“Who are you to respond to John (freakin’) Piper?!!!”

Nobody special. I’m just a plebeian with a mind, a Bible, and the Holy Spirit. Those are my credentials. You probably have the same credentials. Do you think we’re unqualified to raise an argument against a well known theologian like Piper? Should I assume that because I object to Piper’s commentary that I’m wrong? Would you suggest we just defer to the opinion of people more famous than us? I think that’s a mistake. If you agree, keep reading.

READ PIPER’S ARTICLE – It is lazy and irresponsible to form your opinion about Piper’s article by reading my commentary alone. Don’t be lazy and irresponsible!

Don’t just keep reading…read Piper’s article first.

…have you read Piper’s article? I wan’t kidding about that. If you ignored the paragraph above you’re being lazy and irresponsible. You might as well stop reading this article too. You’re not going to be able to discern whether or not I’m saying true things.

Keep Vague To Yourself

I don’t see the point in boldly proclaiming vagueness. The opening paragraphs of Piper’s article told me that he wasn’t really going to say anything.

“Nothing I say here is intended to dictate how anyone else should vote, but rather to point to a perspective that seems to be neglected.”

This is the language of modern Christianity. The culture requires us to preface everything with, “I don’t want to dictate how you live.” God forbid that we say God forbids anything!

My question for JP would be, “If you’re not trying to dictate how I should vote, why did you put so much scripture in this article?” Is the Bible just a perspective that seems neglected? If Piper is not dictating how I should do something, why in the world should I read his article? I trust God has put people in his life to listen to his rambling. I’ve got other stuff to do.

I think Piper was trying to dictate how I vote. I’m fine with that! I’m annoyed that he didn’t come right out and say it. The opening paragraphs quite literally render the rest of Piper’s article moot. But, since we read it anyway, I’ll finish my commentary.

Don’t Treat Sin Like It’s Nothing

Piper summarizes his first “perspective” by saying:

“It is not a small thing to treat lightly a pattern of public behaviors that lead to death.”

Earlier he equates sins such as unrepentant sexual immorality, unrepentant boastfulness, unrepentant vulgarity, unrepentant factiousness with murdering babies. (This is why I insisted you read his article. You shouldn’t take my word for it when I say stuff like this.)

It is outrageous to suggest that voting to defend the lives of unborn children means I am treating other sins lightly. Equally outrageous is the idea that Donald Trump’s boastfulness is JUST AS BAD as the legalized slaughter of 60 million babies. It is simply not true that killing babies and bragging about sexual conquests have the same effect on culture.

Piper is wrong when he suggests that voting for sinful people is APPROVAL of those sins.

“Is it not baffling, then, that so many Christians seem to be sure that they are saving human lives and freedoms by treating as minimal the destructive effects of the spreading gangrene of high-profile, high-handed, culture-shaping sin?”

Um. No, John. It’s not baffling. It’s not even mildly confusing. What’s baffling is why a smart guy like you would setup such a clumsy false equivalence.

“Therefore, Christians communicate a falsehood to unbelievers…when we act as if policies and laws that protect life and freedom are more precious than being a certain kind of person.”

Here’s the thing: the policies and laws that protect life and freedom are the result of being a certain kind of person. Laws are not separate from morality. It is our morality that shapes our laws. It is disingenuous to suggest that a person who votes pro-life would “treat as minimal the destructive effects” of other sins. The people that Piper is criticizing don’t actually exist.

If You Have Nothing To Say, Say Nothing.

Piper ends with the following:

“I will not develop some calculus to determine which path of destruction I will support. That is not my duty. My calling is to lead people to see Jesus Christ…That calling is contradicted by supporting either pathway to cultural corruption and eternal ruin.”

Piper is saying that leading people to Christ precludes participation in the election process. You can’t lead people to Jesus if you voted for “either pathway to cultural corruption.” This is garbage.

The election is not intended to select out finest, most righteous people. The election is intended to select people who will establish policies and laws that represent our values. Government is there to defend liberty. Every person who establishes a policy will be guilty of sin. Every lawmaker will also be a lawbreaker. And here’s the thing that Piper doesn’t mention: we’re all sinners EVEN IF WE DON’T SUPPORT EITHER CANDIDATE.

Piper’s position (if that’s what you want to call it) doesn’t help anybody. His refusal to “support either pathway to cultural corruption” is equally corrupt. He knows this. It’s why he repeatedly states that it is no sin to disagree with him. But I think he’s wrong about that. I think it would be sinful to agree with him.

Trust God While Everything Goes to Hell

The Bible tells us that we are not capable of perfect morality. It also tells us we are to try to achieve perfect morality. Piper is saying the opposite. JP suggests a sort of spiritual nihilism. Since every path is corrupt, hunker down and wait for the apocalypse. He asks ‘pastors’ to:

“Imagine that America collapses. First anarchy, then tyranny — from the right or the left. Imagine that religious freedom is gone. What remains for Christians is fines, prison, exile, and martyrdom. Then ask yourself this: Has my preaching been developing real, radical Christians?”

You know what will hasten the collapse of America? Voting for leaders who make laws legalizing the slaughter of unborn babies. The ‘real, radical Christians’ are those who stand opposed to abortion while well-known theologians scold us. It’s guys like me who slow America’s descent into depravity.

Piper’s article (and others like it) is ammunition for the pro-choice agenda. That’s all it is. It does nothing to advance the biblical command to “choose life.” It is meek, mild persecution. However, Piper makes one comment that rings absolutely true:

“…I said my way need not be yours.”