Justin Taylor's Blog, page 123

Gospel Truth on TBN

Ed Stetzer hosted Matt Chandler, Jefferson Bethke, Priscilla Shirer, and Matt Chandler—with music by Josh Wilson and Christ August—on TBN last week:

C.S. Lewis’s Argument Against the Strange Idea that You Should Read Only Modern Books

From C. S. Lewis’s introduction to a new translation of Athanasisus’ On the Incarnation (originally written in the fourth century):

There is a strange idea abroad that in every subject the ancient books should be read only by the professionals, and that the amateur should content himself with the modern books. Thus I have found as a tutor in English Literature that if the average student wants to find out something about Platonism, the very last thing he thinks of doing is to take a translation of Plato off the library shelf and read the Symposium. He would rather read some dreary modern book ten times as long, all about “isms” and influences and only once in twelve pages telling him what Plato actually said. The error is rather an amiable one, for it springs from humility. The student is half afraid to meet one of the great philosophers face to face. He feels himself inadequate and thinks he will not understand him. But if he only knew, the great man, just because of his greatness, is much more intelligible than his modern commentator. The simplest student will be able to understand, if not all, yet a very great deal of what Plato said; but hardly anyone can understand some modern books on Platonism. It has always therefore been one of my main endeavours as a teacher to persuade the young that firsthand knowledge is not only more worth acquiring than secondhand knowledge, but is usually much easier and more delightful to acquire.

This mistaken preference for the modern books and this shyness of the old ones is nowhere more rampant than in theology. . . .

Naturally, since I myself am a writer, I do not wish the ordinary reader to read no modern books. But if he must read only the new or only the old, I would advise him to read the old. And I would give him this advice precisely because he is an amateur and therefore much less protected than the expert against the dangers of an exclusive contemporary diet. A new book is still on its trial and the amateur is not in a position to judge it. It has to be tested against the great body of Christian thought down the ages, and all its hidden implications (often unsuspected by the author himself) have to be brought to light. Often it cannot be fully understood without the knowledge of a good many other modern books. If you join at eleven o’clock a conversation which began at eight you will often not see the real bearing of what is said. Remarks which seem to you very ordinary will produce laughter or irritation and you will not see why—the reason, of course, being that the earlier stages of the conversation have given them a special point. In the same way sentences in a modern book which look quite ordinary may be directed at some other book; in this way you may be led to accept what you would have indignantly rejected if you knew its real significance. The only safety is to have a standard of plain, central Christianity (“mere Christianity” as Baxter called it) which puts the controversies of the moment in their proper perspective. Such a standard can be acquired only from the old books. It is a good rule, after reading a new book, never to allow yourself another new one till you have read an old one in between. If that is too much for you, you should at least read one old one to every three new ones.

Every age has its own outlook. It is specially good at seeing certain truths and specially liable to make certain mistakes. We all, therefore, need the books that will correct the characteristic mistakes of our own period. And that means the old books. All contemporary writers share to some extent the contemporary outlook—even those, like myself, who seem most opposed to it. Nothing strikes me more when I read the controversies of past ages than the fact that both sides were usually assuming without question a good deal which we should now absolutely deny. They thought that they were as completely opposed as two sides could be, but in fact they were all the time secretly united—united with each other and against earlier and later ages—by a great mass of common assumptions. We may be sure that the characteristic blindness of the twentieth century—the blindness about which posterity will ask, “But how could they have thought that?”—lies where we have never suspected it, and concerns something about which there is untroubled agreement between Hitler and President Roosevelt or between Mr. H. G. Wells and Karl Barth. None of us can fully escape this blindness, but we shall certainly increase it, and weaken our guard against it, if we read only modern books. Where they are true they will give us truths which we half knew already. Where they are false they will aggravate the error with which we are already dangerously ill. The only palliative is to keep the clean sea breeze of the centuries blowing through our minds, and this can be done only by reading old books. Not, of course, that there is any magic about the past. People were no cleverer then than they are now; they made as many mistakes as we. But not the same mistakes. They will not flatter us in the errors we are already committing; and their own errors, being now open and palpable, will not endanger us. Two heads are better than one, not because either is infallible, but because they are unlikely to go wrong in the same direction. To be sure, the books of the future would be just as good a corrective as the books of the past, but unfortunately we cannot get at them.

 

 

“One of the Best Apologetics Books In Years”

Michael Kruger, president and professor of New Testament at Reformed Theological Seminary in Charlotte, NC:

Every once in a while a book is published that is so helpful, so original, and so needed, that it makes one wonder, Why was this book not written before now?

James Anderson, associate professor of theology and philosophy here at RTS Charlotte, has written such a book: What’s Your Worldview? An Interactive Approach to Life’s Big Questions (Crossway, 2o14).

This is a wonderful little book for a number of reasons.

