:

    People call themselves Christian who don’t even know what it means.

    Therein, lies the dilemma of the 21st century church in America. Easy-believism; cheap grace; a cult of personality. Multitudes in church, but few know Christ. Narrow is the road.

  240. In the Pastor’s Talk video (BP appears at 2:26, not 0:26, by the way) Barnabas makes no mention of the new birth. He seems to think that he identified with true Christianity by his own efforts and hard work.

    I can’t bear to watch it again, but someone else may want to transcribe the relevant words. In describing how he moved from being a head-knowledge-only Christian, to what he is now, he definitely said nothing about himself born again or experiencing the new birth.

  241. @ Divorce Minister:

    Divorce Minister– your post http://www.divorceminister.com/thoughts-barnabas-pipers-podcast-interview/ is TOP NOTCH! Bravo, mate. (Aussie expression)

    Here’s a quote from it:

    “While Barnabas Piper claims the interest in his life is likely merely born of voyeuristic interest, I have another–more charitable–reason people may be paying attention:

    “People are reasonably expecting a teacher of church leaders to apply the Bible to his own life’s tragedy. They are trying to make sense of what appears to be theological dissonance.
    And specifically, they are wondering why his famous father, John Piper, was allowed to caste them – i.e. the divorced–as sinners simply for being divorced for whatever reason, and why Barnabas Piper gets a pass on getting divorced now morally?”

    And I love your spelling of ‘caste’. I presume that was intended? Very clever.

  242. Off-topic announcement.

    Shauna in Texas (Dee wrote about Shuana’s son Billy’s horrible church abuse story) has pressing financial needs: rent, utilities, phone, and car insurance.

    If you can give a helping hand, please do so. She has a part-time job at a grocery store.

    Thank you.

    ___
    Shauna on Mon Jan 30, 2017 at 11:47 AM said:
    In desperate need $500 rent, 156.00 utilities, 87.00 car insurance, phone will be shut off. My hours are not covering this months bills. Trying to get more hours more work still need food and gas to get to work. About 200.00 I don’t expect anything just putting the need out there. Pray that I can get full time. Im trying to do what I can for billy and support us…
    https://www.gofundme.com/pxs5dk
    Shauna and billys gofundme

  243. @ Ken F:

    And how is it the complementarians expect single Christian women to marry complementarian men, when they keep depicting marriage in such a manner?

    They make staying single til death look a million times more appealing than marrying. They also make marrying a non-believer look 10x more appealing than marrying a complementarian guy.

  244. Ken G wrote:

    So if BP’s wife asked him the question, “Do I look fat in this dress?” should he tell her the truth? Hypothetically speaking, if she looked really fat should he say so or is a little (perhaps not so little) white lie appropriate because a greater good, such as his wife’s self esteem, may be more important?

    Most of the time, when a woman asks here husband, BF, or female friend “do I look fat in this dress” she already knows that she does.

    Your best bet is to say something to that woman like, “That dress is not flattering for you / for your shape.” You’re telling the truth, but tactfully.

    Some women ask their husband “does this make me look fat” knowing that they probably do look chubby in that dress, but they want the husband to reassure her, “Baby no matter how blimped up you get, I will never leave you or cheat on you.”

    (They’re (the women are) looking for validation or reassurance.)

    Also: women generally go to the bathroom in groups to talk smack about the men they’re on double dates with but don’t want the men to over-hear.

    Women go into the women’s room in groups to say in private to their lady friend(s), “Carol, I don’t know about this Doug guy. He’s kind of flaky.”

  245. Lea wrote:

    Exactly. You cannot have a relationship without trust.

    Or without vulnerability.

    If you can’t safely open up to someone about your fears, flaws, and mistakes, there can be no closeness.

  246. Nancy2 wrote:

    Makes me wonder who else within the ranks are “playing roles”……. how many more of th gospel glitterati are pretending to be something they’re not?

    The complementarians expect men and women to play their stupid gender roles.

    So, if you’re not a woman who is naturally into Susie Home Making stuff or babies or pink or being June Cleaver, you have to play that gender role and pretend you are.

  247. Jen wrote:

    I rarely comment here, but I wanted to say–one line in the initial blog post by Barnabas Piper *kinda* seemed to blame his ex-wife, but it didn’t seem very overt. I am not necessarily a Piper fan (John or otherwise), but in my opinion, this is a non-story.

    You came for the blog post, feel let down, but stick around for the comments.

  248. Daisy wrote:

    @ Ken F:

    And how is it the complementarians expect single Christian women to marry complementarian men, when they keep depicting marriage in such a manner?

    That’s what Patriarch-arranged Courtship(TM) is for.

    If the woman has NO choice in the matter, comp men can easily get married.

    They make staying single til death look a million times more appealing than marrying. They also make marrying a non-believer look 10x more appealing than marrying a complementarian guy.

    Works both ways, Daisy.

    Just how attractive is a comp woman?

    “What is Thy will, Milord Husband? How might I better submit (and Stay Sweet)?”

    While there are men who just want a domestic animal with Benefits (nudge nudge wink wink know what I mean know what I mean), how long before a female who just holds a mirror up so you can admire your Trump-like Greatness gets ho-hum stale?

  249. roebuck wrote:

    People call themselves Christian who don’t even know what it means.

    Rich Buhler used to call that “the Not-a-Muslim definition of Christian”.

    It’s all so sad… nothing seems to mean anything any more.

    Well, this IS the era of Post-Truth and Alternative Facts…

  250. Max wrote:

    Lydia wrote:

    That sums up my problem with his teaching as a professed 7 pointer.

    Yes, only Piper would claim to be a 7-Point Calvinist in a 5-Point theological grid. He has to top everybody, you know! His extra 2 points earns him “Most Arrogant Theologian” status. (somebody pinch me)

    Which is only gonna last until some other Gospelly Glitteratus claimes 8-Point Calvinist status.

    While checking some of the blogs in your links, came across a one-panel cartoon of “I’m a SIX-Point Calvinist — BURN ALL ARMINIANS AT THE STAKE!”

  251. Lydia wrote:

    Lol! Like his father, they write like really bad romance novelists.

    Never thought of putting it that way but THAT’S A GOOD LINE!

    But just like porn, writing quality is NOT the draw of romance novels.

  252. Lea wrote:

    Max wrote:

    Pere Piper:God is calling us to be conduits of his grace, not cul-de-sacs.

    Tell me again why people think this guy is brilliant?

    Because they also attended that N.I.C.E. banquet with Merlin.

    “Strong delusion, that they should believe a lie.”

  253. Lea wrote:

    Etc. Maybe that’s part of the problem they’re having where they think they can ignore the people in the relationship when they ‘working’ on the relationship.

    Because the Relationship is so much easier without those pesky RL people to get in the way.

    “The way to Love My Fellow Man
    And hate my next-door neighbor.”

  254. Nancy2 wrote:

    Muff Potter wrote:

    I propose a New Orleans style jazz-band funeral for the word ‘incredible’

    Double funeral: “winsome”

    As long as we’re talking the Big Easy, why not propose the New Orleans Axman?
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CpimJVu4YjU
    “I shall pass over the city; in whosoever’s house is found a jazz band in full swing shall be spared; those who are only ‘incredible’ and ‘winsome’ shall get The Ax.”

  255. Daisy wrote:

    when a woman asks her husband, BF, or female friend “do I look fat in this dress”

    When animals sense they are in danger some will play dead, others pretend hearing loss.

  256. @ dee:
    That’s great and as it should be IMO. I just hate unnecessary rudeness so when another regular Patheos evangelical blogger responded to a mildly disagreeing polite commenter ‘I only like positive comments’ and to 2 other commenters ‘Goodbye’, the blogger lost credibility and integrity for me. I have several other anecdotal examples I won’t bore you with….

  257. Lydia wrote:

    @ Joe Reed:
    That is the result of seeking to be a paid celebrity Christian. They might as well get used to the scrutiny. They don’t get to be the gatekeepers anymore. He could have chosen a small church somewhere.
    Do you realize how big it is the Piper ministry son is divorced? it means what Piper lectured people and said was verboten for decades is a crock. It did not even work in his own family yet people in his church were spiritually abused with discipline over divorce from abuse when they needed support. So young Piper gets a pass as a career ministry celeb hawking books and consulting to churches. But not under discipline at his church and gets to keep his high paying LifeWay ministry job which most likely came from his last name.
    That whole movement is a phoney crock of beans.
    The list of hypocrisy grows. If Barnabas wants a private life, he knows what to do.

    Oh my, Lydia, how could I be so dense? You’re right. B. Piper is still able to function with impunity because of his last name, while others in the Neo-Cal churches are issued warnings of excommunication for leaving their abusive husbands. His divorce is either being ignored or justified. Whatever the case, there are glaring Double Standards in this Calvinista Camp. But I guess this is no surprise. It’s been going on for awhile now.

  258. Lydia wrote:

    Joe Reed wrote:
    The divorce is a fact, the dirtiness of it is what’s being speculated.
    The price of being a paid celebrity Christian.
    So. According to what the SBC teaches and his Dad, should Barnabas Piper be a highly paid Lifeway church consultant? Is there one rule for the celebs and one for pew sitters?

