This Week in Calvinism - May 24, 2013

• Bob Burnett, in a typical liberal rant about how those who support people keeping more of their own money are not real Christians, writes:

  During the eighties American Calvinism morphed into a conservative political ideology with the formation of the Christian Right. James Dobson, Jerry Falwell, Ralph Reed, Pat Robertson, and others preached on political subjects and touted conservative "Christian" candidates.

  Of all the names one could associate with Calvinism, these are the ones he chooses? Maybe I need to brush up on my history.
  
  
• Blogger Ritzhaus also confuses Calvinists with Republicans:

  I just liked The Christian Left on facebook recently and have enjoyed their perspective. Today, they reposted a blog from Frank Schaffer about how Calvinism and the right wing Republicans have combined and really no longer follow Christ. This trend in American Evangelicalism took over my old church and is a faith killer.

  I'm beginning to feel insulted that I'm automatically perceived as a Republican just because I'm a Calvinist.
  
  
• I would agree that Romans 9 "isn't about Calvinism." In fact, I'd be willing to bet that Paul had never even heard of John Calvin.
  
  
• If the theme of the Bible is "God's gracious plan to redeem needy sinners," then it makes sense why we see his mercy in so many messed-up families in scripture.
  
  
• Rachel Held Evans is upset over John Piper's "abusive" theology. Following the Oklahoma tornadoes, Piper posted on Twitter:

  "Your sons and daughters were eating and a great wind struck the house, and it fell upon them, and they are dead." Job 1:19

  Apparently, people expect that when you quote a verse from scripture you are obligated to include an in-depth explanation in the same tweet. Sorry, but Twitter's 140-character limit kind of hinders one from doing that. That's why Piper followed that up with another:

  "Then Job arose and tore his robe and shaved his head and fell on the ground and worshiped." Job 1:20

  God is worthy of worship even in the midst of tragedy. Yeah, that's abusive, all right.
  
  
• Adam Ericksen takes it a step further, calling Piper's theology "satanic." He writes:

  John Piper calls himself a Christian, but I don't think he knows Jesus. Whenever Jesus talks about natural disasters they are just that, natural disasters. He never blames anyone for them; instead he points to them as an opportunity to show God's love. Jesus was once asked, "Who sinned, this man or his parents, that he was born blind?" He responded, "Neither this man nor his parents sinned." Then the power of God worked through Jesus to stop the accusations and heal the man.

  Come on, Adam. If you're going to quote John 9:3, can't you at least read the rest of the verse? It says, "...but that the works of God might be displayed in him." The man's blindness served a purpose. What was the purpose? That the works of God might be displayed.
  
  
• John Piper explains the essence of those now-infamous tweets:

  When tragedy strikes my life, I find it stabilizing and hope-giving to see the stories of the sheer factuality of other's losses, especially when they endured them the way Job did. Job really grieved. He really agonized. He collapsed to the ground. He wept. He shaved his head. This was, in my mind, a pattern of what must surely happen in Oklahoma. I thought it would help. But when I saw how so many were not experiencing it that way, I took them down.