Check out this post from John Piper. He tries to interpret a natural disaster. I think he does this reasonably well. His point, natural disasters remind us that we are mortal and need to repent and turn to Jesus.
See the comments as I unpack more of what I think about Piper's statement
Popular Posts
-
So for those who don't know, here in Hobart we have just run (i think it technically goes until the end of this month) the Jesus All Abo... -
I think there are two mistakes we can make as Christians as we seek to be missionaries or evangelists in our world today. The first... -
I've just finished my first ever full blown exegetical sermon series. I decided to tackle Hebrews over eight weeks. You can listen t...
I disagree......he didn't do it well. His point wasn't "natural disasters remind us that we are mortal and need to repent and turn to Jesus."
ReplyDeleteHis point was, "This specific natural disaster was a sign/nudge from God that speaks directly the ECLA and it should remind us all that we are mortal and need to repent and turn to Jesus."
Piper is using a natural event for his own agenda - and yes we are all sinners and need to repent and turn to Jesus - but Piper is wrong here. In fact it makes me quite angry that he would so inconsitently say something like this. The logic doesn't follow. If Piper speaks so passionately against a doctrine that teaches if you do good things or believe the right things you will prosper, how can he then propose that calamity happens because of bad behavior or belief? It is inconsistent. God is provident but without direct revelation, like Moses style revelation, nobody should say what Piper has said.
Hey Joey
ReplyDeleteFriendly questioning rather than arguing is what I'm gonna do here, so make sure you catch that as my tone when I write.
I definitely don't think I would have said what he said. God is sovereign and only he knows why things happen. There were Christians in Melbourne who said that the 'Black Saturday' bush fires were God's judgment for the recent passing of a horrid abortion law allowing babies that were 6 months in utero to get killed. That's clearly not right. To draw a link between one sinful corporate act and one natural disaster and equate them with God's judgment is stupid and unbiblical.
Let me however say that he was not suggesting a causal link. Piper says:
"When asked about a seemingly random calamity near Jerusalem where 18 people were killed, Jesus answered in general terms—an answer that would cover calamities in Minneapolis, Taiwan, or Baghdad. God’s message is repent, because none of us will otherwise escape God’s judgment.
Jesus: “Those eighteen on whom the tower in Siloam fell and killed them: do you think that they were worse offenders than all the others who lived in Jerusalem? No, I tell you; but unless you repent, you will all likewise perish.” (Luke 13:4-5)"
He is suggesting that the natural disaster is a reminder to all of us that God is a sovereign God with holy standards that we can only meet through repentance and faith in Jesus.
It would be Piper's conclusion that would trouble you though I guess. As it does me a little (hence why I said Piper did it reasonably well!)
Piper says:
"Conclusion: The tornado in Minneapolis was a gentle but firm warning to the ELCA and all of us: Turn from the approval of sin. Turn from the promotion of behaviors that lead to destruction. Reaffirm the great Lutheran heritage of allegiance to the truth and authority of Scripture. Turn back from distorting the grace of God into sensuality. Rejoice in the pardon of the cross of Christ and its power to transform left and right wing sinners."
This does look like he is drawing a one-to-one link of causality. But let me suggest rather he is applying a more general point to the specific. His point is that natural disasters are meant to remind us that we not God and we need to repent and trust in Jesus. That includes the ECLA and all those making decisions in that Synod. And they have a clear choice, to uphold the teaching of scripture or depart from it, as all of us do.
So perhaps he has been a little too specific, but I think he has used a natural disaster reasonably well. Not the best, but not all wrong either.
Yeah, so I guess I wonder whether he is making a direct link between bad behaviour or belief and calamity or rather linking two of those events that happened in the geographically same place with two theological ideas, the reminder that calamity is for us to repent, and the repentance required by the ECLA who have now said yes to homosexuals in ministry.
Chris, I apologize if my tone came off as argumentative. Reading back over my comment I can't deny that my frustration with Piper's comment comes through. I should have chosen my words more patiently.
ReplyDeleteJesus used the tragedy of the tower for two reasons: to disassociate God's justice with a tragedy (he does something similar in John 9 - "who sinned..."), and to preach repentance to all. Piper's folly is that he only pointed out the latter of the two and actually contradicted the former.
I could stand to be more gracious towards Piper sometimes but a man in his position and with the amount of young men and women who faithfully follow his teachings has a responsibility to be more careful about what he says.
Hey fellas, good discussion so far... No time to comment, but thought I'd link to a further 'tornado' post from Piper: http://www.desiringgod.org/Blog/1968_clarifying_the_tornado/
ReplyDelete