    Someone else in the Christian music industry comes to mind when speaking of Double Standards: Steve Camp. He still has his Christian music career after his divorce over ten years ago. And he is in the Reformed Camp, having attended John MacArthur’s Grace Community Church. He has even remarried since his divorce and is able to continue to function within the Reformed/Calvinist venue. Interesting. Here is a link to an interview with Camp on the Iron Sharpens Iron podcast from 10 years ago after his divorce where he expresses his view that in *some cases* people can in “good conscience” remarry after a divorce.
    http://sharpens.blogspot.com/2007/08/steve-camp.html

  259. Preacher’s Wife wrote:

    On an unrelated note, a friend of a friend on facebook just said she voted for Trump “to remain in Godly submission to her husband!” I don’t know her so I can’t adequately express my shock with out being rude. I don’t even have the words. If that is what the complementarian crowd expects, I’d be excommunicated the minute I walked in the door.

    When you think about it, a belief system that expects the wife to vote the way her husband wants her to is one that denies the woman of her Personhood. Think about that and let it sink in for a moment. That husband doesn’t want a woman who has her own opinions, thoughts, feelings, contributions. He wants a robot that does what he says.

  260. Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

    mot wrote:
    lynn wrote:
    If i remember correctly Oral Roberts held the same view (divorce but no re-marry) until his son Richard got divorced and things changed after that and of course Richard re-married.
    Hypocrites when it comes to their families.
    Roberts struck me more like a Tywin Lannister wanna-be, Patriarch of a Great House (in his own mind and the Christianese bubble). Here’s an article on Oral & Richard (AKA Oral Junior) and Succession in House Roberts that reads like something out of Game of Thrones:
    https://longreads.com/2014/09/16/oral-roberts-family-history/

    I can’t believe I read that entire article. Words fail at the moment. 😉 While reading that article, an old-time tele-evangelist came to mind whom I hadn’t thought of in years: Rex Humbard!

  261. Lydia wrote:

    @ mot:
    CJ’s SGM was famous for that line.

    But what does it mean? Christianeze for what? It sounds Pentecostal to me. Do Calvinistas really want to go there?

  262. Max wrote:

    dee wrote:
    Seriously?
    Well, he’s still listed on the link for this conference as of this morning. If so, he will be taking the platform shortly as a former skeptic of something or other.

    I believe it to be a marketing tool in the evangelical world. In other words, it sells. Skeptic….and wow, now he believes in Jesus and is a Christian. It reminds me of back in the day when the person who could give the most outrageous testimony of how they came to the Lord from a life of wicked debauchery would be honored in the eyes of all those listening. A kind of Christian voyeurism now that I think about it. Margoe Gortner made bank on that kind of testimony turning it into a twisted entertainment of sorts.

  263. Lea wrote:

    For the ‘Bad Christian’ people, there is a stage when you get out of the strict religious no-cussing/talking about tacky things upbringing when it’s like a huge rebellious to use profanity and be tacky. It sounds like they’re still in that phase maybe? Or they’re appealing to people who are.

    I’d call it a Middle School phase. They haven’t grown up…arrested development.

  264. Max wrote:

    Deb wrote:
    Interesting…
    Oh yes, very interesting that BP is keeping his speaking commitments right now. He even spoke at Barna’s “The State of Pastors” conference last week in Malibu, CA. Speaking on the topic of “Pastors and Family”, he related his life as a pastor’s kid, noting the “chameleon aspect of becoming what you need to be as the situation demands … constantly playing a role.” You can view his presentation beginning at 02:26 on: http://www.barna.com/watchpastors2017/#

    Max wrote:

    From BP’s coming-soon new book “The Curious Christian”:
    “Love Lost – Marriages are powerful and fragile, and they are incredibly difficult too. Marriage takes remarkable effort because love gives in to the inertia of life. It stalls and stales unless we intentionally, passionately, actively fight to keep it going and living and sparking. Only curiosity will do this because it recognizes the unknown depths of the spouse and the
    relationship and seeks to learn and love it all. Uncuriosity sits idly by
    and lets the love grow still, cold, and dead.” (Barnabas Piper)

    Wow…I think Son of Piper lacks self-awareness. He is trying to sell a book that will expose his failure to do the very thing he is claiming should be done in that book. It’s like a 300 pound person trying to sell a successful weight loss plan.

  265. Lydia wrote:

    I’m confused. I thought God controlled every molecule 24/7. Worms can’t be expected to dig straight ditches. So, “we can’t” but are “expected to”. That sums up my problem with his teaching as a professed 7 pointer.

    Lydia, what is a 7 pointer?

  266. Nancy2 wrote:

    Muff Potter wrote:
    I propose a New Orleans style jazz-band funeral for the word ‘incredible’
    Double funeral: “winsome”

    Don’t forget “robust.”

  267. Jen wrote:

    I rarely comment here, but I wanted to say–one line in the initial blog post by Barnabas Piper *kinda* seemed to blame his ex-wife, but it didn’t seem very overt. I am not necessarily a Piper fan (John or otherwise), but in my opinion, this is a non-story.

    Oh, IMO this is a very important story!

  268. Darlene wrote:

    Whatever the case, there are glaring Double Standards in this Calvinista Camp. But I guess this is no surprise. It’s been going on for awhile now.

    No surprise, but still worth pointing out. Always.

    Maybe some poor soul who is trying to be forced to stay in a terrible marriage will see this and realize she doesn’t have to.

  269. Darlene wrote:

    Lydia wrote:

    @ mot:
    CJ’s SGM was famous for that line.

    But what does it mean? Christianeze for what? It sounds Pentecostal to me. Do Calvinistas really want to go there?

    I have no idea how one “speaks into another’s life” or what it accomplishes.

    My guess is it fits in the ever popular “mystery” category and only those higher beings with spiritual decoder rings have insight into how it works.

  270. @ Darlene:
    There seem to be special spiritual passes for some. And, sometimes, they are kind enough to explain the complicated understandings to us peasants. (Just don’t question the explanation)

  271. Off-topic announcement.
    Shauna in Texas (Dee wrote about Shuana’s son Billy’s horrible church abuse story) has pressing financial needs: rent, utilities, phone, and car insurance.
    If you can give a helping hand, please do so. She has a part-time job at a grocery store.
    Thank you.
    ___
    Shauna on Mon Jan 30, 2017 at 11:47 AM said:
    In desperate need $500 rent, 156.00 utilities, 87.00 car insurance, phone will be shut off. My hours are not covering this months bills. Trying to get more hours more work still need food and gas to get to work. About 200.00 I don’t expect anything just putting the need out there. Pray that I can get full time. Im trying to do what I can for billy and support us…
    https://www.gofundme.com/pxs5dk
    Shauna and billys gofundme

  272. Darlene wrote:

    a twisted entertainment of sorts

    Certain corners of New Calvinism fit that description (e.g., Driscoll, Mahaney, The Bad Christians, etc.). It’s getting weirder by the day. Entertaining perhaps, but deadly spiritually.

  273. mot wrote:

    What the hey is “those that can speak into my life?

    Just like Driscoll didn’t like any of the marriage counseling he and Grace received. He couldn’t find the right yes men to speak into his life. So he wrote a book to fill the void.

    BP must have found a few yes men, men who tell him what he wants to hear. Only these men can speak into his life. This is my guess anyway.

  274. Mara wrote:

    Just like Driscoll didn’t like any of the marriage counseling he and Grace received. He couldn’t find the right yes men to speak into his life. So he wrote a book to fill the void.

    Seriously? I hadn’t heard that tidbit.

  275. Darlene wrote:

    Wow…I think Son of Piper lacks self-awareness. He is trying to sell a book that will expose his failure to do the very thing he is claiming should be done in that book. It’s like a 300 pound person trying to sell a successful weight loss plan.

    I guess the idea is that a larger person like me [I’m around 265, but fairly tall] knows how NOT to diet.

    And yes, I’m an expert in that! And no, I won’t be writing a book!

    And that’s one of the main issues. I’m not concerned about Barney’s divorce, apart from hoping that his wife and kids will be OK. My concern is with the hypocrisy of his status as a professional Christian, who makes his living telling others how to do life and do marriage and do church. His divorce suggests that he needs to take a break from the spotlight, get some help, and be a normal person. Do some work outside of the church. Get out of the bubble.

    And maybe he can’t right now. He might not know how to do anything else. Staying a professional Christian, staying in church work and in the spotlight, may be the only way he can make enough money to support two households, for now. So, he’s in damage control, trying to offset the divorce thing and maintain his rep and sell his books. But he’s young, he should have lots of free time, and Nashville is a happening place. It would be a good time to learn something new and start a career in a field where he doesn’t have to live up to the name of Piper.

    Maybe professional wrestling? I’m starting to think that wrestling is a healthier and more honorable profession than working in the Evangelical Industrial Complex.

  276. GSD wrote:

    Maybe professional wrestling? I’m starting to think that wrestling is a healthier and more honorable profession than working in the Evangelical Industrial Complex.

    And the gimmicks and angles can’t get any worse than those of the EIC.
    Creatively bad instead of just bad.
    http://www.wrestlecrap.com/

  277. Mara wrote:

    BP must have found a few yes men, men who tell him what he wants to hear. Only these men can speak into his life. This is my guess anyway.

    Because from Hollywood to White House to Pulpit, NOBODY dares tell the CELEBRITY anything other than what the CELEBRITY wants to hear.

  278. Lea wrote:

    Seriously? I hadn’t heard that tidbit.

