Are you a Bellian or Piperian?

I came out Bellian—but am worried it may have been predestined ;)

"The difference – which is radical – is hermeneutics and not fidelity and integrity." This is the summary of everything good and holy in this blog article. In answer to your questions: 1. When God looks at you… Both. God's Holiness sees one totally depraved, a sinner deserving nothing but damnation, but saved us while we were yet sinners because our Creator sees us as a beautiful part of God’s Good world 2. We know that God is Love because… Both. The salvation of even one sinner, because everyone desires death. Still, our Redeemer continuously, freely, and faithfully pursues us through Sin, Law, and Death. 3. God’s work in the Cross and Resurrection of Jesus is Good News for… B. All of God’s Creation…every person, society, and all of history. What is so hard to understand about John 3.16? 4. The Christian Gospel is persuasive because…. None of the above. It is persuasive because of the grace of the Holy Spirit. We cannot do this by ourselves. If reading scripture, seeing God's work, and living Jesus' way could do it alone by its existence, we could figure all this out on our own. We can't figure it out on our own. We can't carry it out on our own. We are depraved sinners, after all. But, the Spirit of Creation enters our lives because we are a beautiful part of God's creation.

I think the way Peter Rollins describes our efforts to make sure our "right" view is heard by others is pertinent to this thread. A powerful preach focused on love. http://marshill.org/teaching/2011/02/20/pyro-theology/

@HC I think there's truth to some of Piper's teachings. I think we are all totally hopeless without Jesus. That's why I try not to vilify him or any other Reformed preacher. However saying farewell to Rob on Twitter wasn't the smartest thing in the world.

@DeaconBurrley. There have been many dialectics/tensions throughout the history of philosophy and theology but a subsequent synthesis has often resolved them at one point in time (for each debate). How is it possible to say they cannot both be true? Surely they are each telling one version of the eternal truth. Can one human preacher ever give the full version?

Wow that is funny. I was never a Calvinist (weren't u Tripp) because my friends always said stuff like this. Of course I love Rob Bell and always assumed he was eschatologically optimistic. @HC I'm not sure what you mean by synthesis. It seems that they both couldn't be true at the same time. Sure their are bits to take from any talented communicator like these but the two broads stories they preach are extremely divergent

So here's the rub: Unless we can accept our differences and talk more - indeed, DO MORE- based on our COMMON GROUND, hermaneutic differences are going to kill us (by us I mean, all of us = creation - ha!).

I consider myself more of a Christian than either a Bellian or a Piperian. But after going out the quiz, looks like I lean more towards Bell (which I kinda already knew). What I don't get it so many Christians were quick to write Bell off as a heretic before his new book was even released! So much for not judging by mere appearance (John 7:24).

I read the blog regularly with interest Tripp - but this post is way too dualistic for me!! My partner and I read and listen to both Piper and Bell. We ask the Lord for the synthesis he is working out in life today by his ever present spirit of redemption.