(1) Target audience. Although this book is certainly for Christians, it has a strong evangelistic thrust to it.  It is designed to be given to non-Christians.

(2) Methodology: Anderson has written this book from a presuppositional perspective and demonstrates that such an apologetic approach is really practical, understandable, and effective for evangelism (despite perceptions to the contrary!).

(3) Creativity.  This book is distinctive in terms of how it is structured. Anderson takes the reader through a “Choose Your Own Adventure” type of journey, where the path is chosen by the responses of the reader. There is really nothing else like it.

Don’t miss this book.  Buy a bunch of copies and give to your neighbors or friends. Or work through it in a Sunday School class or home Bible study.

You can find out more about the book here.

And here are a couple of other blurbs:

“This book will become ‘the book’ that will be used by campus ministers, students, and a host of others who are constantly being drawn into conversations concerning worldviews. The layout of this book is ingenious, helpful, and engaging. The information found in these short pages will provide accurate long-term care for those on a ‘worldview journey.’”

—Rod Mays, National Coordinator, Reformed University Fellowship

“James Anderson’s What’s Your Worldview? is a delightfully innovative apologetic. I know of nothing like it. It gets the reader to interact by asking crucial worldview questions. Depending on the reader’s answers, he is led to further questions, or to a conclusion. Animating the journey is a cogent Christian apologetic, showing that only the Christian worldview yields cogent answers to the questions. Anderson’s approach is both winsome and biblical, as well as being the most creative apologetic book in many years. I pray that it gets a wide readership.”

—John M. Frame, J. D. Trimble Chair of Systematic Theology and Philosophy, Reformed Theological Seminary, Orlando

“I can think of readers to whom I would not give this book: they like their reading material to be straightforward exposition. The notion of an interactive book, where readers are forced to choose distinguishable paths and interact with discrete lines of thought, finding their own worldviews challenged—well, that does not sound very relaxing, and it may be a bit intimidating. But James Anderson has written something that is as creative as it is unusual: he has written a book in clear prose and at a popular level that nevertheless challenges readers to think, and especially to identify and evaluate their own worldviews. If the style is akin to ‘Choose Your Own Adventure’ books, the content is at least as entertaining and far more important.”

—D. A. Carson, Research Professor of New Testament, Trinity Evangelical Divinity School

A Letter from John Newton to a Despairing Woman

Tony Reinke, author of the forthcoming Newton on the Christian Life, recently spoke at Crossway’s chapel and shared a lightly revised letter from John Newton (1725-1807), “A Letter to a Friend in Trouble” (Works of John Newton 6:377-80). He gave me permission to share it here. We don’t have the originating letter, but it was from a correspondent who was friends with a woman struggling with extended periods of depression. This friend wrote to Newton to ask if he might write her some gospel encouragement.

My dear Madam, . . .

They who would always rejoice [in trials], must derive their joy from a source which is invariably the same; in other words, from Jesus. Oh, that name! What a person, what an office, what a love, what a life, what a death, does it recall to our minds!

Come, madam, let us leave our troubles to themselves for a while, and let us walk to Golgotha, and there take a view of his. We stop, as we are going, at Gethsemane, for it is not a step out of the road. There he lies, bleeding, though not wounded; or, if wounded, it is by an invisible, an almighty hand. Now I begin to see what sin has done. Now let me bring my sorrows, and compare, measure, and weigh them, against the sorrows of my Saviour! Foolish attempt; to weigh a [grain of dust] against a mountain! . . .

We are still more confirmed at our next station.

Now we are at the foot of the cross.

Behold the Man! Attend to his groans; contemplate his wounds. Now, let us sit down ere a while and weep for our crosses, if we can. For our crosses! Nay, rather let us weep for our sins, which brought the Son of God into such distress. Agreed. I feel that we, not He, deserved to be crucified, and to be utterly forsaken. But this is not all: his death not only shows our [sin], but seals our pardon.

For a fuller proof, let us take another station.

Now we are at his tomb. But the stone is rolled away. He is not here; he is risen. The debt is paid, and the surety discharged. . . . Where then is He? Look up! Methinks the clouds part, and glory breaks through — Behold a throne! What a transition! He, who hung upon the cross, is seated upon the throne! Hark, he speaks! May every word sink deep into your heart and mine! He says, “I know your sorrows, yes, I appoint them; they are tokens of my love; it is thus I call you to the honor of following me. See a place prepared for you near to myself! Fear none of these things: be faithful unto death, and I will give thee a crown of life.”

It is enough, Lord.