    Yes, it was a thing.
    He wanted answers that wouldn’t hold him responsible for his problems and errors in attitude, thinking, and teaching.

    His book was about holding Grace responsible for her issues which she stepped up and accepted. And it was also about her being a victim that needed rescuing. And about him manning up and rescuing her.

    Oh, and about Grace making sure he got enough wild and crazy, well, you know, in order to keep him happy. Because ultimately his happiness and hedonism are at the center of his mind, marriage, and doctrine.

    He learned from Piper plus had a few tricks/doctrines of his own that JP just loved.

  279. Lydia wrote:

    My guess is it fits in the ever popular “mystery” category and only those higher beings with spiritual decoder rings have insight into how it works.

    The Illuminati (Speshul Enlighted Ones) with their Occult Gnosis (Sekrit Knowledge).

    (Original definitions are fun)

  280. Jen wrote:

    I am not necessarily a Piper fan (John or otherwise), but in my opinion, this is a non-story.

    Definitely a non-story if your last name is Piper.
    (Almost had a Freudian slip there — “Poper”.)

  281. Mara wrote:

    BP must have found a few yes men, men who tell him what he wants to hear. Only these men can speak into his life. This is my guess anyway.

    “Those who can speak into my life” = yes men

    Yep, I think you’ve got it!

  282. mot wrote:

    Oh, IMO this is a very important story!

    All the King’s horses and all the King’s men?

    Questions: Given the world BP was raised and works in, did he and Lesley receive Biblical(TM) marriage counciling? Was Lesley put under church discipline?

  283. siteseer wrote:

    Mara wrote:

    BP must have found a few yes men, men who tell him what he wants to hear. Only these men can speak into his life. This is my guess anyway.

    “Those who can speak into my life” = yes men

    Yep, I think you’ve got it!

    well, I found this …. the lyrics by one Heidi Stampley, but if she originated the phrase or ‘borrowed’ it from another, I don’t know … I don’t think it is from anything in ancient Church, so it must be modern Christianeze ‘cool palaver’ 🙂

    https://play.google.com/music/preview/Tlwbsypzc5cqbmaanzvmgaa6sqm?lyrics=1&utm_source=google&utm_medium=search&utm_campaign=lyrics&pcampaignid=kp-songlyrics

  284. GSD wrote:

    Nashville is a happening place

    Nashville is also a very expensive place. Property prices and rent are astronomical – maybe part of the reason Lesly is being so quiet?

  285. To me, the concern with BP’s initial post is that he is playing the victim card. Drawing a parallel between his divorce and someone receiving the news of sudden death of a loved one is not at all fair to those who have walked through that particular pain. The kidney analogy seems to be blaming the ex-wife, as if he were the only one trying. I give him credit for allowing a critical comment to remain on the post.

  286. Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

    Just how attractive is a comp woman?
    “What is Thy will, Milord Husband? How might I better submit (and Stay Sweet)?”
    While there are men who just want a domestic animal with Benefits (nudge nudge wink wink know what I mean know what I mean), how long before a female who just holds a mirror up so you can admire your Trump-like Greatness gets ho-hum stale?

    Reminds me of that insufferable Gaston character from Disney’s “Beauty and the Beast”. The guy spends all his time hunting, drinking and showing off, and assumes that Belle will think it a privilege to cook his meals and wash his smelly socks.

    (Being a PG movie, it doesn’t get into the other “Benefits”. Ugh.)

  287. Darlene wrote:

    Here is a link to an interview with Camp on the Iron Sharpens Iron podcast from 10 years ago after his divorce where he expresses his view that in *some cases* people can in “good conscience” remarry after a divorce.

    I don’t doubt it for a moment if you’re nobility in the chrislam religion (reformed or arminian makes no difference). But just regular pew serfs divorcing and remarrying?
    There’s no such thing as ‘conscience’ when you’re low on the totem pole, you’ll do as you’re told or else.

  288. Jen wrote:

    I rarely comment here, but I wanted to say–one line in the initial blog post by Barnabas Piper *kinda* seemed to blame his ex-wife, but it didn’t seem very overt. I am not necessarily a Piper fan (John or otherwise), but in my opinion, this is a non-story.

    If you were a member of a Piper influenced church and you had been convinced God required you to stay with an abusive spouse, you had been “enduring abuse for a season” (whatever a “season” is), your life was miserable but your pastor, elders, and Piper’s books and sermons had cornered you into staying on pain of excommunication, do you think you might feel it was a story then? Particularly, to see how it is handled compared to your own case? Just wondering.

  289. Mara wrote:

    He wanted answers that wouldn’t hold him responsible for his problems and errors in attitude, thinking, and teaching.
    His book was about holding Grace responsible for her issues which she stepped up and accepted. And it was also about her being a victim that needed rescuing. And about him manning up and rescuing her.

    He talked about how they both had sex before marriage, but only she was in sin against their marriage for it. Of course, he wasn’t. And how he ran her across the coals for it, and only found out years later that she was assaulted, because she was afraid to tell him.

  290. Jen wrote:

    I rarely comment here, but I wanted to say–one line in the initial blog post by Barnabas Piper *kinda* seemed to blame his ex-wife, but it didn’t seem very overt. I am not necessarily a Piper fan (John or otherwise), but in my opinion, this is a non-story.

    when the family busine$$ has been to excoriate those who sought reasonable separation and divorce from situations that were intolerable,
    and one of the scions of the Pater Familias seems to casually stroll around the Christian publishing neo-Cal world speaking of his marriage and divorce and writes about ‘his story’ and talks about ‘his story’ while his wife says nothing,
    that is a ‘non-story’?????

    in my opinion, he wants publicity, negative or positive or defenders or detractors:
    he wants attention and probably thinks ‘this smells money if I can publish a book my followers will lap up’ ……

    he is talking and she is not …. is that neo-Cal for ‘it’s not his fault’ ?

    ?

  291. Nancy2 wrote:

    Nashville is also a very expensive place. Property prices and rent are astronomical – maybe part of the reason Lesly is being so quiet?

    Maybe that is a factor. Especially if they live in Brentwood or Franklin. And if Barney’s book sales and celebrity works better for the kids, if that helps provide them with a smoother transition and a more normal life, then great.

    I guess I’m starting to see the ex-wife and kids, and maybe Barnabas too, as victims of the EIC, and victims of a comp mindset that sees women as less-than. All of this emotional carnage might be traced back to that idea. Back to John and his ringing for tea, back to John’s absentee evangelist father.

  292. ishy wrote:

    He talked about how they both had sex before marriage, but only she was in sin against their marriage for it. Of course, he wasn’t. And how he ran her across the coals for it, and only found out years later that she was assaulted, because she was afraid to tell him.

    Driscoll wrote about his wife, knowing full well that one day his five children would read what he wrote. That is abuse on a grand scale. Narcissism on steroids. So harmful to his family.

  293. ishy wrote:

    Mara wrote:
    He wanted answers that wouldn’t hold him responsible for his problems and errors in attitude, thinking, and teaching.
    His book was about holding Grace responsible for her issues which she stepped up and accepted. And it was also about her being a victim that needed rescuing. And about him manning up and rescuing her.
    He talked about how they both had sex before marriage, but only she was in sin against their marriage for it. Of course, he wasn’t. And how he ran her across the coals for it, and only found out years later that she was assaulted, because she was afraid to tell him.

    What on earth was his justification on why only she was in sin? Because she did not reveal she’d been assaulted?
    Man, what is wrong with these men?

  294. ishy wrote:

    He talked about how they both had sex before marriage, but only she was in sin against their marriage for it. Of course, he wasn’t. And how he ran her across the coals for it, and only found out years later that she was assaulted, because she was afraid to tell him.

    It beggars (buggers?) the mind. It really does. If there’s any good to come out of all these imbroglios, it’s that chrislam will be exposed for the toxic religion it is.

  295. K.D. wrote:

    What on earth was his justification on why only she was in sin? Because she did not reveal she’d been assaulted?
    Man, what is wrong with these men?

    As far as I could tell, he had no justification other than that she had sex before marriage and that was wholly offensive to him. He mentioned he did earlier in the chapter, but was dead silent on his own past at that point.

    She told him about the assault much later. Maybe she had blocked it in her mind; that’s fairly common in assault.

  296. I guess it does say “just after we started dating”, but he also says how he had a prophetic dream from God about it and how horrible it was, and how he confronted her angrily while she was pregnant. If that’s so, why didn’t God tell him she was assaulted? Seems like the most important point there.

    I suspect he knew something was wrong from the time it happened. Maybe by rumor or what have you, but I doubt it was his “gift of discernment”.

  297. ishy wrote:

    I doubt it was his “gift of discernment”.

    Yep, it was no prophetic dream from God, either.
    It was his male ego bullying his pregnant wife.

  298. Mara wrote:

    Yep, it was no prophetic dream from God, either.
    It was his male ego bullying his pregnant wife.

    His claim is that he dreamed about it before she told him. But God wouldn’t have left out the fact that she was assaulted, nor only focused on her sin and not his own.

    I think he found out about it some other way, and just lost it at her, blaming it on God.

  299. ishy wrote:

    I think he found out about it some other way, and just lost it at her, blaming it on God.

    Probably. And when they ‘just started dating’ was probably not cheating, it was probably they had been out once or twice (if that) or maybe weren’t even exclusive. I kind of doubt God gave a specific timeline either, for that matter, without bothering to mention that she was assaulted.

