I have long made it a habit to listen to both Greg Boyd and John Piper’s sermons each week. I like to be pushed from both sides, and keep myself balanced theologically. (Well, my theological convictions lean heavily toward one side, but want to keep wrestling with the opposing views.)
Every once and a while they’re preaching on the same topic, and coming to completely different conclusions. Both deeply rooted in the Bible, and passionately and confidently exegeting the text for their hearers. And then my head is left spinning. I suffer from episodes of theological schizophrenia.
Both have been addressing God’s love for us in the past couple weeks. If you want to know what I mean, go check out the past couple weeks of sermons and get your head spinning, too.
The question I’m most often left with is: Is it an either-or? Is one of them right and the other mistaken? Must we choose one or the other? Or, perhaps, is it the case that both are emphasizing two different sides of the same coin? Are they both emphasizing different aspects of God’s nature over others that are equally true (e.g., God’s wrath vs. God’s love)?
Updated 4/29: For example, here is my paraphrase of two seemingly very different views of God’s love from their most recent sermons:
PIPER: “There are four ways God loves you. By “you” I don’t mean everybody. God doesn’t love everybody in the same way. The kinds of love that are described here are for those who have been [chosen by God from eternity past]… I’m sure not everyone in this room are in that category.” [By implication, God does not share the same love towards those He has not chosen for salvation.]
BOYD: God is madly in love with all people, and pursues all like a husband trying to woo his bride into a relationship of covenant love. In Christ, God was showing the extent of his love by dying to rescue us from the destructive power of sin and win us back to himself. But individuals are free to resist his love and choose a life apart from his saving grace, and therefore suffer the eternal consequences of that choice.
Are these two different views of God’s love? Two sides of same coin? Or, are we dealing with two different gods?
What do you think?
Discover more from Jeremy L. Berg
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Jeremy L. Berg 
Well, part of Piper’s message said that God showed his love for me by choosing me to be saved before the world began. Boyd doesn’t even believe that God knew I would EXIST before the world began, does he?
It seems pretty either/or.
Hi Zack –
1. Yes, there are A LOT of either/or issues in their sermons. It’s fun to mentally point them all out as I listen. I personally think Piper (and Calvinists) are mistaken when they understand “election” passages to refer to God choosing certain individuals for salvation and not others. The God of Scripture, from the OT and onward, chooses a people (corporate category) through whom he accomplishes his purposes (Israel in the OT, the church in the NT). But that’s an old debate as you well know.
2. You may want to read up more on the Open View from those who hold to it if you haven’t. You may realize that it is more nuanced than many critics claim. For example, there is much that Open View proponents believe God has foreordained and determined from before the world began, namely that God would send Christ to die for our salvation. In other words, I don’t think Boyd would say God doesn’t know who would exist before the world began…. He certainly knew it was a possibility you would exist AS IF it were a certainty, because Open View proponents believe God has unlimited intelligence and he knows all possibilities as if they are certainties, and can therefore anticipate all circumstances and be prepared with a plan for moving forward his purposes. For more READ THIS.
3. Would you join me in the fun, mind-sharpening, theological exercise of listening to Boyd as well as Piper to increase your understanding of the “other side” of the issues?
4. Finally, I try my best to be equally critical of both sides, and am waiting for Boyd to substantiate some of the claims he has made in his recent messages. For example, I would like to ask him if he can square his argument with some core passages in Romans that seem to challenge him.
Always fun to hear from you! Grace and peace!
Zach,
Did you listen to the sermons?
The foreknowledge issue is definitely polarizing and has been discussed at great length for many years. I think Jeremy is pointing out the interesting differences in how Greg and John approach God’s love.
To my mind, John is so concerned that God’s glory is our greatest concern and not that God loves us – even though he loves us greatly. Greg seems so concerned to bust the image of an angry God that is out to get you. Much of Greg’s content seems to stem from his upcoming book on the OT.
Are they compatible? In many ways, yes. However I think Greg needs to flesh out his understanding of God’s wrath. Piper is clear on his stance, I am un-sure about Greg’s.
If you haven’t listened to the recent sermons, please do and report back. I’d love to hear your thoughts on this topic.
Peter
Zack – I updated the post giving an example. Thoughts?
Yes, Peter, I had in mind here their different views of God’s love. I updated the post to expand on my real question. Did you listen to Piper’s latest? Did I accurately represent Piper’s view?
Zack, how do you know that Piper was talking about you when he said that God chose to save you before the world began? How do you know if you are even the elect?
Hey Jeremy, nice post, I stumbled upon your blog when reading some articles from Greg Boyd. I must first say I really appreciate the loving way you have shown respect towards opposing views and your honesty, the blog is very nice to read.
I apologize in advance if this post goes on a bit…… Currently I’m not sure where I stand spiritually, I no longer attend church, haven’t for a few years, but I can say that I used to be a very big John Piper fan, I used to love the reformed teachings and was very evangelistic, my problem i feel was that deep down I always struggled with Calvinism, and it got to the point where I was finding it immoral to believe, and couldn’t see what the point of prayer was if everything had been predetermined, in fact after much thinking I couldn’t really see how we had free choice, and when looking at all the evil things in the world, I could only conclude under the Calvinistic interpretation that God must be responsible.
Eventually these issues just made me pretty bitter and frustrated and confused, but becasue Calvinism had such a grip on my belief, I felt to ditch calvinism would be to ditch Christianity. A friend of mine at the time (I’ve since moved to the otherside of the world) was a PHD student of theology, and he had read a lot of boyd’s books, so led me in his direction, and it helped me a lot, although i think my heart has been cold / hardened for some time.
Even now though, I’m still reading Boyd’s books, just going over ‘letters from a Skeptic’ again and I found the Open View very helpful and surprisingly it seems rather biblical, even though when i went to bible college, it was totally slated.
I must say you guys are very fortunate to have John Piper and Gregory Boyd in your city :) Of course these days I can’t stand the calvinistic interpratation, it makes me pretty angry.
And so to get to your comparison between the two interpratations of love, to me personally I found what John Piper said scary, John says God so loved the World that he sent His only son right??? To then limite the “World” to “only the elect” shows how scary the calvinistic doctrine can be, and to actually say that from the pulpit :)
Would be interesting to ask non christians what they think of both interpretations, to me Greg’s view is the only side of the coin that show love and makes sense.
Thanks
Wayne,
Wave Particle Duality…… Look it up!