The Beauty of Reformed Theology
Analysis of John Piper’s Sermon "The Beauty of Reformed Theology" at Desiring God
Introduction
Purpose: To evaluate John Piper’s sermon with a Berean mindset (Acts 17:11), testing its scriptural accuracy, logical coherence, and theological integrity against the Tanakh and New Testament, from a Biblical perspective seeing Yeshua as the Messiah who fulfills God’s covenant promises to Israel and the nations.
Details: Delivered by John Piper to the Acts 29 network, likely in a teaching/worship setting, spanning ~52 minutes (0:00–52:39). Date unspecified; assumes previous to March 11, 2025.
Theme: Reformed Theology is beautiful for exalting God’s glory and sovereign grace, satisfying believers.
1. Sermon Agenda
Goals: Teach Reformed Theology’s merits, inspire worship of God’s glory, urge fidelity to Reformed doctrine (51:41).
Biblical Alignment: Emphasizes God’s supremacy (e.g., Isaiah 42:8) and Yeshua’s salvation, but omits Israel’s covenant role and Yeshua’s fulfillment of Torah (e.g., Matthew 5:17), leaning on a Gentile system.
Focus: Persuade that Reformed Theology reflects scripture and enriches faith.
2. Scriptural Usage and Contextual Analysis
Key Verses:
Exodus 3:14 (9:21) – “I am who I am” – God’s self-existence.
Context: Covenant with Israel (Exodus 6:7).
Accuracy: Sound, but philosophical (10:00) over covenantal.
Romans 3:9-11 (36:13) – “None is righteous” – Total depravity.
Context: Sin universal (Psalm 14:1-3), resolved by Yeshua (Romans 3:21-26).
Accuracy: Fair, but “utter inability” (36:44) ignores agency (Deuteronomy 30:11-14).
Ephesians 1:5-6 (17:16) – “Predestined… to his glory” – Unconditional election.
Context: Election in Messiah, tied to Israel (Deuteronomy 7:6-8).
Accuracy: Overextends to fatalism, sidelining response (Romans 11:1-2).
Jeremiah 32:40 (46:14) – “Fear of me… not turn” – Perseverance.
Context: Israel’s restoration (Jeremiah 32:37-38).
Accuracy: Sound, but absolutized, ignoring warnings (Hebrews 6:4-6).
2 Timothy 1:9 (48:50) – “Grace… before ages” – Sovereign election.
Context: Plan through Yeshua (2 Timothy 1:10).
Accuracy: Fair, but denies choice (49:02) against Tanakh (Joshua 24:15).
Conclusion: Frequent scripture use, filtered through TULIP (50:21), missing Israel’s context and Yeshua’s fulfillment.
3. Analysis and Correction of Reformed Theology
Total Depravity (35:17):
Claim: Humans cannot choose God (36:44).
Correction: Sin corrupts (Genesis 6:5), but agency exists (Deuteronomy 30:19), renewed by Yeshua (Romans 5:18-19).
Unconditional Election (17:16):
Claim: God predestines individuals (48:55).
Correction: Covenantal—Israel first (Exodus 4:22), extended via Yeshua (Galatians 3:29)—with response (Romans 10:9).
Limited Atonement (50:21, implied):
Claim: Atonement for elect only (43:20).
Correction: Universal (Isaiah 53:6; 1 John 2:2), fulfilled in Yeshua (John 1:29).
Irresistible Grace (44:32):
Claim: Grace forces awakening (44:06).
Correction: Powerful (Titus 2:11), yet resistible (Acts 7:51), as Yeshua invites (Revelation 22:17).
Perseverance of the Saints (46:08):
Claim: God guarantees fidelity (46:14).
Correction: Security (John 10:28) with accountability (Matthew 24:13; Hebrews 6:4-6).
Conclusion: TULIP, a 16th-century construct, distorts scripture’s balance, corrected by Yeshua fulfilling Torah (Matthew 5:17).
4. Analysis and Correction of Supersessionism
Omission of Israel:
Issue: No mention of Israel’s role (e.g., Romans 11 absent).
Implication: “Elect” (43:14) replaces Israel.
Correction: Israel’s covenant endures (Jeremiah 31:35-37), fulfilled in Yeshua (Romans 11:26-27), grafting Gentiles in (Romans 11:17-24).
Universalized Election:
Issue: Election abstracted (17:16), not Israel-centric.
Correction: Rooted in Israel (Isaiah 44:1), extended through Yeshua (Acts 13:47).
Conclusion: Implicit supersessionism corrected by affirming Israel’s primacy (John 4:22).
5. Logical Soundness
Argument: Reformed Theology exalts God’s glory (6:37) and grace (34:58), satisfying souls (27:09) via sovereignty (39:54).
