John Piper – Why Pastors Should Bless Interracial Marriage

You are currently viewing John Piper – Why Pastors Should Bless Interracial Marriage

I’m not sure I’d tick every single box that Piper has here but there’s no doubting the force of what he says.


Well said, Piper.


Leave a Reply

This Post Has 9 Comments

  1. Cradle Anglican

    Mr. Piper is a political liberal and seems to believe in not only accepting mixed marriages, but positively encouraging them. It’s part and parcel of his ideology of political “liberalism”. Unfortunately such evangelicalism promotes of a collectivist vision of society which focuses on so-called “social justice” and “racialism” instead of the centrality of the Gospel and the Cross. When the Word of God is proclaimed, these other concerns are dealt with by God in individual hearts and minds by the Holy Spirit. Also, his frequent messages on race encourage a “guilt trip” type attitude toward Anglo-Saxon (white) Christians by non-white Christians; a false “politically correct” guilt that is not for actual personal sin, but shame for just being from a European people group (English, French, German, etc.). In the US this propaganda is incessant. It’s sad to see this political and theological error promoted in the Church.

    1. David Ould

      Mr. Piper is a political liberal and seems to believe in not only accepting mixed marriages, but positively encouraging them. It’s part and parcel of his ideology of political “liberalism”.

      Can I clarify what you’re saying here? Are you suggesting that Piper should not encourage mixed marriages? ie that there is something wrong about them?

      1. Cradle Anglican

        I think it’s an area of “Christian liberty”, but there are many potentially negative consequences to consider before entering into such a marriage. Consideration of: family history, financial responsibility, vocation, ancestry and cultural, ethnic and religious background, along with other factors, should be weighed honestly and seriously before entering into such a union. My question is: why does the Rev’d Piper promote this as a social and spiritual good? There are many Christians who disagree on non-essential matters. I wish he wouldn’t push his pollitical agenda on the Church under the guise of orthodox Christian theology. It’s unfair and un-Christlike to stigmatise Christians who disagree with such marriages as “prejudiced”. We all have preferences and we are prejudiced in favour of our own family aren’t we? And we should always prefer our own husband or wife above those of other couples, right? I don’t like self-righteous “liberal” American evangelicals any more than apostate US Episcopalians. The former may be regenerate, as baptised Christians, but confused politically. The later, much of the time, are not even “saved” from their sins because they don’t acknowledge the existence of sin. En Agape,

        1. David Ould

          My question is: why does the Rev’d Piper promote this as a social and spiritual good?

          Well, perhaps because it is a social and spiritual good!
          I’m beginning to wonder if you’ve actually watched the video. All he’s arguing is that those that suggest inter-racial marriage is wrong in any way end up being the thin end of the wedge of much wider applications of racial separation.

          So let me ask you – do you think that falling in love with and marrying someone of a different race is somehow defective and therefore contrary to God’s will?

  2. Cradle Anglican

    Here’s what the Prayer Book says on marriage: Marriage is good, but not all marriages are entered into according to God’s will. Some Christians marry unbelievers, even though Scripture forbids it. Just because someone “feels” like they are in love doesn’t necessarily mean it’s an advisable union. Prayerfully consider the consequences of entering into a lifelong covenant with another Christian, no matter his ethnic and racial background. Things may become more difficult for both parties if one seeks a husband or wife of a another nationality or race. Family issues and societal norms can exert pressures which add to the regular stresses of daily married life. Differences which may seem inconsequential at first can become more troublesome as time goes on. I think most people are naturally more attracted to those of their own race. This has been true throughout history. The pattern is that similar “creatures” usually reproduce “after their own kind”.
    Under the Mercy,
    Cradle Anglican
    Ephesians 5:15-17, Romans 14 ( )

  3. David Ould

    I’m having trouble working out whether you are saying that inter-racial marriage is, in and of itself, more likely to be contrary to God’s will.
    Yes, things are more complicated but, as Piper points out, there are also wonderful opportunities to display the “many tribes nations & tongues” outworking of the gospel.

    What makes me think you’re suggesting more than simply a wisdom issue is your last argument, that different races are different “kinds” (as described in Genesis). Is that your argument?

    I also find your use of Eph 5:15-17 troubling. Paul is speaking of ungodliness with the wise/foolish dichotomy.

    I ought at this point to disclose something i assumed you may have known. I am in an inter-racial marriage. My wife is Singaporean, I am English. Perhaps that clouds my response to you. I recognise many of the tensions that you describe, yet at the same time I think your language is saying more than this is simply a matter of not entering into marriage “lightly, unadvisedly or wantonly” – almost to the point where you are suggesting there are fundamental reasons why such marriages ought not to occur. If you are, then that does seem to be denying the gospel and makes your initial comments about Piper appear very wide of the mark.

    1. Thanks for your spirit of Christian charity “debating” the pros and cons of mixed marriages in the Church. Since this is your forum, you get the last word. I’ll have to study the subject further. Dr. Peter Toon was also married to a nice Asian woman (Indian, I believe). He was a gentleman and scholar who was a tireless advocate of the Anglican Prayer Book and the Prayer Book Society. I’ve read a bit more of your writings here and at the Stand Firm web-site and am in hearty agreement with much (or all) of what you’ve written. God bless you and your work defending the Faith and exposing error. These political Bishops you take on, and the compromising priests who often cover for them, are indeed “slippery” folks. You’re offering a valuable service holding them to account. Keep up the good work and press on regardless. All the best.
      p.s. – Have you read the ex ArchBp Carey’s new book? Any thoughts, book review in the works?

      1. David Ould

        certainly wasn’t intending to close you out of the conversation. I just think your response to Piper jumped the gun. He’s a good gospel man and the last you could accuse of legalism. Feel free to push the issue around a bit here.

        Thanks also for your kind words.
        No, not read the book. Can’t say it’s high on my list, only since I have other priorities at the moment.

Leave a Comment - but please pay careful attention to the house rules