All I ever see is people cleanly denouncing pietism, except this video. I’m really not even exaggerating. This video is very good, and you’re right. I think many scholastically oriented people could stand to deepen their emotional maturity together with God, and in turn cut down some of the pride that comes with looking down on emotions.
The Augsburg Confession condemns AnaBaptist a lot throughout its articles. It would be interesting to hear you address some of the issues that the Reformers had with this group. I actually became an Anabaptist i.e., Mennonite for eight years before I converted to Lutheranism.
As an ordained Covenant pastor, the Evangelical Covenant Church that I serve was birthed out of Pietism, uniquely its formulation as it found its way to the New World, I can only thank you for such an articulate and succinct discussion of the movement!
Piety isn't wrong until you see it as a means of working to get in better standing with God. At least that's my basic understanding. Thanks for the video.
The problem is only the Western Christian mindset about spiritual practise. Eastern Christians understand that bearing fruit is as important as correct doctrine. Roman Catholics separate spiritual practise and dogma while Lutheran Protestant Catholics sort of believe that correct dogma will bear spiritual fruit. Spiritual practise is good, dogma is good but the essential work is to build the trust in God's faithful love which bears fruit. And that is the missing link Pietists sought to restore to us.
Thank you for this video , it helped me sort some of these things out and understand the nuances of the doctrine of salvation. I personally had a profound “conversion experience” late in life at 42 but have come to a more reformed understanding and use of the means of grace in my Christian life .
Your video is MUCH more balanced than Ryan Reeves' Reformed screed against Pietism. (Incredibly, Reeves calls Spener "Spencer" throughout his video!) Thank you for this brief, but informative talk.
I have to go back and finish it (I've been working my way through his early and modern playlists and literally smack dab in the middle of the pietist video), but I thought he overemphasized the association of emotion and pietism, instead of just piety. Emotion is part of it, though, so it's not an entirely unfair association and I like his stuff in general.
It seems that pietism is rooted in a works based salvation. Rome was founded on pietism (before Jesus), many other religions would be aswell. The difference is what your standard of "piety" is, Christian pietist use scripture as the standard, muslims, Hindus, humanists, ect use different standards. Scripture clearly teaches against pietism, the inclusion of Samson in the hall of faith is my favorite example, David is a good one aswell. Good works flow out of faith, not the other way around. If you get this wrong you quickly end up with a dead religion. I grew up in mennonite communities and experienced this first hand.
I love theology probably because my brain likes to ponder deeply the truths of scripture. But a problem I constantly run into is people only want to talk doctrine and rarely if ever want to have Bible study.
@@tylerwhaley4872 Yes, but not always true, especially when you play hop scotch around the Bible, taking text out of context. I was not intent to diminish Bible study.
Thank you for your contribution. When you say "some parts are good and some parts are bad," I wish you would explain this a bit. I didn't hear anything in that that I would consider bad. What did I miss?
Fair, honest, balanced, informative. Thank you. I’ve recently read or heard too many criticisms of pietism from brothers I respect but who have a disdainful uppity attitude about it. At least that is how I perceive them. Is it not possible to be a scholastic pietist? Can someone not have a high regard for correct doctrine and deep desire for personal holiness?
Can we have two versions of Christianity - one for the theologians and one for the laity? It was a reaction to scholastic Lutheranism that formed Pietism initially. Is there a tension between intellectual complexity and faith?
I was sprinkled as an infant. My church called this "baptism" and told my parents that it washed away my sins. Later I went through confirmation to "confirm my baptism". I would estimate that maybe, MAYBE 20% of those kids I was confirmed with are still professing Christians and attending church even semi-regularly. If that's what Christianity is, then that's pretty sad in my humble opinion. The real baptism that forgives sins is the baptism of the Holy Spirit (1 Corinthians 12:13) that happens the exact moment we are born of the Spirit/born again by trusting Christ alone to save us. "That we should be to the praise of his glory, who first trusted in Christ. In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise" - Ephesians 1:12-13 KJV When Jesus said you must be born again in John 3:3-8, he was talking about being born of the Spirit. This is the indwelling of the Spirit in a new believer who realizes their own sinful, wicked state and turns to/agrees with God that nothing they do can save them (including “sacraments”) and they, by faith, call on the Lord (and him alone) to save them, receiving Jesus Christ as their personal Savior and trusting his blood alone for the forgiveness of all sins (Romans 3:25, Revelation 1:5). When Jesus says born of water and Spirit, he's contrasting physical birth with Spiritual birth. Everyone is born once by water when they entered into the world through their mother's womb. But only those who are born again (i.e. born of the Spirit of God) will go to Heaven. In other words, if you're born once (physical birth), you will die twice (physical death and spiritual death - eternity in Hell). But if you're born twice (physical AND Spiritual birth), then you will only die once (physically) and you will live forever with God in Heaven because you've been born again of his Spirit. Those who are born again will not be hurt by the second death - eternity in the lake of fire. “I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance. but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire” - Matthew 3:11 “It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.” - John 6:63 "That we should be to the praise of his glory, who first trusted in Christ. In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise" - Ephesians 1:12-13 KJV May God bless you.
