Some of this book's strengths are felt immediately once the
reality that this little 220 page book is an exegetical force to be reckoned
with (granted the print was small). First, much of it interacted not
only with English writers but also German scholarship as well. This is only fitting and expected since Piper
did his doctorate in Germany. But this
exposure beyond American Evangelicalism is always good and extremely
important. Piper also demonstrated
various views and fairly presented them to the reader. I am able to say "fairly" (as in
justly or accurately) because I used to hold to the view he was arguing
against. He spent pages demonstrating
the opposing views points and arguments.
They even seemed convincing, that is until he destroyed them with his
own points and arguments.
Every strength has its weaknesses, however. Piper's book is no different. Although it was central to his argument and
established what the "righteousness of God" is in Romans, chapters
6-8 take a detour to build a case for his meaning of the phrase
"righteousness of God." This
was necessary to establish his point, but it did seem a bit taxing at
times. It gave the book a sense of
discontinuity that I felt would have strengthened his view.
Perhaps another weakness (or this could simply be my
mistake) is that I was expecting a more "lay-level" explanation of
Romans 9:1-23. Instead, what I got was a
fantastic exposition of the Greek text.
Piper didn't even supply translation or transliteration most of the
time. So for those whose Greek (and
Hebrew at times) needs improvement, it is challenging. This in turn limits the range of audience for
which this book will be useful. Could
someone with no knowledge of Greek and Hebrew read this? Yes, but it would be very difficult.
Lastly, Piper's conclusions are not real popular; at least
they are not popular where I'm from. But
I am glad he was willing to demonstrate and undergird them with solid
exegetical support. The basic premise is
that Romans 9 is dealing with individual election unto salvation. If that is the case, then what should we do
with phrases like the following:
"I will have mercy on whom I have mercy,
and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion,"
"So then he has mercy on whomever
he wills, and he hardens whomever he wills,"
"Has the potter no right over the
clay, to make out of the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for
dishonorable use,"
"What if God, desiring to show his
wrath and to make known his power, has endured with much patience vessels of
wrath prepared for destruction"?
Piper advocates reprobation also known as the
unfortunately titled doctrine of "double predestination." This view sees God as the ultimate sovereign
power of the universe. And yes, he
creates some for honor and some for destruction. I would have liked Piper to develop that a
bit more, but he mainly just cites Daniel Fuller who basically says that this
is not unrighteous for God to do since the only way to express his great mercy
is for people to see and desire it out of his wrath. This gives the word "grace" an
entirely new meaning.
I hope for our sake that Piper, with his upcoming transition from the pastoral ministry to a teaching/writing ministry, will be commissioned by a publisher to write an entire commentary on
Romans that will match the intensity and depth that The Justification of God
reached (a commentary would also update this now almost 30-year-old book). This one was fantastic – 2 thumbs way
up. It has a limited readership, but its
usefulness for the study of Romans 9 cannot be denied.
No comments:
Post a Comment