Fallacies:
False Dichotomy (39:49): Sovereignty vs. free will, ignoring Tanakh’s both/and (Deuteronomy 30:19).
Strawman (23:31): Critics misrepresented (e.g., Oprah, 21:54).
Conclusion: Coherent in Calvinism, flawed biblically.
6. Contradictions
Preaching vs. No Free Will (38:12 vs. 40:06): Urges preaching, yet denies agency.
Resolution: Scripture balances sovereignty (Isaiah 46:10) and response (Acts 17:30).
Conclusion: Contradictions reflect Reformed bias over scripture.
7. Denominational Biases and Corrections
Bias 1: Reformed Theology (1:28) as biblical truth.
Issue: Equates TULIP with scripture (6:32).
Correction: Man-made system, not Tanakh/New Testament whole (2 Timothy 3:16-17).
Bias 2: No Free Will (40:06).
Issue: Denies agency (40:16).
Correction: Tanakh affirms choice (Genesis 4:7), fulfilled in Yeshua’s call (Revelation 3:20).
Conclusion: Reformed lens distorts; scripture alone corrects.
8. Alignment with Easy Belief or Denominational Structure
Easy Belief: Absent—salvation is sovereignly decreed (43:14), not a one-time act, though risks passivity.
Structure: Evangelical/Reformed, pastor-led assembly, rigid in TULIP (50:21).
Conclusion: Leans on Reformed framework, less flexible than scripture-based models.
9. Pastoral Responsibility and Authority
Evaluation: Piper guides to Reformed Theology (51:41), not scripture alone. Passion (25:55) borders on pride, dismissing critique (e.g., Oprah, 21:54).
Conclusion: Accountable to Calvinism, not Tanakh/Yeshua, risking misguidance (James 3:1).
10. Practical Application and Ethical Fruit
Equipping: Promotes worship (33:15) and perseverance (46:58), but lacks Torah-based action (e.g., Micah 6:8—justice, mercy).
Tone: Sincere, yet speculative (“Christian Hedonism,” 31:34) vs. covenant faithfulness (Titus 2:7).
Conclusion: Limited equipping; theology over ethics.
11. Anti-Semitic Language
Finding: No explicit anti-Jewish tones or replacement theology (e.g., Romans 11 not contradicted).
Conclusion: Honors God’s glory but misses Israel’s covenant role (Romans 11:17-24).
12. Warnings to a New Believer
Risk 1: Reformed Theology Overreliance (1:17).
Issue: Human system, not scripture’s full truth.
Scripture: Test all (2 Timothy 3:16-17).
Risk 2: Neglect of Israel’s Role (entire sermon).
Issue: Ignores Yeshua fulfilling Israel’s promises (Isaiah 53).
Scripture: Study Tanakh/New Testament unity (Romans 15:4).
Summary: Beware traditions; cling to scripture alone.
Final Assessment
Summary: Piper champions Reformed Theology’s beauty, uses scripture selectively, aligns logic to Calvinism, risks supersessionism by omitting Israel, contradicts agency with preaching, shows Reformed bias, risks pastoral overreach, offers weak application, avoids anti-Semitism, and warrants cautions.
Strengths: Zeal for God’s glory; scripture use.
Weaknesses: Filters through TULIP (1:28), neglects Torah, Israel, and agency.
Corrections: Center on Yeshua fulfilling Tanakh (Luke 24:27), reject Reformed Theology and supersessionism for scripture alone (2 Timothy 3:16-17).
Depth: Milk – Prooftexts/assumptions; meat in complexity, not challenge.
Shepherd Accountability: Piper pushes Reformed fidelity (51:41), not Berean scrutiny, risking James 3:1 judgment.
Reject Traditions: Reformed Theology, Catholicism, Dispensationalism—man-made—stray from Tanakh/New Testament truth.
Biblical Roots: Study Genesis to Revelation as one—God’s covenant with Israel, fulfilled in Yeshua for all. Test everything against scripture (Acts 17:11).
Summary for a New Believer
John Piper’s sermon claims Reformed Theology is amazing because it highlights God’s greatness and His total control in saving us, promising deep happiness in Him alone. He’s got some solid points: (1) God is supreme above everything (Exodus 3:14—“I am who I am”), showing He’s the one true God who doesn’t depend on anyone or anything. (2) Yeshua, the Messiah, gives us new hearts to love God (Ezekiel 36:26), turning us from stone-cold rebels into people alive to Him. These truths come from the Bible and can encourage you as you start following Yeshua.