Even after the Lutherbibel, Bibles weren't in every motel room like today. The laity were expected to memorized portions of the Scripture as catechesis. Also, the Lutherans clearly taught that no one should teach the Church without a "regular calling." Householders should teach catechism to their households. But a man not called and ordained to be servants of the word should not get a bunch of laity together and spout pseudo-scriptural nonsense. Personal Bible reading good. Unqualified pontificating bad.
Theology is not Christianity. Jesus Christ said, "You must be born again." The New Covenant is what God does for and in His people personally and corporately. A theologian may be able to describe that without having the reality of Christ's work in him. A theologian can talk of the indwelling of the Spirit of God without possessing that indwelling. Theology saves no one. We are saved through faith in Christ.
"Kinda detached from the Laity." That's a bit understated! And because of that scholasticism stands in opposition to the Gospel and Jesus Christ. Pastors responsibility is the welfare of God's people. Scholastics are focused elsewhere. If a child can't understand it, it isn't from Jesus. I'm a bit loathe to say it but scholasticism is the path of the Pharisees, turning people to the traditions of men rather than to the simplicity and purity of the Gospel.
Every century- Guys, we need to get away from the man-made stuff and get back to God and the Bible. Satan- Those are great ideas. Now you should add your own ideas to it. and around we go.........
These are good and helpful
All I ever see is people cleanly denouncing pietism, except this video. I’m really not even exaggerating. This video is very good, and you’re right. I think many scholastically oriented people could stand to deepen their emotional maturity together with God, and in turn cut down some of the pride that comes with looking down on emotions.
The Augsburg Confession condemns AnaBaptist a lot throughout its articles. It would be interesting to hear you address some of the issues that the Reformers had with this group. I actually became an Anabaptist i.e., Mennonite for eight years before I converted to Lutheranism.
Thank you for an even-handed treatment of the subject. I've found reading Johann Arndt's True Christianity helpful in making Lutheranism come alive.
As an ordained Covenant pastor, the Evangelical Covenant Church that I serve was birthed out of Pietism, uniquely its formulation as it found its way to the New World, I can only thank you for such an articulate and succinct discussion of the movement!
I spent much of childhood in the ECC.
Piety isn't wrong until you see it as a means of working to get in better standing with God. At least that's my basic understanding. Thanks for the video.
The problem is only the Western Christian mindset about spiritual practise. Eastern Christians understand that bearing fruit is as important as correct doctrine. Roman Catholics separate spiritual practise and dogma while Lutheran Protestant Catholics sort of believe that correct dogma will bear spiritual fruit.
Spiritual practise is good, dogma is good but the essential work is to build the trust in God's faithful love which bears fruit. And that is the missing link Pietists sought to restore to us.
Thank you for this video , it helped me sort some of these things out and understand the nuances of the doctrine of salvation. I personally had a profound “conversion experience” late in life at 42 but have come to a more reformed understanding and use of the means of grace in my Christian life .
Thanks Pastor, I loved it. Knew very little about Pietism now I a little more; it was a blessing. God's peace be with you
Taking an ethics course, and learning on Kant's beginnings led me to want to learn more on pietism. Thank you for this.
Your video is MUCH more balanced than Ryan Reeves' Reformed screed against Pietism. (Incredibly, Reeves calls Spener "Spencer" throughout his video!) Thank you for this brief, but informative talk.
I did think his mispronunciation was really strange. He certainly focuses on the negative aspects of the movement.
I have to go back and finish it (I've been working my way through his early and modern playlists and literally smack dab in the middle of the pietist video), but I thought he overemphasized the association of emotion and pietism, instead of just piety. Emotion is part of it, though, so it's not an entirely unfair association and I like his stuff in general.
It seems that pietism is rooted in a works based salvation. Rome was founded on pietism (before Jesus), many other religions would be aswell.
The difference is what your standard of "piety" is, Christian pietist use scripture as the standard, muslims, Hindus, humanists, ect use different standards.
Scripture clearly teaches against pietism, the inclusion of Samson in the hall of faith is my favorite example, David is a good one aswell.
Good works flow out of faith, not the other way around. If you get this wrong you quickly end up with a dead religion. I grew up in mennonite communities and experienced this first hand.
Helpful! Heard this word on the Hard Men podcast. I highly recommend.
Excellent summation and commentary thank you so much
I love theology probably because my brain likes to ponder deeply the truths of scripture. But a problem I constantly run into is people only want to talk doctrine and rarely if ever want to have Bible study.
i think a mix of both is good
Bible studies are a great way to avoid theology. That is why they are so popular.
@@rbelf001 theology is the study of... God. when you study the Bible, you are practicing theology...
@@tylerwhaley4872 Yes, but not always true, especially when you play hop scotch around the Bible, taking text out of context. I was not intent to diminish Bible study.
Could you do a video on the Lutheran practice of holy orders in both a biblical and historical context? Thanks
thank you for your explanation that I can understand and to which I can relate.