    So. Basically all a bunch of jerky nonsense, which is typical of Driscoll.

  300. ishy wrote:

    He talked about how they both had sex before marriage, but only she was in sin against their marriage for it. Of course, he wasn’t.

    Boys Will Be Boys (nudge nudge wink wink), and then there’s making sure of Paternity for Patriarchal Descent of Birthright through the Male Line Only…

  301. GSD wrote:

    I guess I’m starting to see the ex-wife and kids, and maybe Barnabas too, as victims of the EIC, and victims of a comp mindset that sees women as less-than. All of this emotional carnage might be traced back to that idea. Back to John and his ringing for tea, back to John’s absentee evangelist father.

    RL Generational Curses, where each generation raises the next and passes on whatever dysfunctions they have.

    The world has always been broken; that’s why we need good cops.”
    — Chief Bogo, Zootopia

  302. @ Lea:
    The fact she allowed that information to be published or spoken of at all publicly without some sort legal pushback on him does not bode well for her.

  303. Lydia wrote:

    @ Lea:
    The fact she allowed that information to be published or spoken of at all publicly without some sort legal pushback on him does not bode well for her.

    I feel very sorry for her, truly.

  304. FW Rez wrote:

    To me, the concern with BP’s initial post is that he is playing the victim card. Drawing a parallel between his divorce and someone receiving the news of sudden death of a loved one is not at all fair to those who have walked through that particular pain. The kidney analogy seems to be blaming the ex-wife, as if he were the only one trying. I give him credit for allowing a critical comment to remain on the post.

    Thank you! I was so upset by what I read. That I've been unable to form a response, but that's exactly it. As I've said before, this is from the very same playbook my own abusive ex-husband has always played by – and continues to spin. This sense of entitlement, the professional victim status (ESPECIALLY where there is a power differential, as there is in all complementarian marriages) is the smoking gun, I believe, for some level of abuse. I stand by that.

  305. @ Jen:

    “I am not necessarily a Piper fan (John or otherwise), but in my opinion, this is a non-story.”
    ++++++++++++

    Jen — the impact of John Piper & friends and their pet doctrine of complementarianism/patriarchy reaches far and wide, even reaching historically egalitarian places like Assemblies of God. it is cruel, unhealthy, dysfunctional, (so many descriptors i could use). It has reached me, chances are it has reached you (whether realized or not).

    There is a double-standard (i am so sick of this word but it is at the heart of the matter) It is readily observable that cruel treatment (discipline, shunning, shaming, etc.) is meted out to ‘ordinary’ church folks. Meanwhile, those in power are “exempted from punishment or freedom from the injurious consequences of an action” (to define impunity).

    John Piper is the chief influencer for this kind of cruelty. Now that his son warrants the same cruel treatment which John Piper and his influence inflict on others, we are watching to see what happens.

    it will be of great consequence to thousands/millions… (i was never good at estimating jellybeans in the jar)

    you bet there’s a story here.

    it is utterly ridiculous that one family & their ideological friends could have this much influence & consequence. stupid christians made it happen.

    but i’m simply reiterating what others have already expressed.

  306. Thinking about BP’s openness about the end of his marriage, it strikes me that he seems strangely distant from the feelings many would have should their marriages end ….. a shallowness, maybe? or not enough of himself invested into the marriage so that he was shaken up when it ended? I don’t know.

    I just know that something about his writing and speaking doesn’t ring true, and it goes beyond ‘just telling lies’ …. it’s something far worse

    Flannery O’Connor once wrote, “I don’t think literature would be possible in a determined world. We might go through the motions but the heart would be out of it….”

    Piper’s world is a ‘determined’ world, not open to choices and personal responsibility for those choices. And his son ‘got married’, ‘had a family’, and went through the motions of being a young adult. But BP’s heart ‘may not have been in it’ by the tone of his speaking and his writing.

    He isn’t ‘suffering’. He’s too casual about something that tears many young adults to pieces. What he writes, if it was meant to convey his upset over the divorce, simply has failed to do so. And in that, I see that perhaps he did not invest much of himself emotionally into that marriage. (?)

  307. elastigirl wrote:

    the impact of John Piper & friends and their pet doctrine of complementarianism/patriarchy reaches far and wide, even reaching historically egalitarian places like Assemblies of God. it is cruel, unhealthy, dysfunctional, (so many descriptors i could use). It has reached me, chances are it has reached you (whether realized or not).

    Didn’t even know about this doctrine but it was the idea of church covenant contracts that was the beginning of the end of me attending church. The A of G church I used to attend went through the Purpose Driven program and after that membership required a covenant.

    There was also a whole list of other things that contributed (fundamentalism, intolerance) but having to sign on the line certainly didn’t help.

    And keep in mind, I have never heard of Piper nor has anyone in my circle (Christians and none) – see my previous comments. Nor did I really know what Calvinism was.

    I think there is a lot that is not reaching the rank and file until it’s too late. Forewarned is forearmed so the info here is certainly welcome. I no longer attend church but my wife does and she takes our kids. I need to know what’s behind what’s being taught and countermand it if needed.

    Although even though they allow women to preach, the church definitely always had a “pro-guy” stance. I attended from 2000 to 2004 – has A of G always been that way? Or is it like the focus on literalism – eg. Young earth creationism – a more recent affectation. My wife claims such things were not part of the church she grew up in.

  308. Christiane wrote:

    he seems strangely distant from the feelings many would have should their marriages end ….. a shallowness, maybe?

    I agree. In both his blog post and the podcast where he discusses his marriage he seems to have had no emotional investment. Even if he feels utterly disconnected from his ex-wife he should have some kind of reaction to losing time with his children. It’s just not there. Normal people mention their children when a marriage ends. On the podcast, the host had to ask BP if he has any children. It’s shocking to me.

  309. Jack wrote:

    Although even though they allow women to preach, the church definitely always had a “pro-guy” stance. I attended from 2000 to 2004 – has A of G always been that way? Or is it like the focus on literalism – eg. Young earth creationism – a more recent affectation. My wife claims such things were not part of the church she grew up in.

    I’ve read a couple of things that stated AofG has recently been influenced by the neo-Calvinists and patriarchists. There’s always been some patriarchal influence there, but with opposition, as many charismatics and Pentacostals are egalitarian.

  310. @ Jack:

    “Although even though they allow women to preach, the church definitely always had a “pro-guy” stance. I attended from 2000 to 2004 – has A of G always been that way? Or is it like the focus on literalism – eg. Young earth creationism – a more recent affectation. My wife claims such things were not part of the church she grew up in.”
    ++++++++++++++

    in my recent foray in an AOG church, i did some reading of their periodicals and journals for pastors to understand the state of things. it all struck me as loaded with that popular term “cognitive dissonance”.

    The powers that be were clearly wary of the influence of this new breed called New Calvinism. They champion women in everything. But at the same time, there are articles on backtracking on that. Practical ways to go about male headship / husband authority, all in a very benign manner.

    i was so struck with how they championed two opposing things — they don’t seem to realize.

    Women pastors in AOG realize it, for sure. I’m sure they have to be careful how they talk about such things.

    such a bummer, such a sad state of affairs that women have to abide by rules which don’t apply to men — that equality is very hard to come by even in egalitarian places. that those with privilege and power are blind to it.

    i swear, christians have the potential to be the stupidest people on earth.

  311. ishy wrote:

    I doubt it was his “gift of discernment”.

    IF he had a gift of discernment, then he would have been prompted to guard the dignity of his wife rather than expose her to judgment and scorn. And also he would have had enough class to realize that in exposing HER, he is always going to be considered a cad who attempted to publicly humiliate his own wife, the mother of his children.

    No ‘discernment’, nope. Just a mean-spirited foolish man with a big mouth….. the kind of person you would want to tell to ‘put some clothes on’ because they are shaming themselves.

  312. elastigirl wrote:

    John Piper is the chief influencer for this kind of cruelty. Now that his son warrants the same cruel treatment which John Piper and his influence inflict on others, we are watching to see what happens.

    And his son is employed by Lifeway. Very significant.

  313. ishy wrote:

    I’ve read a couple of things that stated AofG has recently been influenced by the neo-Calvinists and patriarchists. There’s always been some patriarchal influence there, but with opposition, as many charismatics and Pentacostals are egalitarian.

    My wife also said that when she was growing up in the A of G there was no membership covenants. The membership covenant thing in her current church came about after Purpose Driven. I did read some of that book and it seemed more about manipulating the believer into attending church. The covenant seemed an ends to keeping the believer in place. I didn’t get the impression that it was Calvinist per se. However I don’t know if Rick Warren is Calvinist or Neo Cal. and it was a dozen years ago on my part.

  314. Jack wrote:

    My wife also said that when she was growing up in the A of G there was no membership covenants. The membership covenant thing in her current church came about after Purpose Driven. I did read some of that book and it seemed more about manipulating the believer into attending church. The covenant seemed an ends to keeping the believer in place. I didn’t get the impression that it was Calvinist per se. However I don’t know if Rick Warren is Calvinist or Neo Cal. and it was a dozen years ago on my part.

    They may not have known where the influence came from. I do know some patriarchists in AoG, and I think it’s been an influence for longer than the Calvinistas have been around. The patriarchists often travel in the same circles and are influenced by each other, even if they don’t agree theologically. And membership covenants marry well (ha!) with patriarchy, because they both appeal to people who want to have sole control over others.