But here’s where you need to be careful—there are traps to watch out for: Piper’s big idea, Reformed Theology (with its five points called TULIP, mentioned at 50:21), isn’t the full Bible—it’s a human system cooked up in the 1500s by a guy named John Calvin. It’s not God’s pure word. For example, it skips over how God keeps His promises to Israel, like when He says the sun and moon have to stop shining before He’d abandon His people (Jeremiah 31:35-37). Piper doesn’t talk about that, which can make it seem like Israel doesn’t matter anymore—but the Bible says it does (Romans 11:26-27—“All Israel will be saved”). Another trap: he says you can’t choose God at all (40:06), that you’re too broken to even reach out. But scripture says God calls us to choose—like “Choose this day whom you will serve” (Joshua 24:15) or “Turn to me and be saved” (Isaiah 45:22). Yeshua invites everyone (John 3:16), not just a select few picked before time. If you buy into Piper’s view, you might miss how God works with us, not just on us.
So, stick to the Bible—the Tanakh (Old Testament) and Yeshua’s words in the New Testament—for the real truth. Don’t let anyone’s system, even one that sounds smart like Reformed Theology, take over. Here’s how to do that: Be a Berean (Acts 17:11). The Bereans were awesome—they didn’t just swallow what Paul said; they “examined the Scriptures daily to see if these things were so.” You can do that too! It means checking everything you hear—sermons, books, even this summary—against the Bible yourself. Don’t lean on pastors or big names like Piper to spoon-feed you. God gave you His word and His Spirit to guide you (John 16:13).
Lesson: How to Read in Context and Be Berean Here’s a simple way to read the Bible right and avoid getting tricked by man-made twists:
Ask Who, What, When, Where, Why: Every verse has a setting. Take Exodus 3:14—God says “I am who I am” to Moses at the burning bush, promising to free Israel from Egypt. It’s not just a cool philosophy; it’s God showing up for His people. Who’s speaking? God. To whom? Moses, for Israel. When? During slavery. Why? To prove He keeps His word (Exodus 6:7). Context keeps it real.
Read Around the Verse: Don’t grab one line and run. Piper uses Romans 3:9-11 (“None is righteous”) to say we’re totally helpless (36:13), but keep reading—Romans 3:21-26 says Yeshua’s sacrifice fixes that for “whoever believes.” The whole chapter matters.
Connect Tanakh and New Testament: The Bible’s one story. Ezekiel 36:26 (new heart) links to Yeshua’s work (John 3:3—“born again”). Piper skips how it’s first for Israel (Ezekiel 36:24), then us. See how it all fits—God’s plan starts with Israel and reaches everyone (Genesis 12:3).
Test with Other Verses: Piper says grace can’t be resisted (44:32), but Acts 7:51 says people “resist the Holy Spirit.” Check multiple spots—scripture doesn’t contradict itself.
Pray and Think: Ask God for wisdom (James 1:5). Mull it over. If Piper says you can’t choose (40:06), but Deuteronomy 30:19 says “I set before you life and death… choose life,” which holds up? The Bible, not Piper.
Warnings to Watch Out For:
Man-Made Systems: Reformed Theology, Catholicism, or other “-isms” add layers to God’s word. Piper loves TULIP (1:28), but it’s not in the Bible—it’s Calvin’s spin. Stick to what’s written (Revelation 22:18-19—don’t add or subtract).
Missing Israel: If a teaching ignores God’s promises to Israel—like Piper does—you’ll miss half the story. Yeshua’s a Jewish Messiah (Matthew 15:24), and Gentiles join Israel’s blessings (Romans 11:17), not replace them.
No Choice Myth: Saying you’re too dead to choose God (35:17) can make you lazy, thinking it’s all on Him. But Yeshua says “Come to me” (Matthew 11:28) and “Repent” (Mark 1:15)—that’s on you to answer.
Feel-Good Trap: Piper’s “Christian Hedonism” (31:34)—chasing joy in God—sounds nice, but if it’s just about feeling good, not obeying (John 14:15—“If you love me, keep my commands”), it’s off track.
Amen to all that! Yeshua is Lord..
Thank you, Sergio, for taking the time to do these reviews. I think what I love is that you give a large "whole Biblical context" answer and yes that takes time and hard work. Most responses will be one verse here and there and while true, they have a context to support them.
It sounds simplistic to tell someone it is like trying to describe the word "trunk" with one group firmly saying the word "trunk" in the sentence, "The trunk sits open" means the trunk of a car. They ignore the rest of the story where many - MANY other sentences in the same story explain that the trunk is the elephant's nose which sits open as it waits to suck in water to drench the masses watching it at the Zoo. Unfortunately, those who want their trunk to be stuffed and packed with their stuff inside the car, anticipating they will get somewhere won't like getting drenched and being stuck going nowhere.