The Assemblies of God Theological Seminary

Review of John Pipers

Think: The Life of the Mind and the Love of God

A Book Review
Submitted to
James D. Hernando, Ph.D.
In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for
BTH 901
Advanced Exegesis and Hermeneutics

by
Joseph Tan

Springfield, Missouri
December 18, 2011

This book is John Pipers plea to embrace serious thinking as a means of loving God

and people (15). Divided into eight small sections with each section building on the

previous, he wants Christians to know what it means to come to faith through thinking

while at the same time maintaining a heart and zeal for God. Thus, thinking is not only a
necessity but crucial in knowing God and his ways.

In section one, Piper reveals the purpose of writing the book stating that all my life I

have lived with the tension between thinking and feeling and doing (26). His years of

studying, teaching and writing about the truth of God has not led him to forget that he is in
business of proclaiming the Word, with passion and with much prayer. Yet, this tension
continues to exist in the church, partly due to the over-intellectualism and anti-

intellectualism, and Christians remain divided on the issue. Some think that too much

knowledge (and thinking) can be dangerous when especially it does not glorify God. Others
feel lack of it results in spiritual immaturity.

Piper points out two pivotal passages that ground the basis of his book. In 2 Timothy

2:7, he stresses that thinking is essential and understanding is a gift of God. However,

this is not sufficient, for one also needs to seek out understanding like silver (Prov 2:1-6).
However, by anchoring on these two passages, has Piper not tried to use them as proof-

texts to argue for the purpose of his book? The former is only one verse of an epistle to a

certain young leader, while the other is lifted out from the context of Proverbs, and thus its
perspective is limited. One can argue that Piper searches for biblical texts to justify his
motive of writing this book.

Piper is deeply influenced by Jonathan Edwards such that the rest of the book (31) is

built by Edwards theological grid. Piper proffers that human thinking and feeling do not
exist arbitrarily; they exist because we are in the image of God, and Gods thinking and

feeling are more deeply part of his Trinitarian being than I had realized(34). By learning
from the nature of Gods Trinitarian existence, Christians are to similarly engage their

minds to know God and their heart to love him fully. Whereas the previous basis tries to
root the book scripturally (exegetically), this basis is rooted on the theology of Edwards
and his Trinitarian understanding. Agreeing with Edwards, Pipers words are quite

alarming: God the Father and the Son have had an eternal joy in each others excellence

that carries so fully what they are that another Person stands forth, the Holy Spirit This
is mere speculation and highly subjective and is not a result of proper theological

reflection. In addition, how both bases are related is not dealt sufficiently by Piper. One has
to agree to both bases before one can proceed to the next chapter.

Nevertheless, Piper argues, in section two, that the only way to know God is through

the Bible and since it is a book, it requires the exercise of thinking. Indeed, reading

involves thinking because that is the way to construe meaning out of the text. Thinking is
intentional and involves hard work to try to figure the meanings of the text. Asking the
right questions will yield much benefit.

In the section on Coming to Faith through Thinking, Piper asserts that saving faith is

not the mere receiving of facts but that of the receiving of Christ. Although the mind is used

to learn, explain and defend the facts of the gospel, it does not play the decisive role in the
awakening and establishing of saving faith. (cf. 2 Cor 4:4-6). In the following section, he
2

tackles what it means to love God with all your mind. (cf. Matt 22:36-39). He explicates

how this can be done: 1) Love God in the way we use our mind to think; 2) Wholly engaged
with our thinking; 3) Treasure God; and 4) Use of the mind since it functions to awaken

and express love. On this last point, Piper says the main reason that thinking and loving

are connected is that we cannot love God without knowing God and the way we know God
is by the Spirit-enabled use of our mind (90). Throughout these few chapters, one feels

that there is a certain level of abstraction and here in particular, it is difficult to embrace

Pipers statement. How much is the Spirit-enabled use of the mind related to how much we
love God? Furthermore, Piper pulls almost random verses to support his arguments (91).
What prevents the use of the mind from knowing God? Piper addresses this in

sections five and six. In section five, he discusses relativism and argues that it is neither
intellectually compelling nor morally upright. Relativism is subjective truth based on

individual preferences and expressions and thus do not correspond to universally valid

truth. As a result, relativists do not feel obliged to follow Gods universal standards. Piper

uses strong words to describe relativism as treason, creating duplicity, concealing doctrinal
defection, covering greed with flattery, pride with the guise of humility, enslaving people,
and eventually leading to totalitarianism (chapter 8).