  315. Elizabeth Lee wrote:

    Even if he feels utterly disconnected from his ex-wife he should have some kind of reaction to losing time with his children. It’s just not there. Normal people mention their children when a marriage ends.

    I agree that he seems not to include the children in mentioning the divorce ….. I would also think that ‘normal’ folks would be VERY concerned about the effects of separation and divorce on their children. My goodness …. what could be more important? Emotionally, he seems ‘limited’ at least in how he can express his feelings, if he has them at all. Not a good sign for his sake, no.

  316. Jack wrote:

    Didn’t even know about this doctrine but it was the idea of church covenant contracts that was the beginning of the end of me attending church. The A of G church I used to attend went through the Purpose Driven program and after that membership required a covenant.

    You bring up a good point, Jack, in that the tentacles reach into every sort of church. The pastors and elders read the books or go to the conferences and look for ways to work in the ideas they’ve learned from the big dogs. There are promises of healthier and bigger churches. If not, there are definitely members who start agitating for the kinds of programs and ideas they’ve been reading about. I’ve seen it happen. The para-church organizations make themselves out to be resources for all churches, those who avail themselves of the resources pick up the ideas and pass them on. I even have a Catholic friend who is into the dominion teachings and quiverfull and all of that. The ideas reach far & wide.

  317. Christiane wrote:

    Driscoll wrote about his wife, knowing full well that one day his five children would read what he wrote. That is abuse on a grand scale. Narcissism on steroids. So harmful to his family.

    I simply have no other adjective for Driscoll besides jerk . .

  318. I have mentioned this before that my niece is an ordained A of G minister. I don’t know if she preaches sermons, but she is in charge of the tweens at the church her husband is a youth minister at. I know I love and respect her for what she does. I was raised in the A of G. I know many times we had women missionaries come and tell their stories and preach. Plus I’ve sat under the preaching of a woman a few times. I have absolutely no problem with it at all.

  319. Harley wrote:

    I have mentioned this before that my niece is an ordained A of G minister. I don’t know if she preaches sermons, but she is in charge of the tweens at the church her husband is a youth minister at. I know I love and respect her for what she does. I was raised in the A of G. I know many times we had women missionaries come and tell their stories and preach. Plus I’ve sat under the preaching of a woman a few times. I have absolutely no problem with it at all.

    One of the local AofGs, which I used to go to some time ago, has banned women from leadership positions, from what I understand, and has gone fairly patriarchal. They have women as office staff and nursery, but no pastoral positions. It might not be every church, but there is a movement in AofG to remove women. They even have one of their ministry tenents that the family unit is “God’s plan and main discipleship method”. Guess singles aren’t welcome.

  320. ishy wrote:

    They even have one of their ministry tenents that the family unit is “God’s plan and main discipleship method”. Guess singles aren’t welcome.

    I’m especially disappointed as it was people from that church that led me to Christ many years ago.

  321. Mara wrote:

    mot wrote:
    What the hey is “those that can speak into my life?
    Just like Driscoll didn’t like any of the marriage counseling he and Grace received. He couldn’t find the right yes men to speak into his life. So he wrote a book to fill the void.
    BP must have found a few yes men, men who tell him what he wants to hear. Only these men can speak into his life. This is my guess anyway.

    Too bad the women in Neo-Calvinism who are having problems with their abusive husbands can’t find people in their local church to “speak into their life.” No, instead they get threats of discipline and excommunication if they aren’t willing to return to their abuser. Funny how that works.

  322. Beakerj wrote:

    a world which has exercised iron control over the theology & practice of marriage, even raising it to be one of the central tenets of the gospel itself. They have sentenced untold women to a life of slavish submission & often abuse. when someone from this world fails leading at this oh-so-sacred task of ‘leading’ his wife, then questions are going to be asked which sound intrusive. Because the entire world he comes from has intruded, unapologetically, into the marriages of many many tens of thousands (or more)to the point of determining people’s behaviour to their spouses, & putting marriage itself above human welfare.

    James 3:1-2 “Not many of you should become teachers, my brothers, for you know that we who teach will be judged with greater strictness.”

    Titus 2:7-8 “Show yourself in all respects to be a model of good works, and in your teaching show integrity, dignity, and sound speech that cannot be condemned, so that an opponent may be put to shame, having nothing evil to say about us.”

    “When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth, for he will not speak on his own authority, but whatever he hears he will speak, and he will declare to you the things that are to come” (John 16:13) and that “the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, he will teach you all things and bring to your remembrance all that I have said to you” (John 14:26)

  323. GSD wrote:

    Darlene wrote:
    Wow…I think Son of Piper lacks self-awareness. He is trying to sell a book that will expose his failure to do the very thing he is claiming should be done in that book. It’s like a 300 pound person trying to sell a successful weight loss plan.
    I guess the idea is that a larger person like me [I’m around 265, but fairly tall] knows how NOT to diet.
    And yes, I’m an expert in that! And no, I won’t be writing a book!

    Right. That was the point. Don’t write a book on a subject in which your life shows that you are not successful. A person writing a book on successful financial ventures would be absurd if they had filed for bankruptcy and gone into debt. Barnabas Piper writing about marriage relationships and speaking at conferences about the same thing is absurd in light of his recent divorce.

  324. Nancy2 wrote:

    GSD wrote:
    Nashville is a happening place
    Nashville is also a very expensive place. Property prices and rent are astronomical – maybe part of the reason Lesly is being so quiet?

    Really? Why is that? I would never have thought of Nashville as an expensive place to live. Does it have anything to do with the Northern migration to the South? The cost of living has escalated in my region due to New Yorkers moving to the area.

  325. ishy wrote:

    Mara wrote:
    He wanted answers that wouldn’t hold him responsible for his problems and errors in attitude, thinking, and teaching.
    His book was about holding Grace responsible for her issues which she stepped up and accepted. And it was also about her being a victim that needed rescuing. And about him manning up and rescuing her.
    He talked about how they both had sex before marriage, but only she was in sin against their marriage for it. Of course, he wasn’t. And how he ran her across the coals for it, and only found out years later that she was assaulted, because she was afraid to tell him.

    Wow, I didn’t know that about Driscoll’s marriage. The excerpts I read it seemed only Grace was the bad one to have sex before they were married. But I do *get* why Grace may have been fearful to talk about her assault to Mark for all those years. Many in that Neo-Cal Camp blame women for their rapes. If only they would have screamed loud enough, fought off their attacker, risked all even to death. Here’s a link to an excellent article that addresses Mark Driscoll’s disturbing views about rape. Trigger Warning ahead of time:
    http://www.patheos.com/blogs/sarahoverthemoon/2012/09/esther-mark-driscoll-rape-bible/

  326. Girasol wrote:

    @ Darlene:
    and no more “speaking into” anything…!

    It just hit me now. I remember where I heard this phrase. Back when I used to socialize in Pentecostal circles, those folks would “speak healing” into another person’s life. Healing of finances into a person’s life in Jesus’ name. Healing from illness, poverty, depression, etc. So, it is a Pentecostal thang (misspelling intentional).

  327. Darlene wrote:

    A person writing a book on successful financial ventures would be absurd if they had filed for bankruptcy and gone into debt.

    I’m pretty sure that true of dave ramsey and maybe the rich dad poor dad guy too.

  328. Darlene wrote:

    Back when I used to socialize in Pentecostal circles, those folks would “speak healing” into another person’s life. Healing of finances into a person’s life in Jesus’ name. Healing from illness, poverty, depression, etc. So, it is a Pentecostal thang (misspelling intentional).

    And a Magickal thing, where the spoken words become reality.

    “ABRACADABRA” = slurred Aramaic for “I Speak and IT IS SO!”

  329. Darlene wrote:

    I would never have thought of Nashville as an expensive place to live. Does it have anything to do with the Northern migration to the South?

    Nashville’s growth seems to be because of the booming economy, and increased immigration. I’m not sure where most people come from. And it is expensive, when compared to other cities and towns in the region. Compared to Southern California or the Northeast, not so much.

    http://www.tennessean.com/story/news/2016/11/05/even-experts-didnt-forecast-nashville-middle-tennessee-growing-fast/93293958/

  330. Darlene wrote:

    GSD wrote:

    Darlene wrote:
    Wow…I think Son of Piper lacks self-awareness. He is trying to sell a book that will expose his failure to do the very thing he is claiming should be done in that book. It’s like a 300 pound person trying to sell a successful weight loss plan.
    I guess the idea is that a larger person like me [I’m around 265, but fairly tall] knows how NOT to diet.
    And yes, I’m an expert in that! And no, I won’t be writing a book!

    Right. That was the point. Don’t write a book on a subject in which your life shows that you are not successful. A person writing a book on successful financial ventures would be absurd if they had filed for bankruptcy and gone into debt. Barnabas Piper writing about marriage relationships and speaking at conferences about the same thing is absurd in light of his recent divorce.

    I’m not sure I can fully agree with this comment. Having a successful marriage doesn’t make someone an expert on marriage, it makes that person an expert on HIS individual marriage. Likewise, being divorced doesn’t make one an expert on divorce, but rather the particulars of ones divorce. There are divorced individuals who understand elements of marital discord and red-flags far better than a “successfully” married couple who are just too uncomplicated/dispassionate in their psychology, and many people wouldn’t desire their type of marriage at all, regardless of it’s success.

