1

Your profile has neglected Piper's strongly reformed (Calvinist) theology and his leadership in the struggle against Open Theism (see earlier profile on Greg Boyd).

2

Good man John Piper. I liked "let the nations be glad" lots of meat on that bone

3

God has used the God-centered, Bible-saturated, Christ-exalting life and words of John Piper to significantly alter my thinking. I first heard him use his provocative term "Christian hedonist" in a radio interview serveral years ago. Totally misunderstanding its meaning, I turned the radio off in disgust. My misperceptions were eventually corrected as I read (and re-read) his book, Desiring God. "Christian hedonism" is a dangerous, but fitting, term. And it is now a concept that I gladly embrace.

4

Thanks for including Piper in your "Know Your Evangelicals" feature. His work, "Desiring God," has helped me form a balanced view of the believer's relationship to the world. I make it required reading in discipleship. I also try to read Piper's sermons before I preach on a text, though I think they make for better hearing than reading.

5

Thanks for this great profile! John Piper has helped me understand and shape several key areas of my worldview.

6

I don't know much about John Piper besides his extreme Calvinism and his opposition to Open Theism.

All I can say is that his work in combatting Open Theism is fairly embarrassing. He ignores debating the real issues in favor of straw men. (Obviously, I'm an Open Theist and I've studied it deeply). I always take it upon myself to understand a position fully and accurately before I launch into an attack, and I would expect someone as reknowned as Piper to do the same, but when it comes to OVT he can't be bother to do anything besides trot out the same tired arguments that have been dismantled again and again.

So, I don't have a very high opinion of the guy, personally. Also, I read an article by him on Original Sin and I found it extremely poorly argued as well.

He may be alot better with his books on Love or Jesus, I just haven't the experience with him on those.

7

To all Open Theist. You have the right to believe that. But please stop all this stuff about it is so much deeper in theology. IT is not. It is simply you giving up the soverignty of GOD. GOD either know everything or he dosen't. If he dosen't, then we are all up a huge creek without a paddle. So please spare me all your human wisdom, your wrong and you are being lied to by your own wisdom.

8

You left out one of Piper's major--and most controversial--hobbyhorses: male/female roles. I don't know any specifics beyond the fact that he's very, very conservative in that regard, but it's a pretty big piece of his work: Recovering Biblical Manhood and Womanhood: A Response to Evangelical Feminism is a hefty tome (I've not read it, but I've seen it).

My father was in Piper's first ever Greek class at Bethel, and then ministered at Bethlehem during seminary. He respects Piper immensely, but has been very dissappointed in the way he has treated those he disagrees with. My mother doesn't respect Piper as much (go figure).

9

To echo Jeff and Phil, in my experience, it seems that whenever the name "John Piper" is mentioned, it is always in reference to on the vanguard of the civil war against the open theists. Although I don't hold to the open theist position, my sentiment has always been to embrace them as brothers and sisters since there are much larger fish to fry. So I laud Joe for pointing out Piper's other contributions. It is refreshing to hear Piper's other contributions so I can get a more balanced view of him. On the subject of Piper's theology, does anyone know what his attitude towards molinist and middle knowledge proponents are? I am very curious as to what he has to say about that.

Scott

10

Piper's book "Don't Waste Your Life" is a great call to action for Christians. I give him credit for keeping his church in a declining urban neighborhood while many of its neighbors moved to nicer digs in the suburbs.

On the other hand, the energy he spends trying to kick Open Theists out of the church is positively disgraceful, especially considering that his arguments against OVT suggest he doesn't fully understand the position. His positions on the role of women in the church and teetotaling lean more towards empty legalism than the sound application of Biblical instruction.

11

Erik -

I don't give up the sovereignty of God, I give up the settledness of the future. There's a big difference, and accusations that I don't think God is sovereign is exactly my beef with Mr. Piper. He makes the same claims no matter how many times we explain our position. So I suppose your response is fitting for this thread topic.

Everyone -

Doesn't anyone else find it amusing that Mr. Piper's radio show is called Desiring God? What does a Calvinist talk about on that subject?

