I’ll give this to John Piper, he may be Larry David’s twin brother…and just about as odd…but at least he’s honest about what the true Evangelical “bible believing” Position is with regards to God and their view of how he exercises his Free Will. Those who hold a “bible is inerrant, infallible, perfect” Position really embrace Piper’s view of God here:
Basically, Piper clearly states that God can nuke whoever he wants for whatever reason he wants. Does God slaughter women and children in the Old Testament bible? Yep. Does God command parents to execute their children with stones for rebellion, gluttony or drunkenness? You betcha! Did God command the Israelites to slaughter the Amalekite men, women and children? Yessirreee Bob. Did God command and permit the Israelites to own slaves and sex slaves (concubines)? You know it!
How could a “good” and “loving” and “holy” and “just” and “merciful” and “forgiving” God do all this evil above?
Well, according to Piper…and the rest of Evangelical “bible believers” who hold to a “perfect bible” Position: Because God is God and can do whatever he wants and the rules don’t apply to him like they do to you.
Think about that. It’s “the” seminal issue that has caused me to rethink what I thought I knew about the bible and about who God really is.
Part of the bible narrative commands us to “love”….love one another, love your neighbor, love your enemies, bless those who hurt you, forgive 70 times 7, return evil with good, etc. This Standard is the Standard applied to “us”…and the Fruits of the Spirit are “love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness and self-control” while the devil and the flesh and those who are the children of the devil are ascribed “anger, wrath, malice, hate, envy, bitterness, revenge” etc.
Who is God if he kills women and children and it is called “good” and “righteous” by John Piper and “bible believing” Evangelicalism? Are humans held to a higher Standard than God himself? Is there a different definition of “good” and “love” for us vs. the same for God?
Piper’s answer seems to be that we, the church, aren’t Israel and that something changed in time and that now we are to follow the Law of Love and love our enemy etc, but that it’s OK for the Government or Israel or those who God “gives the sword” to exact vengeance, revenge, killing, harsh punishment etc. This is an extremely shaky philosophical thesis and it asserts that Truth did “change” over time from Old Testament to New Testament…something I’ve been pointing out for some time…especially if one holds the “inerrant, infallible, perfect” bible position.
Piper’s thesis doesn’t ring true. If “good” and “love” are Absolute Truths and Universal…they are the same for all people, all cultures, in all contexts for all of time…or you have to redefine the terms.
Clearly, Piper asserts that there is one set of Standards for “good” and “evil” for God and those God “gives the sword” and for Israel at one time…and another Standard for the rest of us today who are part of the “church”. Very dodgy position indeed.
What Piper’s clearly articulated thesis does is cut through the normal intentionally wiggly and intellectually dishonest Evangelical truthiness slight-of-hand in changing the subject or claiming “that doesn’t apply any more” duct tape…and establishes the fact that the bible presents two Standards, two sets of Truths regarding “good” and “evil” and two sets of rules.
Will the real Jesus please stand up? The brutal, barbaric and retributive God of the Old Testament and Revelation who kills with the sword and slaughters the enemy…or the loving, merciful, forgiving God of Jesus in the Gospels.
Personally, I think more highly of God…I don’t think he’s evil and I don’t think he’s ever been evil…unless he’s repented?