I think it would be cool to do different videos like these on the early church fathers
Thanks a lot john:) like your channel, very helpful.
Thank You for the video. Could You elaborate more about on how You believe pietism influenced the rise of foreign missions? Thank You.
Super helpful brother thank you!
Thank you for your contribution. When you say "some parts are good and some parts are bad," I wish you would explain this a bit. I didn't hear anything in that that I would consider bad. What did I miss?
thank you, is helpful for my exams, you are great speaker engaging
Fair, honest, balanced, informative. Thank you. I’ve recently read or heard too many criticisms of pietism from brothers I respect but who have a disdainful uppity attitude about it. At least that is how I perceive them. Is it not possible to be a scholastic pietist? Can someone not have a high regard for correct doctrine and deep desire for personal holiness?
Can we have two versions of Christianity - one for the theologians and one for the laity? It was a reaction to scholastic Lutheranism that formed Pietism initially. Is there a tension between intellectual complexity and faith?
These are helpful - do more.
+Kathy Mokris Thanks!
thank you for this.
I was sprinkled as an infant. My church called this "baptism" and told my parents that it washed away my sins. Later I went through confirmation to "confirm my baptism". I would estimate that maybe, MAYBE 20% of those kids I was confirmed with are still professing Christians and attending church even semi-regularly. If that's what Christianity is, then that's pretty sad in my humble opinion.
The real baptism that forgives sins is the baptism of the Holy Spirit (1 Corinthians 12:13) that happens the exact moment we are born of the Spirit/born again by trusting Christ alone to save us.
"That we should be to the praise of his glory, who first trusted in Christ. In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise" - Ephesians 1:12-13 KJV
When Jesus said you must be born again in John 3:3-8, he was talking about being born of the Spirit. This is the indwelling of the Spirit in a new believer who realizes their own sinful, wicked state and turns to/agrees with God that nothing they do can save them (including “sacraments”) and they, by faith, call on the Lord (and him alone) to save them, receiving Jesus Christ as their personal Savior and trusting his blood alone for the forgiveness of all sins (Romans 3:25, Revelation 1:5).
When Jesus says born of water and Spirit, he's contrasting physical birth with Spiritual birth. Everyone is born once by water when they entered into the world through their mother's womb. But only those who are born again (i.e. born of the Spirit of God) will go to Heaven. In other words, if you're born once (physical birth), you will die twice (physical death and spiritual death - eternity in Hell). But if you're born twice (physical AND Spiritual birth), then you will only die once (physically) and you will live forever with God in Heaven because you've been born again of his Spirit. Those who are born again will not be hurt by the second death - eternity in the lake of fire.
“I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance. but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire” - Matthew 3:11
“It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.” - John 6:63
"That we should be to the praise of his glory, who first trusted in Christ. In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise" - Ephesians 1:12-13 KJV
May God bless you.
Experience doesn't give assurance because it changes
The Association of Free Lutheran Congregations say they descend from Norwegian Pietists, what do you make of them?
I think this helps me understand something about Kant.
And Hegel too.Hegel was also a liberal pietist.
Spener and Jordan Cooper are pretty much the two people keeping me in the Lutheran church right now.
Wolfmueller?
Hey, thank you! I have a question. Didn‘t the anabaptists come the pietists before in case of the „today-evangelical“ style?
But, what does a Pietist believe? I heard very little about that.
Simply put. Pietism holds emotion over doctrine.
Wrong, its actually doctrine on fire.
You didn’t listen to the video
so.. are al evangelical christians and churches pietists? Or are you just saying it creeps in to it more often?
Is it really the case that personal bible study wasn't a thing in Lutheranism before the pietist movement. If so why?
Even after the Lutherbibel, Bibles weren't in every motel room like today. The laity were expected to memorized portions of the Scripture as catechesis. Also, the Lutherans clearly taught that no one should teach the Church without a "regular calling." Householders should teach catechism to their households. But a man not called and ordained to be servants of the word should not get a bunch of laity together and spout pseudo-scriptural nonsense. Personal Bible reading good. Unqualified pontificating bad.
I think I am a Lutheran and Pietist.
Theology is not Christianity. Jesus Christ said, "You must be born again." The New Covenant is what God does for and in His people personally and corporately. A theologian may be able to describe that without having the reality of Christ's work in him. A theologian can talk of the indwelling of the Spirit of God without possessing that indwelling. Theology saves no one. We are saved through faith in Christ.
"Kinda detached from the Laity." That's a bit understated! And because of that scholasticism stands in opposition to the Gospel and Jesus Christ. Pastors responsibility is the welfare of God's people. Scholastics are focused elsewhere. If a child can't understand it, it isn't from Jesus. I'm a bit loathe to say it but scholasticism is the path of the Pharisees, turning people to the traditions of men rather than to the simplicity and purity of the Gospel.
URG!!! another Christian channel with annoying ads, every 2 minutes, interrupting teachings!
Every century- Guys, we need to get away from the man-made stuff and get back to God and the Bible.
Satan- Those are great ideas. Now you should add your own ideas to it.
and around we go.........
Need to talk slower.