    I learn a lot from the failures of others, and so I do think there is some value in hearing BP’s story, especially because divorce does happen in Christianity, and sometimes to fairly normal people. We’ve heard PLENTY enough from married pastors behind the pulpit about divorce, but how many divorced Christians are invited to speak about their experience?

    This comment isn’t to undermine the idea that BP might be a lousy person–he may very well be. There are probably more qualified candidates to dole out divorce and marriage advice. But by shutting him down, I’m thinking this only furthers a shutdown regarding the lives and cultural-viability of divorced Christians. For example, I CANNOT WAIT to hear the comments BP will be doling out in three years when his church-imposed celibacy begins to wear on him. I suspect many people can’t either!

  331. GSD wrote:

    Nashville’s growth seems to be because of the booming economy, and increased immigration. I’m not sure where most people come from. And it is expensive, when compared to other cities and towns in the region. Compared to Southern California or the Northeast, not so much.

    I’m in SoCal. Here the reputation for a REAL expensive city is San Francisco/Silicon Valley and/or Seattle.

  332. SureWhyNot? wrote:

    I learn a lot from the failures of others, and so I do think there is some value in hearing BP’s story, especially because divorce does happen in Christianity, and sometimes to fairly normal people. We’ve heard PLENTY enough from married pastors behind the pulpit about divorce, but how many divorced Christians are invited to speak about their experience?
    This comment isn’t to undermine the idea that BP might be a lousy person–he may very well be. There are probably more qualified candidates to dole out divorce and marriage advice. But by shutting him down, I’m thinking this only furthers a shutdown regarding the lives and cultural-viability of divorced Christians. For example, I CANNOT WAIT to hear the comments BP will be doling out in three years when his church-imposed celibacy begins to wear on him. I suspect many people can’t either!

    The book was already written before his divorce, so not sure he took any red flags into account, since he said he was completely surprised by his wife’s desire to leave. And from the things he’s said in his article and the podcast, I don’t think he’s learned much. He seems rather obtuse of a person. I think I would object to him on a personal basis for that reason. I also object to the idea of Christian celebrities in general, and think that the majority of celebrities, Christian or secular, are the worst possible life examples. They want to be an example to gain money and fame, not to be an example of Christ-like service.

    I do think some of this pushback is in the imagined point of view of his followers, who are pretty nuts when it comes to marriage theology. I mean, they’ve made a the central tenant of their faith, “equal to the gospel”. I’m not even sure B.Pipes (his rapper name) is of the same beliefs, but he is making his living from the people that follow his dad.

  333. SureWhyNot? wrote:

    For example, I CANNOT WAIT to hear the comments BP will be doling out in three years when his church-imposed celibacy begins to wear on him. I suspect many people can’t either!

    What makes you think he’ll be subject to “church-imposed celibacy”?

    He could easily get a Special Dispensation for being a Piper. If not, he could always do it under-the-table like TT and/or so many other preacher-men.

  334. ishy wrote:

    I’m not even sure B.Pipes (his rapper name) is of the same beliefs, but he is making his living from the people that follow his dad.

    HIS RAPPER NAME?

  335. ishy wrote:

    The book was already written before his divorce

    I was wondering about that, and figuring it must have been because of the timeline. In which case, he really really should have pulled it.

    I’m not opposed to people writing ‘here are all the things I did wrong and what I learned from them’ books but that’s clearly not what this is and it would be WAY too soon for that anyways. He needs time and perspective.

  336. ishy wrote:

    he said he was completely surprised by his wife’s desire to leave

    That’s not how I took the article (didn’t read the podcast). I took it that he knew things were bad for a long, long time. He just couldn’t believe she would actually leave. Is that really ‘surprise’? IDK. I think it’s more disbelief, or denial.

  337. Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

    ishy wrote:
    I’m not even sure B.Pipes (his rapper name) is of the same beliefs, but he is making his living from the people that follow his dad.
    //
    HIS RAPPER NAME?

    I’ve been calling him B.Pipes in my head since I read the first post.

  338. Lea wrote:

    ishy wrote:
    The book was already written before his divorce
    //
    I was wondering about that, and figuring it must have been because of the timeline. In which case, he really really should have pulled it.
    I’m not opposed to people writing ‘here are all the things I did wrong and what I learned from them’ books but that’s clearly not what this is and it would be WAY too soon for that anyways. He needs time and perspective.

    He’s got a contract with the publisher, and publishing contracts are scary deals. I’ve turned them down because they are not just “I’ll pay this royalty to publish this book.” They often include how much speaking and marketing the author with do (usually at the author’s expense), and once you sign it away, you might not have the choice anymore to pull it. It belongs to the publisher then. And authors generally lose lawsuits to regain control, even if the publisher refuses to keep the book in print.

  339. ishy wrote:

    I’ve been calling him B.Pipes in my head since I read the first post.

    OK, so he didn’t start a sideline or preach in Rap.

    Just other Celebrity-Christians HAVE gone Rapper, GANGSTAAAAAA and all.
    To the point of ridiculous.

  340. Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

    ishy wrote:
    I’ve been calling him B.Pipes in my head since I read the first post.
    //
    OK, so he didn’t start a sideline or preach in Rap.
    Just other Celebrity-Christians HAVE gone Rapper, GANGSTAAAAAA and all.
    To the point of ridiculous.

    Nah, just his name lends itself to it. 😉

    I haven’t come up with one for Driscoll that adequately expresses my opinion of him.

  341. Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

    SureWhyNot? wrote:

    For example, I CANNOT WAIT to hear the comments BP will be doling out in three years when his church-imposed celibacy begins to wear on him. I suspect many people can’t either!

    What makes you think he’ll be subject to “church-imposed celibacy”?

    He could easily get a Special Dispensation for being a Piper. If not, he could always do it under-the-table like TT and/or so many other preacher-men.

    You’re right, although I was operating under the assumption that some day he might want to remarry. You can sweep sexual escapades under the rug, but it would be difficult to conceal a remarriage.

    And also, I have no idea if his theology differs from his father. So he may have no qualms about remarriage, although it will be sad, because his father would be unlikely to attend the wedding in such a case.

  342. ishy wrote:

    SureWhyNot? wrote:

    I learn a lot from the failures of others, and so I do think there is some value in hearing BP’s story, especially because divorce does happen in Christianity, and sometimes to fairly normal people. We’ve heard PLENTY enough from married pastors behind the pulpit about divorce, but how many divorced Christians are invited to speak about their experience?
    This comment isn’t to undermine the idea that BP might be a lousy person–he may very well be. There are probably more qualified candidates to dole out divorce and marriage advice. But by shutting him down, I’m thinking this only furthers a shutdown regarding the lives and cultural-viability of divorced Christians. For example, I CANNOT WAIT to hear the comments BP will be doling out in three years when his church-imposed celibacy begins to wear on him. I suspect many people can’t either!

    The book was already written before his divorce, so not sure he took any red flags into account, since he said he was completely surprised by his wife’s desire to leave. And from the things he’s said in his article and the podcast, I don’t think he’s learned much. He seems rather obtuse of a person. I think I would object to him on a personal basis for that reason. I also object to the idea of Christian celebrities in general, and think that the majority of celebrities, Christian or secular, are the worst possible life examples. They want to be an example to gain money and fame, not to be an example of Christ-like service.

    I do think some of this pushback is in the imagined point of view of his followers, who are pretty nuts when it comes to marriage theology. I mean, they’ve made a the central tenant of their faith, “equal to the gospel”. I’m not even sure B.Pipes (his rapper name) is of the same beliefs, but he is making his living from the people that follow his dad.

    Okay, yes. I wasn’t aware of BP writing a book specifically on marriage. As far as I knew, he was famous for his pastor’s kid book.

    I’m more talking about his future–a future of discourse on being a divorced Christian. The bulk of Christians aren’t on these watchdog sites, so I don’t know how many divorce survivors permeate their lives. I think BP is up against a lot in the Christian community and I want to see how he finagles this one.

    I listened to most of the radio podcast, and I don’t know that his tone is laced with the insidious mystique of an abuser. He actually sounds like someone who is like “SO OVER HER.” Very hipster. Like, I’m not sure how much either of them cared for each other toward the end because, although the paperwork on that divorce seems recent, the actual process sounds like it was years in the making. This is like a multi-year long divorce. They both probably feel like they just finished a marathon in Hell. He also might be exceptionally immature, I don’t know. But whatever he does, it’s a bit of a symbol for the rest of the Christian conservative community as to how divorce will be handled. And I do want to see how his story will unfold, particularly because we’re still months away from the next season of Game of Thrones.

  343. SureWhyNot? wrote:

    Okay, yes. I wasn’t aware of BP writing a book specifically on marriage. As far as I knew, he was famous for his pastor’s kid book.
    I’m more talking about his future–a future of discourse on being a divorced Christian. The bulk of Christians aren’t on these watchdog sites, so I don’t know how many divorce survivors permeate their lives. I think BP is up against a lot in the Christian community and I want to see how he finagles this one.
    I listened to most of the radio podcast, and I don’t know that his tone is laced with the insidious mystique of an abuser. He actually sounds like someone who is like “SO OVER HER.”