In section six, Piper confronts the anti-intellectualism that has almost defined modern

American evangelicalism. Citing the example of Billy Sundays low view of education,

American Christians have been clouded by the elements of pragmatism and subjectivism making
them antagonistic towards any intellectual effort and labor. Two biblical passages may have
given rise to this attitude (1 Cor 1:20; Luke 10:21) that wisdom is viewed negatively (Has not
3

God made foolish the wisdom of the world and has he not hidden these things from the wise
and understanding and revealed them to little children?). Piper, however, attempts to show that
these passages have been widely misunderstood. There is a difference between the wisdom of the
world and Gods wisdom. The former is a kind of wisdom that alienates a person from God and
his truth. Such wisdom will not find God. On the other hand, the wisdom of God begins
consciously with God, is consciously sustained by God and has the glory of God as its
consciously goal (149). The cross is a stumbling block to those who embrace the wisdom of the
world but it is the heart of Gods wisdom in his commitment in the work of salvation (147). Thus
little children are those who are utterly dependent on the death of Christ to save them and to
open the door to wisdom (150). The wise and understanding are offended by the message of
cross since it contradicts their sense of self-sufficiency and resourcefulness; even though they
have made remarkable scientific advances. Thus, even God chooses to hide himself from this
group.
However, Piper says, rather appallingly, that not only God did choose to hide himself, he
also rejoices in doing so. Taking the Greek word eudokia in Luke 10:21 to mean wellpleasing, and eudokesen to mean pleased in 1 Corinthians 1:21, Piper asserts that God
delights in what his own wisdom dictates (151) and then answers the reason why God rejoices in
hiding himself from the wise and understanding (152). However, has not Piper imposed his
own hermeneutical grid onto the text by taking two or three words from two separate passages to
arrive at his presupposed conclusions? Why has he not done proper exegesis taking into account
the historical, social and cultural backgrounds to establish his case? If serious thinking is
required to know about God, should he not go beyond two words to gain further insight in the
4

background issues and better comprehend the meaning? Furthermore, both passages are of
different genres, written by different authors with different intents and purposes. How and
why fit the message of the cross into the Luke 10 narrative?

In the seventh section, Piper calls for the need to know God and to be known by God.

This is true knowing which is the purpose of loving God and loving people. However, pride
stands in the way of this true knowing. Being zealous for God does not necessarily lead to
salvation since this zeal is not according to knowledge and those who do this seek to establish
their own righteousness instead of submitting to the righteousness of God. (cf. Rom 10:2-3).
This was the situation with the Corinthian church and Pauls kinsmen. They had knowledge but
were puffed up. All they need to realize is to discover Gods grace in Jesus Christ which comes
by faith in Christ (164). Piper then applies this message to the Christian scholars today.
Academics tend to drift away from their allegiance to Christ and his Word (168, 174) if their
pursuit is not of God. Serious thinking and learning is essential but ultimately it should lead to
knowing God, loving God and showing God (175), which is the plea of this book. In the final
section, Piper gives some practical steps to embrace serious thinking to know God and make him
known.
This book is written to all Christians, educated or non-educated, and a challenge to
properly use the mind to glorify God and to love his people. Pipers end goal is commendable
and necessary for the church today. However, several biblical expositions are weakly argued
because his exegesis is built on the combination of select passages and coupled with his

presuppositions to drive home his points. This fails to convince this reviewer of the quality of
this work.
5