John Piper’s Jesus

I have posted a link to Greg Boyd’s blog so you can read his response to John Piper’s very public claim that the August 19th tornado in Minneapolis, MN struck a church to warn them that they were flirting with condoning gays. Read Greg’s very good response below. But first, can I ask, what sort of Jesus does John Piper worship? Is it the Jesus who is obsessed with one sin (namely homosexuality) while neglecting the many sins of the church? How about the churches that promote war and racism? How about churches that neglect the poor and preach wealth as a sign that God is blessing you? How about televangelists that prey on the poor? Why don’t these churches get hit by tornadoes? Or is John Piper’s Jesus not Love Incarnate?

http://www.gregboyd.org/blog/did-god-send-a-tornado-to-warn-the-elca/

Comments

  1. Greg –

    It does bring a little clarity to Piper’s stance. I would still contend, however, that he is grossly wrong. I don’t think God operates the way Piper suggests he does. And might I add, that it is convenient that he added humility to his claim about the tornado only after his theology was called on the carpet. I think it would be wise to be humble first in matters of judgment.

    I could be wrong, however. I suppose it is plausible that the Christian God, namely Jesus, sends tornadoes to hit buildings where people are gathered to have honest discussions about the complexities of homosexuals in the church.

    But if I worship this kind of God, can I petition him to send a tornado to rallies where people hold signs up promoting anger and hatred (in the name of God)? Is it appropriate to petition God to these acts, if indeed he is that kind of God?

    Reply
  2. I came across this post and felt compelled to comment. When interpreting the few biblical passages that generally get appealed to in this debate, It is assumed that homosexuality, as we know it today, is addressed in scripture. There are an increasing number of evangelical bible scholars who agree it’s not. It goes without saying that people with a high regard for Scripture and who are prayerfully committed to ordering their lives in accordance with it are honestly divided over this issue. Therefore, the need for people at this time — and especially believers — to exercise all of their interpretive and other virtues in an open conversation with all the concerned parties could not be more acute. Sadly, such conversations have been the exception rather than the rule. The result is that we have pushed homosexuals in the church to the margins of our church life forcing them to shout their message to us from the few safe havens they have been able to find. An even more heartrending result of this is that gay people have suffered at the hands of (of all things!) heir churches, the one place on this earth where grace, love and fairness ought to be the theme of life for them. Exegesis is supposed to be about getting out of the text what it originally meant to the author and original intended audience — without reading into the text the many traditional interpretations that may have grown up around it. But what too many do instead is what some theologians refer to as “frontloading”, i.e., they read their own personal, political or ideological beliefs back INTO the Bible instead of reading OUT FROM the Bible what the original writers were saying.

    Food for thought: http://jewishchristiangay.wordpress.com/

    Reply
    • Alex –

      Thank you so much for your comments! I too hope and pray for open and honest conversations about this theme.

      Peace –

      Joe

      Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s