    The book hasn’t been published yet, which is why people here are wondering if he’ll try to put a hold on the book. Since I don’t think he can or has any power to do so anymore, I think he’s trying to go through. But I also think that he’s making some very poor choices in how he’s doing that, especially by going on Bad Christians. That was just a terribly bad choice. The fact that he doesn’t mention his kids at all is worrying, too, like he just doesn’t care about them. I certainly don’t hold divorce against anyone, but I also don’t believe it’s a “covenant” relationship.

    I get the impression that he was in love with the idea of marriage, but maybe not her. That would be 90% of my Christian friends before they got married. Most of them couldn’t wait long enough to get to know the person they were marrying, because they had to have sex right away. And churches are terrible about being honest about the problems you might encounter with marriage, but it’s 100 times worse with the Calvinista crowd. They seem to think they women are going to do whatever they want whenever they want, and will do so “joyfully”. They certainly wouldn’t hold that expectation for themselves, so I don’t know why they think women are different from men in that respect.

  344. ishy wrote:

    The book hasn’t been published yet, which is why people here are wondering if he’ll try to put a hold on the book. Since I don’t think he can or has any power to do so anymore, I think he’s trying to go through. But I also think that he’s making some very poor choices in how he’s doing that, especially by going on Bad Christians. That was just a terribly bad choice. The fact that he doesn’t mention his kids at all is worrying, too, like he just doesn’t care about them. I certainly don’t hold divorce against anyone, but I also don’t believe it’s a “covenant” relationship.

    I get the impression that he was in love with the idea of marriage, but maybe not her. That would be 90% of my Christian friends before they got married. Most of them couldn’t wait long enough to get to know the person they were marrying, because they had to have sex right away. And churches are terrible about being honest about the problems you might encounter with marriage, but it’s 100 times worse with the Calvinista crowd. They seem to think they women are going to do whatever they want whenever they want, and will do so “joyfully”. They certainly wouldn’t hold that expectation for themselves, so I don’t know why they think women are different from men in that respect.

    I don’t really know much about these Bad Christians. So far as I can tell, their only sin is looking like a garage band from Seattle. But maybe Barnabas has nowhere else to go? I don’t really see MacArthur giving him airtime on Grace To You, and Barnabas has a story to tell! A tale to weave!

    Which is why, Ish, I think BP has tremendous marketing potential for a new ABC Family Reality series entitled “Being Barnabas Piper.”

    The show opens up with Barnabas strolling along the beach at sunset, gulls circling the burning sky, a remnant of happy couples relaxing in the sand, each looking like they belong in a Trojan commercial. Barnabas walks alone. All episodes featuring him paying child support and never marrying again.

  345. SureWhyNot? wrote:

    Which is why, Ish, I think BP has tremendous marketing potential for a new ABC Family Reality series entitled “Being Barnabas Piper.”
    The show opens up with Barnabas strolling along the beach at sunset, gulls circling the burning sky, a remnant of happy couples relaxing in the sand, each looking like they belong in a Trojan commercial. Barnabas walks alone. All episodes featuring him paying child support and never marrying again.

    Maybe he’ll be calling you tomorrow to produce that!

    Never marrying is not half as bad as a lot of people think. Honestly, I think Christians have made it out to be this horrible, evil thing, and it’s really not. I understand wanting to remarry, but not being married isn’t terrible. And some relationships are much worse than being single.

  346. ishy wrote:

    They seem to think they women are going to do whatever they want whenever they want, and will do so “joyfully”.

    Isn’t that one of the standard tropes of PORNOGRAPHY?

  347. ishy wrote:

    I get the impression that he was in love with the idea of marriage, but maybe not her. That would be 90% of my Christian friends before they got married. Most of them couldn’t wait long enough to get to know the person they were marrying, because they had to have sex right away.

    This mindset is disappointing and sad. I also think that this rush to marry in Christian circles in order to have sex is setting up a marriage for failure. I know, I know, bring out Paul the Apostle’s words. But here’s the thing. I believe if a person’s #1 reason for marrying is sex, they will eventually be let down. Because marriage comes with serious challenges that cannot be solved merely by having sex. Furthermore, I believe marrying for sex as the primary reason is objectifying the other person. Now I’ll go off in the corner somewhere and wait for the responses. 😉

  348. @ Darlene:
    It’s called “A Marriage of Continence”, i.e. a marriage entered into entirely to legalize the sex. This does not sound like it could end well.

  349. Darlene wrote:

    I also think that this rush to marry in Christian circles in order to have sex is setting up a marriage for failure. I know, I know, bring out Paul the Apostle’s words. But here’s the thing. I believe if a person’s #1 reason for marrying is sex, they will eventually be let down. Because marriage comes with serious challenges that cannot be solved merely by having sex. Furthermore, I believe marrying for sex as the primary reason is objectifying the other person. Now I’ll go off in the corner somewhere and wait for the responses.

    No, I totally agree with you. What’s worse is that the messaging we got over and over was that we should hurry and just find somebody, and once we said the vows, everything would be okay. I went to a fundamentalist college, and they treated marriage vows like some magic words that seal the fairy tale. No honest discussion about marriage or the real challenges of it. No discussion on the problems of objectifying the opposite sex.

    Most of those friends are now divorced, and some have repeated the same process over and over again without learning from it.

  350. Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

    ishy wrote:
    They seem to think they women are going to do whatever they want whenever they want, and will do so “joyfully”.
    Isn’t that one of the standard tropes of PORNOGRAPHY?

    HUG, yes, and they force this idea in their dastardly “biblical counseling’ sessions (even when a woman is leading the counseling farce) and from their holy pulpits too, being the godmen they think they are. “Joyfully” is a word I heard very often, and in the context of what you’re saying.
    The way this lot are misbehaving, God Skypes them every morning with updates and new laws and amendments to last week’s laws…all for their satisfaction and for the “joyfulness” of their women.

  351. About divorced and not remarried christians vs divorced and remarried christians

    At SBC mega here, regardless of what they may teach or not, and based on the first person experience of one close family member, here is what actually happens. When you divorce, male or female, you are instantly segregated from the general population and ‘forced’ into the singles track. This is preposterous because formerly married with kids and now divorced with kids is nothing like never married-not past a certain age. None the less, this is what they do. Then, should you remarry, you will be re-admitted to the general population whether you are male or female. Should you not remarry, if you are male you will be potentially be readmitted to the general population after a non-specified time on an individual basis, but if you are female you will not be readmitted to the general population.

    I have read that Pope Francis tried to get something changed so that divorced and remarried catholics could be admitted (or readmitted) to participation in the eucharist, but the public information regarding this at the time (the past year or two) indicated that he did not get that change in procedure in place.
    Others here would be more competent to address this issue, but I do get a tad frustrated with conversation which seems to be overly focused on the evangelical response to this issue as though they were the only ones with rules and regulations concerning divorce and/and not remarriage.

  352. okrapod wrote:

    but I do get a tad frustrated with conversation which seems to be overly focused on the evangelical response to this issue as though they were the only ones with rules and regulations concerning divorce and/and not remarriage.

    I feel the same way about fencing the table issues. It happens across denominations.

  353. Darlene wrote:

    This mindset is disappointing and sad. I also think that this rush to marry in Christian circles in order to have sex is setting up a marriage for failure. I know, I know, bring out Paul the Apostle’s words. But here’s the thing. I believe if a person’s #1 reason for marrying is sex, they will eventually be let down. Because marriage comes with serious challenges that cannot be solved merely by having sex. Furthermore, I believe marrying for sex as the primary reason is objectifying the other person. Now I’ll go off in the corner somewhere and wait for the responses

    How about this response – I totally agree !!!!

  354. Bridget wrote:

    Furthermore, I believe marrying for sex as the primary reason is objectifying the other person. Now I’ll go off in the corner somewhere and wait for the responses
    How about this response – I totally agree !!!!

    Darlene et Bridget,
    Totally agree too. This corner is getting big, it seems!

  355. ishy wrote:

    The fact that he doesn’t mention his kids at all is worrying, too, like he just doesn’t care about them.

    I’m inclined to give him the benefit of the doubt on this and assume that he’s not mentioning his kids because he doesn’t want to drag them into anything. I hope that’s the truth.

  356. Valerie wrote:

    Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:
    ishy wrote:
    They seem to think they women are going to do whatever they want whenever they want, and will do so “joyfully”.

    Isn’t that one of the standard tropes of PORNOGRAPHY?

    HUG, yes, and they force this idea in their dastardly “biblical counseling’ sessions (even when a woman is leading the counseling farce) and from their holy pulpits too, being the godmen they think they are. “Joyfully” is a word I heard very often, and in the context of what you’re saying.

    The sad thing here is that sex SHOULD be fun. It should be ‘joyful’. Right? If it isn’t, there is something wrong. Telling someone to ignore the wrong and be ‘joyful’ regardless, is only going to exacerbate the problems.

  357. okrapod wrote:

    but I do get a tad frustrated with conversation which seems to be overly focused on the evangelical response to this issue as though they were the only ones with rules and regulations concerning divorce and/and not remarriage.

    That is true. Catholics (and Episcopalians I guess?) seem to have a lot of ‘official’ regulations on this (and as Bridget mentions, definitely on taking communion). Evangelicals seem to have a lot of semi-official rules, that aren’t quite the same because of the differences of opinion on sacraments and because they are not as connected to each other as the catholic church is, so its easier to just hop from one church to the next.

    I think in practice people who are married at all tend to be more accepted and treated as the same, regardless of whether they’ve been married 5 times or 1.

