Monday, December 31, 2007

Christian Hedonism questioned

I'm a pretty convinced Christian Hedonist but there are questions to be raised and it's suggested that that's not allowed, but why not ask them! I think John Piper has done some good work online and in books (like, When I don't desire God) to respond to apparent problems, but no harm talking about them...
Maurice McCracken questions: I know it’s practically considered heresy to disagree with John "the magic" Piper in some circles, and I want to caveat what I am about to say by saying that there is no one Christian writer who has influenced me more over the last few years than that distinguished American gentleman. Yet, on reflection, I find myself unable to totally wholeheartedly subscribe to Christian hedonism. My questions may be answerable, I don’t really know – but here are my objections...

John Armstrong: My goal is not to attack John Piper, whose work has helped so many to love God more deeply. I did want to question his basic thesis about the motivation of the heart for loving God.

iMonk Michael Spencer Noted: the critical conversation that never happens

Dan Hames begins to respond saying we need a bit more Trinity in Christian Hedonism to deal with it's apparent flaws: 'The glory of God' is the bottom line in theology for many of us today. The 'young, restless, Reformed' types following in the footsteps of Piper have made this the pillar of their outlook... The glory of God is in His love that gives, and spreads, looks outwards, and enfolds the Church into His loving relationship within Himself.

Update:
Dan Hames: Trinity - unity & subordination
Dave K: Trinitarian theology and the offence of God's passion for his glory
John Piper: DG conference on Trinity (mostly Bruce Ware, with Piper on Athanasius)

Update (4/1): Ed Goode joins the party with a lengthy defence of Christian Hedonism
Glen Scrivener - So what about different thinking on TRINITY?

No comments:

Post a Comment