"Today we'll be talking with God's elect, chosen before they were born to be saved. We'll start with Mike. Mike, how do you go about desiring God?"
"Well, John, I just do. I find that it's impossible not to. I never did anything on my own intiative to desire God, it just happened."
"Same here, Mike. Please join us next week when we talk to the unelect, whom God prevented from being saved prior to their creation. We'll try to get to the bottom of why they don't desire God. Good night!"

Obviously I'm being facetious and overgeneral, but I just had to chuckle at the name. (Just poking a little fun, don't take me too seriously)

12

So we have people criticizing Piper for not understanding OT, but then broadly mis-characterizing Calvinism and Piper's theology (in the name of humor, which was admittedly funny), while others admit they've read nothing Piper has ever written but criticize him anyway. Interesting.

I've read and understand Boyd, but don't agree with him. In fact, I love his Repenting Of Religion, even the very few parts with which I don't agree, but I disagree on large sections of his OT writings. While I would express my disagreement in more sophisticated ways than Piper tends to, in the end I believe Piper that is essentially right, if impolitic.

In any case, there are many positive things to say about Piper that missed the profile, and one is that everything he writes is available for free online to anyone.

I don't agree with the man on everything, of course, but I'll avoid listing individual points here and just say that one wouldn't go too far wrong swallowing everything Piper says: hook, line, and sinker.

13

I want to thank everyone for the contributions that made to the discussion so far. My profile, particularly the "assessment" portion, is generally based on my limited knowledge of the subject and is often sorely lacking.

That is why the comments are an essential component of this series. Without your input the purpose of these posts -- to highlight what is significant about these men and women -- would be incomplete.

Feel free to point out areas that need further exploration, providing links an detailed comments whenever you feel appropriate. I welcome all suggestions whether positive or negative. Once again, thanks for the input and for helping me to improve on this series of posts.

14

His writing and preaching have had a significant impact on many young Christian leaders, including . . . Third Day . . .

Ha! I should have guessed.

15

Piper has been an extremely influential figure in my Christian understanding. His passion for God is evident in everything he preaches and writes. I have not read his arguments on Open Theism yet, I get the feeling that neither have many of the negative commentors who posted previously. Generalized comments like "his arguments are tired" just don't cut it. If you don't have anything to prove your point, then why argue...unless it is to simply drag Piper's name through the mud. If his arguments can be easily argued...please provide an example...or point us to an example elsewhere.

16

If anyone wants to read a good book on Open Theism, read No Other God: A Reponse to Open Theism by John Frame (from Reformed Theological Seminary in Orlando). He is a very humble man who attempts to analyze the good and the bad of open theism from a biblical perspective.

17

Piper's book "Don't Waste Your Life," is a short but important read that really pushes us all toward how we can and should find ways to, as Bob Burford would say, move to a life of signficance for the kingdom.

18

Not sure if it matters to anyone (on either side), but I read a Piper sermon given on the "someteenth" anniversary of his time at Bethlehem Baptist in which he apologized to Gregory Boyd and others he hurt in opposition to open theism. It was an interesting read, as the whole message was about things he "regretted" (as opposed to celebrating his accomplishments or something).
I thought that showed a lot of humility.

I read it in the sermon archives of his ministry website, but I'm too lazy to look it up now. If anyone calls me a liar, I suppose I'd be forced to track down a link.

19

Jared,

I read it in the sermon archives of his ministry website, but I'm too lazy to look it up now. If anyone calls me a liar, I suppose I'd be forced to track down a link.

You, sir, are a vicious liar. And a lazy liar at that!

**Only kidding, of course, I don't really think you're lazy. ; ) **

20

Jared,

Thanks for the information on that. It sounds really interesting and I think I am going to try and track it down.

21

Hi, I appreciate you advertising John Piper on here. He is a great teacher. I am surprised there are so many posts on here challenging his teaching. I find him very biblical. Recently I got an iPod and was very glad to find that he has 301 sermons in mp3 format for download on many topics, sex , abortion, predestination,....you name it. It's at www.desiringgod.org I think.
I find them very edifying. I suggest you go download some. And off the subject, you guys should check out Ravi Zacharias' site also (www.rzim.org). He has all his radio messages for download in the resources section. If you don't know he is an excellent, knowledgeble and eloquent Christian Apologists who travels around speaking in universities and churches.

-Neil

22

I find Piper a bit hard to swallow sometimes, even when I agree with him on other issues (e.g., Open Theism, gender roles, and even Reform theology). Even he admits that "almost all commentators" (his words), including his fellow conservatives, have come to vastly different conclusion on marriage and divorce. Piper himself teaches that a Christian should NEVER get a divorce for any reason under and any circumstances whatsoever, unless it's for pre-marital unfaithfulness. Yes, you read that right, yes his church operates in contradictory fashion (but see below). Needless to say, he himself privately rejects nearly all who are remarried, regardless of circumstances and makes thinly veiled threats of non-salvation for those who view the issue differently. In this, he is far closer to Papist misconceptions and mistreatment of the marriage covenant than he is to Reformed (or even reasonable and historical) Biblical understanding of the numerous Scriptures on the issue -- many of which he ignores to maintain what he calls the "advantages" of his personal interpretation. The consequences of his 'one-blind-eye' exegetical processes are substantial. According to Piper (the man, not his church) a husband can look at his wife and say, "I'm gonna sleep with a different prostitute every week for the rest of our marriage!" and Piper himself still says "You shouldn't divorce... pray you don't get AIDS" (although his official church policy is slightly more lenient, but not much). Piper has a gross case of "Jer 3:8-o-phobia" (and some say OT-o-phobia) and ignores even the most balanced conclusion of his fellow Reformed scholars on this critical matter. His exegesis of Matt 5:32 is an embarrassment, and even he admits that virtually no one agrees with his (mis)interpretations and partial exegesis of "porneia" in that verse. Just to finish off remaining Biblical contradictions with his twistings, he even attacks Bible translators as being wrong, too. Many people have not delved deeply enough into his teachings on this matter to know all this. Personal convictions aside, his "Statement on Divorce and Remarriage in the Life of Bethlehem Baptist Church" makes provision of his church acting differently to what Piper himself believes, yet it still includes language that allows for mistreatment, shunning (even between current members in good standing!) and even greater abuse of divorced persons (ironically all justified by "conscience"). Basically, Piper's pastoral/official position allows members that believe as he does to (mis)treat other members with the disdain that Piper himself harbors. This is NOT a "side issue" to those of us trying to minister to the millions of broken families who we would like to see come to Christ... I just hope they don't go to Piper's church.

23

Scott, let us know if you find it. If not, Joe's called me out ;-), so I'll try to do it myself. If you don't find it, y'all will have to give me till tomorrow, because I have some work to do this afternoon/evening.

24

Here is the link to Piper's sermon which contains, in the second part, his apology for two specific instances where he says his passionate opposition to Open Theism led him to personally attack Greg Boyd. http://www.desiringgod.org/library/sermons/00/061100.html

Here is his cloing: "As I look back over twenty years of ministry, I am regretful that one of my most characteristic sins is to be quick to anger and quick to criticize in a way that runs ahead of brokenhearted concern and pastoral compassion. So, as you look with me into the future, there's a place for you to focus your prayers. I don't want us to be an angry church. I want us to be a humble, joyful, singing, Christ-exalting, God-centered, Bible-believing, patient, caring, kind, merciful, truth-telling, broken-hearted and bold people. It would help if I were that way. Pray for me."

25

Thanks, Dan! That's exactly what I was referring to.

26

I had intended to add a few thoughts to the link to Piper's apology re: the Boyd controversy, but got a call just as I was in the middle of it. For what it is worth, here they are:

I have read many helpful and inspiring sermons and essays on Piper's web page. I can't really recall anything he has written that causes me major grief from a doctrinal point of view, but I do have problems quite frequently with the tone that he and several other contemporary self identified "Reform" Evangelicals take when engaged in doctrinal food fights. Regardless of how you feel about Calvinism, some of the more assertive Calvinists (and, to be fair, some of the more assertive Arminians) leave much to be desired as controversialists.

Don't get me wrong, I am all for robust theological debate. But it needs to be irenic. Words like "apostate" don't belong in arguments between Christians. Several of the folks that Joe has highlighted in this series are, in my opinion, a little too quick to define Orthodoxy in an exclusionary way. As far as I am concerned, if you can recite the Nicean creed without reservation, you are my brother in Christ. We may have disagreements on important issues, but I hope we would not elevate them to the point of questioning each other's salvation.