  358. Lea wrote:

    Catholics (and Episcopalians I guess?) seem to have a lot of ‘official’ regulations on this (and as Bridget mentions, definitely on taking communion).

    Nope. TEC is in some ways almost the exact opposite of the Romans on this. And not to forget that no two TEC churches are exactly the same; this cannot be overemphasized. That would include marriage, divorce, remarriage, gay marriage and especially who takes communion. In fact, the Anglican communion has now placed TEC in a sort of time out over one of those issues; remains to see how that will be resolved. Radically hell-bound liberals don’t you know, or something of the sort.

  359. Lea wrote:

    The sad thing here is that sex SHOULD be fun. It should be ‘joyful’. Right? If it isn’t, there is something wrong. Telling someone to ignore the wrong and be ‘joyful’ regardless, is only going to exacerbate the problems.

    Lea, I believe “whatever they want, whenever they want” is what is meant here; stuff that is only “joyful” to the man because the acts are way too abnormal and unnatural. There is absolutely no joy in that. It is demeaning and vulgar. Yes, just ignore the wrong because I am the male and what I say goes…natural or not.
    They can take that and stuff it.

  360. okrapod wrote:

    Nope. TEC is in some ways almost the exact opposite of the Romans on this. And not to forget that no two TEC churches are exactly the same; this cannot be overemphasized.

    Ah good to know. I’m not very familiar with their policies.

  361. Max wrote:

    Back to the topic, BP keeps talking. Earlier this week, he went off on a “Happy Rant” on Southern Politeness, ESV Only, and Women Protesting. He just doesn’t sound like a guy whose marriage just failed, as he cuts up with his bros.
    http://www.barnabaspiper.com/2017/01/new-happy-rant-southern-politeness-esv-only-and-women-protesting.html
    The beat goes on …

    I can’t listen to these kinds of people any more . . . it is detrimental to my health 😉

  362. Bridget wrote:

    I can’t listen to these kinds of people any more . . . it is detrimental to my health

    Mine, too … it’s more heart ache than this ole guy can stand. But I do it to find out what makes these guys tick and to respond more intelligently to their stupidity.

  363. ishy wrote:

    I went to a fundamentalist college, and they treated marriage vows like some magic words that seal the fairy tale. No honest discussion about marriage or the real challenges of it.

    What is there to discuss? The husband does as he pleases, and the wife does as he pleases.

  364. Lea wrote:

    The sad thing here is that sex SHOULD be fun. It should be ‘joyful’. Right? If it isn’t, there is something wrong. Telling someone to ignore the wrong and be ‘joyful’ regardless, is only going to exacerbate the problems.

    I believe HUG pointed it out first on a previous thread, but these people have an equally unhealthy obsession with sex as the porno-libertine-culture outside the church; it’s just in the opposite direction.
    And it’s not just the big reformed bosses either, I just heard Greg Laurie, a west coast fundagelical Big Kahuna (non-reformed), preach a sermon on ‘joyful submission’ by virtue of cast-in-concrete-gender-roles as God’s ‘design’ from the beginning.

  365. Nancy2 wrote:

    The husband does as he pleases, and the wife does as he pleases.

    Is it any wonder the wives are not having fun? No one wants a man who is selfish in bed.

  366. Max wrote:

    Back to the topic, BP keeps talking. Earlier this week, he went off on a “Happy Rant” on Southern Politeness, ESV Only, and Women Protesting. He just doesn’t sound like a guy whose marriage just failed, as he cuts up with his bros.

    So they podcast to beg for freebies and make fun of other people? Southern men are defined by hairstyle and bow ties???? I guess I really don’t know any real southern men!

  367. Nancy2 wrote:

    Southern men are defined by hairstyle and bow ties????

    Well, I’m a Southern man … you won’t find any bow ties in my wardrobe. I do comb my hair, though. Speaking of defining a group by the way they look, New Calvinist men appear to have a fondness for spiky hair and skinny jeans regardless of geographic location.

  368. Nancy2 wrote:

    Southern men are defined by hairstyle and bow ties????

    Bow ties? Seriously?

    That’s hipster nonsense. Beards are terribly in vogue right now, though. They are also hipsterish, but have a wider appeal than bowties.

  369. Joe Reed wrote:

    The hostility toward John is clearly being transferred to Barnabas, and so much criticism is not even trying to hide that.
    $20 says if this was Pastor Wade’s son (and I like him, and don’t know if he has a son), this whole thread would sound different.

    Dunno. Does Wade have a divorced son who is writing books, publicizing them in interviews, and (apparently) giving marriage advice (along with parenting advice) at conferences?

  370. Quoting from the OP:

    “Six years ago Barnabas was fired because he was dumb and dishonest. He didn’t say specifically what he did but said that this was the time that his wife began turning away from him. He claims that he got better and he aimed to be whole. ”

    Six years ago was ~2010, at which time, according to his LinkedIn page http://www.linkedin.com/in/barnabaspiper ), after 5 years Barnabas left a ‘Key Account Manager” position with Crossway in January 2010 to become what sounds like a salesman/recruiter for a now-defunct adult learning academy (archived website web.archive.org/web/20090628033052/http://www.cambridgeadultacademy.com/ ).

    Of interest is the fact that in March 2010 John Piper took a leave of absence ( 5ptsalt.com/2010/03/28/john-piper-takes-8-month-leave-from-public-ministry/ ).

  371. Joe Reed wrote:

    The hostility toward John is clearly being transferred to Barnabas, and so much criticism is not even trying to hide that.

    Perhaps.

    Or perhaps people are weary of the double-standards applied to religion’s celebrities who have touted themselves and have been touted by their fellow religion celebrities as being experts, examples to the hoi polloi, guides to us who are blind.

    Driscoll didn’t have a famous, influential religious father – do you think he was given some sort of criticism pass that Barnabas has not been given?

  372. BL wrote:

    Driscoll didn’t have a famous, influential religious father – do you think he was given some sort of criticism pass that Barnabas has not been given?

    Criticism of Driscoll was based on actual evidence that he was, to be overly charitable, a colossal jerk, among other things. My only point here is that the primary evidence being used to condemn Barnabas is his father’s name, and then reading “John Piper” into everything “Barnabas” says or writes.

    I’m a pastors kid. I’ve taken criticism and judgment from those hostile to my Dad not because of their objective criticism of me, but their hatred of him. And it’s not cool. So I’m just saying this case should be judged on the facts, most of which we don’t know.

  373. Joe Reed wrote:

    I’m a pastors kid. I’ve taken criticism and judgment from those hostile to my Dad not because of their objective criticism of me, but their hatred of him. And it’s not cool. So I’m just saying this case should be judged on the facts, most of which we don’t know.

    The point you make about your experience is valid, but the fact is no one would give a moment’s notice to Barnabas Piper solipsistic silliness if not for John Piper’s drawing power. No one. So if you fly high tied to Papa Piper when Papa flies high, you’re going to nosedive tied to Papa when Papa nosedives.

  374. @ BL:
    Interesting timeline. What does John Piper’s son have to do to get fired by Crossway? I’m thinking it was more than an extended lunch hour.

  375. Gram3 wrote:

    @ BL:
    Interesting timeline. What does John Piper’s son have to do to get fired by Crossway? I’m thinking it was more than an extended lunch hour.

    Yes, and for his wife to still be affected by it 6 years later. Lies are poison. (Nice detective work, BL.) Joe Reed wrote:

    My only point here is that the primary evidence being used to condemn Barnabas is his father’s name

    I think the primary evidence is mostly what Barnabus is actually writing and telling people. But yes, people are paying attention to that because of who his father is. But that’s probably the reason people paid attention to him in the first place. Live by the sword (of nepotism) die by the sword.

  376. Bridget wrote:

    I can’t listen to these kinds of people any more . . . it is detrimental to my health

    Is that anything like “THE STUPID! IT BURNS!”?

  377. Boston Lady wrote:

    Lea, I believe “whatever they want, whenever they want” is what is meant here; stuff that is only “joyful” to the man because the acts are way too abnormal and unnatural. There is absolutely no joy in that. It is demeaning and vulgar. Yes, just ignore the wrong because I am the male and what I say goes…natural or not.

    That’s EXACTLY what I meant up the thread.

    In porn, the female-shaped fantasy object only exists to satisfy the Urrges in the man’s Arreas, no matter how kinky, sicko, and/or twisted. Immediately and instantly. With joyful obedience.

    When carried over IRL, remember what Douggie ESQUIRE did to his Commander’s Handmaid?

  378. Muff Potter wrote:

    I believe HUG pointed it out first on a previous thread, but these people have an equally unhealthy obsession with sex as the porno-libertine-culture outside the church; it’s just in the opposite direction.

    Actually, I’ve pointed it out on a lot of threads, here and elesewhere.
    Christians are just as screwed-up as everyone else.

    And it’s not just the big reformed bosses either, I just heard Greg Laurie, a west coast fundagelical Big Kahuna (non-reformed), preach a sermon on ‘joyful submission’ by virtue of cast-in-concrete-gender-roles as God’s ‘design’ from the beginning.

    PastorGregLaurie (all one word) — now that’s a blast from the past. Associated with “Vineyard”, wasn’t he? I remember the name from Christianese AM radio in the early Eighties, and still see it around. Most recently in ad posters for a “Harvest Celebration” concert on the platform shelters at Irvine Metrolink station.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *