The sad truth is that those self-styled evangelists are likely caught up in the manifold errors of free-will Arminianism and thus they feel threatened by true conversions to Christ that bring much glory to God by emphasizing His sovereign electing grace in contradistinction to the flesh-pleasing, man-centered, “God’s done all He can and now the rest is up to you” psycho-babble that’s espoused by vast swaths of the professing church thanks to Finney and his modern day spiritual counterparts.

And on a Biblical note isn’t it interesting how we always find the sons who were outside the covenant jealously plotting and conspiring against the sons of the covenant? Here’s wisdom – just as He did in the first act of creation God is still separating the light from the darkness, and the darkness comprehended it not.

Unfortunately there are just about as many straw men when it comes to Calvinism than there is unregenerate church members in the SBC.

Okay, maybe not, but still there’s alot.

Justin,

That’s right. The thing that bothers me most about what these 15 evangelists and their conference fellows have done is misrepresent the very biblical truths that send, support, and encourage missionaries across the world. What was it that encourage Carey, called Paton to persevere, motivated Judson to stay? It was God’s sovereignty in salvation and the doctrines of grace. It is not only a bad argument; it is an insult to all those whose lives have born eternal fruit as a result from having believed them.

I see I’m a little late to this thread!

I’ve been reading thorugh “Pierced for our transgressions” recently, and this sort of polemic against Piper reminds me of what the authors say about those who are on the opposite side of the doctrine of penal substitution: namely, that they make accusations without actually engaging the arguments set forth by proponents of penal substitution. Most who criticize Piper (IMO) seem to do this as well by looking past what he actually believes and practices in favor of saying he’s unbiblical, unhistoric, hyper-calvinist, etc. I suppose that would get in the way of their ridiculous straw man arguments.