I have read a good bit of Calvin in translation, and I honor him as one of the great exegists of all time. There is nothing in Calvinism, as stated in the typical TULIP fashion, that causes me any huge problem, but I am much less certain than most self identified Calvinists that it states the whole truth of Jesus' offer of salvation.

To state it another way, Calvin was trained as a lawyer, I am a lawyer, and I recognize a lawyer's brief when I see one. Even if the argument for Calvinism is a winning brief, that is not necessarily the end of the story. I have won cases where my brief was the winning brief, but that my client in no way deserved to win.

I think that all systematic theologyy is of limited value, though often its value is of critical importance, as was (and is) the theology of Luther and Calvin. I never feel very comfortable if my thinking strays too far from what I feel is mainline, Reformed, theology, but at the end of the day I am a believer, not a pastor or a theologian.

For me, the most pressing question to beleivers is "How should we then live?" On that point, I have found Piper to be quite inspirational.

27

Piper doesn't misunderstand open theists. He just thinks they've redefined a whole bunch of words. Their main disagreement is not over what the words mean but is over basic metaphysics -- whether statements about the future are true and in principle knowable. The thing that makes it seem to open theists as if he doesn't understand them is that he insists that they're misusing many terms, such as 'omniscience' and 'sovereignty'. What this objection to Piper misses is that anything short of Calvinism is a denial of God's sovereignty to someone who holds Piper's Calvinistic views of what sovereignty amounts to. Open theists go further and don't just say that there are some things God doesn't have any control over but there are some things that God genuinely doesn't have any idea about. By open theists' own terminology, God takes huge risks. I have to say I stand with Piper on this. I just can't see how that counts as sovereignty, if what might happen is so contingent and independent not just of God's control but even God's knowledge that it counts as a risk! How can it be a risk if God is sovereign? So to say back to Piper that open theists do believe God is sovereign just seems false to me. It's true that open theists believe they believe God to be sovereign, but Piper is not going to consider that a true belief about their belief, and I have to agree.

28

Jeremy has an interesting question about OT:

"I have to say I stand with Piper on this. I just can't see how that counts as sovereignty, if what might happen is so contingent and independent not just of God's control but even God's knowledge that it counts as a risk! How can it be a risk if God is sovereign?"

I don't know what the open thists would say, but might their response be that a God who intervenes in history (I don't think they deny that) can stop things from going too far off course, at least the big things? If, as chaos theory claims, the flap of a butterfly's wing could be the first action in a chain that leads to a hurricane, if God didn't make the butterfly flap its wings, or know that it would, isn't it still in his power to steer the hurricane, once it appears as such, on a harmless (or harmful, if that is His desire) path?

"Basic metaphysices" strikes me as a time wasting thing for Christians to argue about in this fallen world.

29

Here are some verses about God's sovereignty. I think it's clear that He intervenes as He sees fit and as it brings glory to Himself.

Prov. 21:1 "The king's heart is in the hand of the LORD ; he directs it like a watercourse wherever he pleases."

1 Peter 3:17 "It is better, if it is God's will, to suffer for doing good than for doing evil."

Matt. 26:39 "Going a little farther, he fell with his face to the ground and prayed, “My Father, if it is possible, may this cup be taken from me. Yet not as I will, but as you will.”

Isaiah 53:10 "Yet it was the LORD's will to crush him and cause him to suffer,and though the LORD makes [a] his life a guilt offering, he will see his offspring and prolong his days,and the will of the LORD will prosper in his hand."

Daniel 4:35 "All the peoples of the earth
are regarded as nothing.
He does as he pleases
with the powers of heaven
and the peoples of the earth.
No one can hold back his hand
or say to him: "What have you done?"

30

Dan wrote:

"Basic metaphysices" strikes me as a time wasting thing for Christians to argue about in this fallen world.

Dan ... I can't believe what I just read. Metaphysics is the study of reality. Are you really telling me that trying to see reality as it really is, is a waste of time? That is as bad as saying studying logic is a waste of time. I am finishing the semester in JP Moreland's Metaphysics class at Talbot Theological Seminary and it has been the most spiritually rich class I have ever taken. I strongly encourage you to pick up _Philosophical Foundations for a Christian Worldview_ by Moreland and Craig. It is a good introductory text.

To all avid Piper readers:

Does anyone know his stance on molinism or middle knowledge proponents? I would be really curious to hear what he has to say.

31

Over the past 14 years I have known John Piper as a pastor, a teacher, an author, a prayer, a debater, and a basketball player. I have observed his conduct both on the court and (mostly) off. I have been encouraged, challenged, convicted, surprised, and puzzled -- but rarely confused -- by his words.

A few of the previous comments about John Piper could lead someone not familiar with him to a distorted view of his life and ministry. The good news is, as others have pointed out, if you really want Piper's take on a subject, you can usually find it online at www.desiringgod.org.

In no particular order here are some of my observations about "Pastor John." He is:
-- a man of integrity
-- a prolific, versatile, Christ-exalting writer
-- a passionate worshipper
-- a God-centered preacher
-- a careful, Bible-saturated teacher
-- an earnest pray-er
-- a humble, thoughtful sage
-- a wise counsellor
-- a challenging visionary
-- a loving pastor

He probably wouldn't make it onto anyone's fantasy basketball team, but I recommend him highly as a spiritual mentor.

32

Phil Aldridge: [i]Doesn't anyone else find it amusing that Mr. Piper's radio show is called Desiring God? What does a Calvinist talk about on that subject?[/i]

Phil,

With all due respect, I believe your post shows a serious confusion in categories. The is a huge difference between a belief in the Sovereign of God in our salvation and the sovereignty of God in our obedience, or our worship or what we eat for breakfast. I get the humor in your post but I still can't help feeling that it betrays a somewhat shallow view of Calvinism.

33

Up front let me say I'm an Arminian, so there are obviously things I don't agree with Piper on. However, I will agree with him on his position on divorce.

I probably agree with him on shunning that is practiced by the Amish on one side and the American Baptist Association on the other. So, why does it come as a shock that someone would take scripture literally?

Greg Boyd has a discussion forum here http://www.christusvictorministries.org/gbfront/forum/default.asp for anyone that would like to see and/or participate on. I don't agree with Boyd on Open Theism. After participating on his forum for some 296 posts, IMHO they don't know what they believe. Too much is based on logic and can easily be seen as God being a captive to His creation.

34

John also has tons of great full length sermon manuscripts out the web.
see for instance
ScriptureIndex for John Piper

35

Piper's messages and books have brought our church into a deeper level of commitment to our Lord and a greater love and anticipation for our Christ.
Hearts have been set on fire with the word and our fellowship as believers has been enriched.
When a man has been used so greatly as John Piper has -- many tend to be drawn to the man rather than to the Lord. That is one aspect that is unique about Piper. The more you read and listen to him preach -- the more you love Jesus.
We thank God for men like him.

36

I have been doing missionary work in Ukraine for the last five years. Two years ago I ordered 'The pleasures of God' by Piper and since then I have read about 12 of his books.

My understanding of what is important in life and what to aim at in ministry has been shaped more in the last two years with Piper than in the previous 22 of my life, which include a Christian upbringing, Bible College, and three years serving on the mission field.

I highly recommend reading Piper to anyone who wants to be challenged. You will either be offended or fall in love with his God-centeredness, I hope that later. God used Piper to show me that His glory is why I exist, and this truth has been the most liberating and purpose-inspiring and joyful truth I have ever known. This truth has kept me on the field when depression and sickness and loneliness and weariness tell me to return to states and get a day job. God's glory and name and honor are infinitely more valuable and worthy than anything I could otherwise live for.

Don't make the mistake of writting him off because of the Open Theism or Woman/Manhood stuff. He has other important things to say and if you could get past that stuff, you may find one whom the Lord uses to change your entire orientation to life.

I only wish that there were more who have been gripped by this Godwardness in all things. We could use some more missionaries out here!

Jake

37

John Piper is one of my heroes primarily as a preacher and thinker. He is so well-rounded as one can see from his great books:

Preaching (Let the nations be glad: the sumpremacy of god in preaching)

Missions (Let the nations be glad: the supremacy of god in missions)

Theology (Counted righteous in Christ)

Devotion (his magnum opus: Desiring God)

Pastoral ministries (Brothers we are not professionals)

and on and on..

He is now also on the radio and his online ministry DG offers so many resources for free. He is one of my favorite "still-living" evangelical stalwarts.