Now then let us compute, let us calculate again. These scales are the balances of the sanctuary. Let us put in our trials and griefs on one side. What an alteration! I thought them lately very heavy: now I find them light, the scale hardly turns with them. But how shall we manage to put in the weight on the other side? It is heavy indeed: an exceeding, an eternal weight of glory. It is beyond my grasp and power. No matter. Comparison is needless. I see, with the glance of an eye, there is no proportion. I am content. I am satisfied. I am ashamed. Have I been so long mourning, and is this all the causer? Well, if the flesh will grieve, it shall grieve by itself. The Spirit, the Lord enabling me, shall rejoice, yea, it does. From this moment I wipe away my tears, and forbid them to flow; or, if I must weep, they shall be tears of gratitude, love, and joy! The bitter is sweet; the medicine is food.

But the cloud closes: I can no longer see what I lately saw. However, I have seen it: I know it is there. He ever lives, full of compassion and care, to plead for me above, to manage for me below. He is mine, and I am his: therefore all is well.

I hope this little walk will do us both good. We have seen wonderful things today! Wonderful in themselves, and wonderful in their efficacy to compose our spirits, and to make us willing to suffer on.

Blessed be God for his unspeakable gift!

I am, Madam, your affectionate,

John Newton

Timelines of Some Key Characters in the Old Testament

One of the enjoyable discoveries of working on the ESV Study Bible was that the timelines of some of the key OT characters could be plotted—either because of explicit reference (e.g., so-and-so was 75 years old when X happened), or through inference (e.g., 25 years later) or through comparison with the ages of other characters.

Here are some of the results:

Abraham’s Timeline

Event

Age of Abraham

Genesis

Abram departs from Haran, enters Canaan
75
12:4-5


Abram fathers Ishmael with Hagar
85-86
16:3-4


Abraham fathers Isaac with Sarah
100
21:5


Abraham’s wife Sarah dies
137
23:1


Abraham’s son Isaac marries Rebekah
140
25:20


Abraham dies
175
25:7

 

Isaac’s Timeline

Event

Age of Isaac

Genesis

Isaac’s mother Sarah dies
37
23:1


Isaac marries Rebekah
40
25:20


Isaac fathers Jacob and Esau with Rebekah
60
25:26


Isaac’s father Abraham dies
75
25:7


Isaac’s brother Ishmael dies
123
25:17


Isaac sends Jacob to Laban in Haran
137
28:5


Isaac’s grandson Joseph is born
151
30:25; 31:38-41


Isaac dies
180
35:28

 

Jacob’s Timeline

Event

Age of Jacob

Genesis

Jacob’s grandfather Abraham dies
15
25:7


Jacob sent to Laban in Haran
77
28:5


Jacob marries Leah and Rachel
84
29:21-30; 30:1, 22-26


Jacob fathers Joseph with Rachel
91
30:22-24


Jacob flees from Laban to Canaan
97
ch. 31


Jacob’s son Joseph sold into slavery
108
37:12-36


Jacob’s father Isaac dies
120
35:28-29; cf. 25:26 with35:28


Jacob reunites with Joseph and moves his family to Egypt
130
chs. 46-47; cf. 47:9, 28


Jacob dies
147
47:28

 

Joseph’s Timeline

Event

Age of Joseph

Genesis

Joseph’s father Jacob moves family from Haran to Canaan
6
31:17-21


Joseph sold to Potiphar in Egypt
17
ch. 37


Joseph interprets dreams of cupbearer and baker in prison
28
ch. 40


Joseph’s grandfather Isaac dies
29
35:28-29


Joseph interprets Pharaoh’s dreams, is released from prison
30
41:1-36


Seven years of plenty; sons Manasseh and Ephraim born during this time
30-37
41:47-52


Seven years of famine; two years into the famine Joseph reconciles with his brothers and father
37-44
41:53-47:26


Joseph’s father Jacob dies
56
47:28


Joseph dies
110
50:22-26

 

Three Stages of Moses’ Life

Location

Age

Reference

Egypt
0-40
Ex. 2:11; Acts 7:23


Midian
41-80
Ex. 2:15; 7:7; Acts 7:29-30


The wilderness
81-120
Deut. 31:2; 34:7; cf. Num. 14:33-34; Deut. 29:5 

A Way to Pray in a Time of Controversy

Gracious Father, have mercy on your children in disputes.

We are sorry for any root of pride or fear of man or lack of insight that influences our stance in the controversy before us.

We confess that we are not pure in ourselves.

Even as we strive to persuade one another, we stand in need of a merciful Advocate.

We are sinners.

We are finite and fallible.

On both sides of the matter at hand, we take refuge together in the glorious gospel of justification by faith alone through grace.

We magnify Jesus Christ, our Savior and King for all he has done to make us his own.

We are a thankful people even in our conflict.

We are broken and humble to think that we would be loved and forgiven and accepted by an infinitely holy God.

Forbid, O Lord, that our spirit in this struggle would be one of hostility or ill will toward anyone.

Deliver us from every form of debate that departs from love or diminishes truth.

Grant, Father, as Francis Schaeffer pleaded in his last days, that our disagreements would prove to be golden opportunities to show the world how to love—not by avoiding conflicts, but by how we act in them.

Show us, O God, the relationship between doctrine and devotion, between truth and tenderness, between biblical faithfulness and biblical unity, between standing on the truth and standing together.

Let none of us be unteachable, or beyond correction.

May the outcome of our dispute be clearer vision of your glory and grace and truth and wisdom and power and knowledge.

By your Spirit, grant that the result of all our arguments be deeper humility, more dependence on mercy, sweeter fellowship with Jesus, stronger love in our common life, more radical obedience to the commands of our King, more authentic worship, and a greater readiness and eagerness to lay down our lives to finish the Great Commission.

In all this, Father, our passion is that you would be glorified through Jesus Christ.

Amen.

—John Piper, “Our Prayer in a Time of Controversy,” in Contending for Our All: Defending Truth and Treasuring Christ in the Lives of Athanasius, John Owen, and J. Gresham Machen. The Swans Are Not Silent (Wheaton: Crossway, 2006), 173-74.

Carl Trueman on John Owen on Battling Sin and Temptation

My favorite teacher on John Owen is Carl Trueman, Paul Woolley Professor of Church History at Westminster Theological Seminary and the author of John Owen: Reformed Catholic, Renaissance Man and The Claims of Truth: John Owen’s Trinitarian Theology (unfortunately out of print, but a second edition is forthcoming).

Below are four talks Dr. Trueman gave on Owen and his excellent teaching on sin and temptation. It was delivered at Cornerstone Christian Church in Medford, Oregon (November 2013).

To read Owen on these great themes, I would recommend this edition.

Vanhoozer: What Are Theologians For?

Here is a video lecture from Kevin Vanhoozer, asking ”What Are Theologians For? Why Doctors of the Church Prescribe Christian Doctrine.”

You can read a transcript of the lecture here.

Here are Vanhoozer’s seven concluding theses:

[First,] Doctrine tells us who God is and what God is doing in Christ. So, doctors of the church prescribe doctrine in order to preserve the integrity of our Christian witness.

Second, doctrine tells us who and what we are in Jesus Christ. And doctors of the church prescribe doctrine to preserve the integrity of Christian identity. We’re not like the other nations, we’re a holy nation, a people of a new covenant.

Third, doctrine says of what is in Christ that it is. Doctors of the church prescribe doctrine in order, as I’ve said, to minister reality—the only reliable tonic to the toxins of meaninglessness and nothingness.

Fourth, doctrine restores sinners to their senses. Doctors of the church prescribe doctrine to wake up people who are sleepwalking their way through life, helping us see with the eyes of the heart the bright contours of the splendors of God revealed in Christ.

Fifth, doctrine provides a fiduciary framework for understanding God, the world, and ourselves. And doctors of the church prescribe it to dissipate the mist of confusion and apathy about the meaning of life.

Sixth, doctrine directs the church in the way of wisdom, godliness, and human flourishing. If we prescribe doctrine, we’re clarifying the mission of the church and we’re answering another question, maybe for another time, what are the people of God for?

And seventhly, doctrine instructs not only the head, but orients the heart and guides the hand. Doctors of the church prescribe doctrine so that our faith, hope, and love, our credenda, spiranda, and agenda, will go with the grain of the Gospel and correspond to the historical and eschatological reality of what is in Christ.

So, in sum, theology sets forth in speech what is in Christ. And at its best, it’s the attempt to set forth in persons what Christ is like. That is, doctrine is for growing disciples. . . . I’m suggesting, then, that the pastor-theologian is the church’s primary care physician. Problem is, too many pastors have stopped doctoring.

HT: Cameron Morgan

Ravi Zacharias on Postmodern Architecture at Ohio State

From an address by Ravi Zacharias:

I remember lecturing at Ohio State University, one of the largest universities in this country. I was minutes away from beginning my lecture, and my host was driving me past a new building called the Wexner Center for the Performing Arts.

He said, “This is America’s first postmodern building.”

I was startled for a moment and I said, “What is a postmodern building?”

He said, “Well, the architect said that he designed this building with no design in mind. When the architect was asked, ‘Why?’ he said, ‘If life itself is capricious, why should our buildings have any design and any meaning?’ So he has pillars that have no purpose. He has stairways that go nowhere. He has a senseless building built and somebody has paid for it.”

I said, “So his argument was that if life has no purpose and design, why should the building have any design?”

He said, “That is correct.”

I said, “Did he do the same with the foundation?”

All of a sudden there was silence.

You see, you and I can fool with the infrastructure as much as we would like, but we dare not fool with the foundation because it will call our bluff in a hurry.

The Printed Book Is Not Dead; Long Live the Book!

An infographic: