Justin Taylor's Blog, page 250

The Legacy Bible with a Perfect Page

Crossway:

The Single Column Legacy Bible has just arrived in the Crossway warehouse and will start shipping over the coming weeks. We're excited about this new edition for at least four reasons.

1. It features a fresh, new design. Every once in a while it's fun to try new things, and with the Single Column Legacy Bible we started from scratch. It's based off the Renaissance ideal for a perfect page (HT Robert Bringhurst), which means there's a precise layout of the text and the margins – what Renaissance thinkers considered perfect proportions. Below is an example of the interior. You can also download a pdf sample.

2. We aimed for a high standard of excellence in production. This is one of the finest-quality Bibles we publish. Because of the nature of this project, we wanted to use select production materials and processes. The paper, binding, and printer were all carefully selected to ensure the quality of this edition.

3. It's our first Bible that uses line-matching. Line-matching is a process that aligns the text on both sides of a page, minimizing the see-through of text. If you look at your current Bible, chances are you'll notice slight deviations in how the text was placed on each page. This is because Bible printing presses run the paper at incredibly fast speeds, and it's very difficult to get the text printed exactly the same on each page. Line-matching is a process that solves the problem and leads to a more visually appealing, readable edition.

Keep reading….

For the Sake of God's Name

Paul Miller made a comment that has stuck with me: he mentioned that he's recently been noting the number of things in the Psalmists' prayers that he doesn't say in his own prayers.

With that in mind, note the basis upon which these prayers are made:

Jeremiah 14:7

Though our iniquities testify against us,

act, O LORD, for your name's sake;

for our backslidings are many;

we have sinned against you.

Jeremiah 14:21

Do not spurn us, for your name's sake;

do not dishonor your glorious throne;

remember and do not break your covenant with us.

Daniel 9:19

O Lord, hear; O Lord, forgive.

O Lord, pay attention and act.

Delay not, for your own sake, O my God, because your city and your people are called by your name.

A few observations about this phrase as found in God's word:

1. The name of God is God's revelation of himself.

2. In the phrase "for the sake of God's name," "name" is essentially synonymous with "praise" and "glory." Isaiah 48:9 puts "the sake of my name" parallel with "the sake of my praise." Isaiah 48:11 puts "my name" on the same level as "my glory."

3. God's great name can be glorified or profaned (see especially Ezekiel 20).

4. God works for both his glory and our good (compare, for example, Rom. 8:28 and Rom. 11:36), but the Bible puts a priority on God's interest over ours as the basis for his action (frequently saying "not for our sake" but for "your sake").

5. In our prayers we should appeal to God, reminding him of what he cannot forget: to do all things for the glory and praise of his great name.

The following is not quite exhaustive, but here is a catalog of the main uses of the phrase in the Bible.

1 Samuel 12:22

For the LORD will not forsake his people, for his great name's sake, because it has pleased the Lord to make you a people for himself.

Psalm 23:3

He restores my soul.

He leads me in paths of righteousness1

for his name's sake.

Psalm 25:11

For your name's sake, O LORD,

pardon my guilt, for it is great.

Psalm 31:3

For you are my rock and my fortress;

and for your name's sake you lead me and guide me;

Psalm 79:9

Help us, O God of our salvation,

for the glory of your name;

deliver us, and atone for our sins,

for your name's sake!

Psalm 106:8

Yet he saved them for his name's sake,

that he might make known his mighty power.

Psalm 109:21

But you, O God my Lord,

deal on my behalf for your name's sake;

because your steadfast love is good, deliver me!

Psalm 143:11

For your name's sake, O LORD, preserve my life!

In your righteousness bring my soul out of trouble!

Isaiah 48:9, 11

For my name's sake I defer my anger,

for the sake of my praise I restrain it for you,

that I may not cut you off. . . .

For my own sake, for my own sake, I do it,

for how should my name be profaned?

My glory I will not give to another.

Ezekiel 20:9

But I acted for the sake of my name, that it should not be profaned in the sight of the nations among whom they lived, in whose sight I made myself known to them in bringing them out of the land of Egypt.

Ezekiel 20:14

But I acted for the sake of my name, that it should not be profaned in the sight of the nations, in whose sight I had brought them out.

Ezekiel 20:22

But I withheld my hand and acted for the sake of my name, that it should not be profaned in the sight of the nations, in whose sight I had brought them out.

Ezekiel 20:44

And you shall know that I am the LORD, when I deal with you for my name's sake, not according to your evil ways, nor according to your corrupt deeds, O house of Israel, declares the Lord GOD.

Ezekiel 36:22

Thus says the Lord GOD: It is not for your sake, O house of Israel, that I am about to act, but for the sake of my holy name, which you have profaned among the nations to which you came.

The New Testament also uses this language, with Jesus frequently applying it to his own name.

Matthew 10:22

. . . and you will be hated by all for my name's sake. But the one who endures to the end will be saved.

Matthew 19:29

And everyone who has left houses or brothers or sisters or father or mother or children or lands, for my name's sake, will receive a hundredfold and will inherit eternal life.

Matthew 24:9

Then they will deliver you up to tribulation and put you to death, and you will be hated by all nations for my name's sake.

Acts 9:16

For I will show him how much he must suffer for the sake of my name.

Romans 1:5

through whom we have received grace and apostleship to bring about the obedience of faith for the sake of his name among all the nations.

1 John 2:12

I am writing to you, little children,

because your sins are forgiven for his name's sake.

3 John 1:7

For they have gone out for the sake of the name, accepting nothing from the Gentiles.

Revelation 2:3

I know you are enduring patiently and bearing up for my name's sake, and you have not grown weary.

Can Christians Trust the Reformed Theology of a Slave Owner?

Anthony Carter:

Indeed, this [question] is one of the hurdles many (not all) African American Christians find hard to get over as they come to understand and embrace Reformed theology. I have often contended that the reticence that some African Americans have toward an embrace of Reformed theology is not as much the theology as it is the ones who have held to it. There are, however, a couple things to be said about this.

First, the sordid, sinful, and tangled history of slavery in America was not just the property of Reformed Christians. Christians from practically every religious confession in America have a poor history of racism and even slave holding. To disregard any tradition that held slaves would be to disregard practically every theological tradition in America. Admittedly, the problem has often been that while other traditions have been quicker to acknowledge their sins in this regard, many in the Reformed tradition have been slow to and have even retreated into their own theological and cultural enclaves rather than deal publicly and forthrightly with the transgressions of the past. Consequently, Reformed Christians have been viewed as less vigorous in denouncing the sins of slavery and thus implying their approval of it. This perception is unfortunate, yet real.

Nevertheless, the question remains. To answer it, allow me to make it personal. How can I, a black man, embrace the theology of men who owned slaves? I can joyfully embrace it because I realize that I am embracing the theology of the Bible and not necessarily the frail, fallible men who teach it. I can embrace the theology because it allows me to point out the sins of such teachers and yet the grace that is greater than that sin.

How could the early Christians embrace the theology of the Apostle Paul when, as Saul of Tarsus, he pursued, persecuted, and even consented to many of their deaths? They could do it because they understood the gospel to be greater than not just their sins but also the sins of those who transgressed against them. I can embrace it because if we listen and learn only from those in history who have no theological blind spots, then to whom shall we listen and from whom shall we learn? Biblical theology must be larger, more grand than the imperfections of its teachers. I believe Reformed theology is.

Two Theological Classics You May Not Know

From Tabletalk interviews with Jerry Bridges and Anthony Carter:

Tabletalk: Aside from the Bible, do you have a favorite Christian classic? What is it about this book you admire?

Jerry Bridges: My all-time favorite Christian book is the Apostles' Doctrine of the Atonement by nineteenth-century Scottish theologian George Smeaton. It has two strengths. First, it is thorough in the sense that Smeaton treats every passage on the atonement from Acts through Revelation. But for me, the real strength of the book and that which makes it my favorite is his continual emphasis on the believer's union with Christ, both representatively and organically. But it is his emphasis on the representative nature of our union with Christ (that Christ both lived a perfect life and died on the cross in our place) that gets me so excited.

Tabletalk: If you could study under any theologian in church history (excluding those in Scripture), who would it be and why?

Anthony Carter: . . . I would be most excited to study under Wilhelmus à Brakel (1635-1711). Admittedly, most would not be familiar with à Brakel and his theological magnum opus The Christian's Reasonable Service, but I have never been so moved by theological reflection as I am with à Brakel. à Brakel seemingly had the unique ability to take heady theological reflection and not just make it pastoral, but even emotion-stirring. Coming from the rich Dutch Reformed tradition, his biblical theological reflections are keen, but he never just settles for keenness. His goal seems to be experiential — a rich, Reformed, experiential Christianity. That's what I pray to have. Having spent countless hours poring over à Brakel, I feel in some sense that I have studied under him. However, what a joy it would have been to be an eyewitness to the effect his theological insights had on his heart and the hearts of those to whom he was called to minister.

The Greatest Need in the Church Today

From the Tabletalk interview with Jerry Bridges:

There are so many needs in the church today that it is difficult to single out one as the greatest. However, if I had to pick one, I would say the most fundamental need is an ever-growing awareness of the holiness of God. I don't say this because that is the main emphasis of Ligonier Ministries but because I believe it is true.

The emphasis of my own ministry has been the believer's personal pursuit of holiness. But years ago I came to realize the gospel has to be the foundation and motivation for the pursuit of holiness. Believers need the gospel to remind them that our standing with God is not based on our own obedience but on the perfect, imputed righteousness of Christ. Otherwise, the pursuit of holiness can be performance driven: that is, "If I'm good, God will bless me."

How, then, can we get Christians to embrace the gospel every day? I believe Isaiah 6:1-8 gives us a paradigm for addressing this need. Isaiah sees God in His holiness, that is, His supreme majesty and infinite moral purity. In the light of God's holiness, Isaiah is completely undone by an acute awareness of his own sinfulness. This is what we need in our churches today. Because we tend to define sin in terms of the more flagrant sins of society, we don't see ourselves as practicing sinners.

It is only after Isaiah has been totally devastated by the realization of his own sinfulness that he is in the right position to hear the gospel proclaimed to him by the seraphim: "Your guilt is taken away, and your sin atoned for" (v. 7).

What happens next? Isaiah hears God say, "Whom shall I send, and who will go for us?" Immediately he responds, "Here am I! Send me" (v. 8). What causes such an immediate and spontaneous response? It is gratitude for the forgiveness of his sins as he hears the gospel from the seraphim. Jesus said, "He who is forgiven little, loves little" (Luke 7:47). It is because the vast majority of Christians do not realize how much they have been forgiven that there is so much lethargy in the church today.

There is an inevitable sequence in the account of Isaiah's vision. It is God (in His holiness), guilt, gospel, and gratitude. It is deep, heartfelt gratitude for the work of Christ as proclaimed in the gospel that motivates us to pursue holiness. But it all begins with an ever-increasing realization of the holiness of God. That is why I see it as the greatest need in the church today.

You can read the whole interview here.

Bridges also has a new book out: The Transforming Power of the Gospel (NavPress). With other books by Bridges entitled Transforming Grace and The Gospel for Real Life, this could be a bit confusing. But it's actually a new work, and he has explained four ways this work is different.

The first distinguishing mark of The Transforming Power of the Gospel is that it begins with a consideration of the infinite holiness of God and the consequent seriousness of sin in the light of that holiness (Chapters 2 and 3).

The second mark is the increased emphasis on gratitude for the gospel as the primary motivator for the pursuit of transformation (Chapter 6).

Third, the chapter on grace addresses some common misunderstandings of the nature and application of grace that I have not dealt with before (Chapter 7).

Fourth is the greater emphasis on the work of the Holy Spirit in our transformation (Chapter 8). I have covered this subject before but not to the extent I do in the present book. I am convinced the evangelical church needs a greater emphasis on the role of the Holy Spirit, and I have had to address that need.

You can read sample pages here.

Every Crossway eBook: On Sale for $5.99

Go here for details; the sale lasts for 10 days.

The Hardening of Pharaoh's Heart

Does your theology have categories by which to understand both God's hardening of Pharaoh's heart and then Pharaoh's subsequent self-hardening? It's a good test-case for biblically understanding divine sovereignty and human responsibility.

Here is a quick run-down of the key biblical data:

Three times Yahweh declares that he will harden Pharaoh's heart (Ex. 4:21; 7:3; 14:4).
Six times Yahweh actually hardens Pharaoh's heart (Ex. 9:12; 10:1; 10:20; 10:27; 11:10; 14:8).
Seven times the hardening is expressed as a divine passive with Yahweh as the implied subject, i.e., Pharaoh's heart "was hardened" by Yahweh (Ex. 7:13; 7:14; 7:22; 8:19; 9:7; 9:35; 14:5).
And three times we are told that Pharaoh hardened his own heart (Ex. 8:15; 8:32; 9:34).

Divine-hardening and self-hardening are interwoven, but the God's action is primary and initiatory: the first five citations (in Exodus 4 and 7) all focus on God's action; the important point of Pharaoh's self-hardening only appears in the three verses of Exodus 8 and 9.

The Apostle Paul famously reflected on the theological implications of this in Romans 9, using it to demonstrate the power of God's mercy over the human will. Note the inclusio (or literary envelope) in Romans 9:16-18, including his quote of Exodus 9:16 on God's purpose in hardening Pharaoh's heart:

So then it depends not on human will or exertion, but on God, who has mercy.

For the Scripture says to Pharaoh, "For this very purpose I have raised you up, that I might show my power in you, and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth."

So then he has mercy on whomever he wills, and he hardens whomever he wills.

John Piper was teaching at Bethel College when he began working on these issues in the late 1970s. It resulted in a highly regarded book published in 1983, The Justification of God: An Exegetical and Theological Study of Romans 9:1-23. Around the same time, Greg Beale, then at Gordon-College, was making the first attempt to provide contextual exegesis of every hardening passage in Exodus 4-14. The fruit of this is in his article: "An Exegetical and Theological Consideration of the Hardening of Pharaoh's Heart in Exodus 4-14 and Romans 9," Trinity Journal 5 (1984): 129-154.

In his essay Professor Beale asks four questions, and then after the detailed exegesis of these passages he offers his conclusions. I've reproduced below the questions, followed by the answers he provides.

(1) Who is the ultimate cause of Pharaoh's hardening?

First, our study has shown that God was the ultimate cause of all of the hardening actions throughout Exod 4-14 so that at no time was Pharaoh's volition independent of Yahweh's influence when he hardened his heart. This may be especially significant since the hardening may be viewed as a polemic against the Egyptian idea of Pharaoh's deity and the belief that Pharaoh's heart was the all-controlling factor both in history and society.

(2) If the hardening is at all associated with God, is it an unconditional or conditional judgment with respect to Pharaoh's sin?

[I]t is never stated in Exod 4-14 that Yahweh hardens Pharaoh in judgment because of any prior reason or condition residing in him. Rather, as stated in the exegetical conclusion, the only purpose or reason given for the hardening is that it would glorify Yahweh.  Therefore, the divine hardening of Pharaoh was unconditional. All that can be said is that Yahweh deemed it necessary to include Pharaoh's disobedient refusal in the historical plan, which was to glorify himself. . . .

(3) When Paul refutes the idea that God is unjust [Rom. 9:14] in rejecting Esau rather than Jacob before they were born [Rom. 9:10-13], does he give an understandable explanation for this refutation (gar, [Rom. 9:17]), or does he merely refute the idea without offering any rationale in defense of God's rejection?

Neither Moses nor Paul leaves room for the possibility that God was unjust or immoral in his dealings with Pharaoh or Pharaoh had a peccatum alienum [alien guilt].  Paul alludes to Exod 9:16 in affirming the justice of God:  "For this very purpose I raised you up, to demonstrate my power in you, and that my name might be proclaimed throughout the whole earth." . . . Paul seems to be alluding to Exod 9:16 as a summary of the purpose of the hardening throughout Exod 4-14–that God's name should be proclaimed "in all the world."  If God had not repeatedly hardened Pharaoh, there would have been no drawn out series of plagues and there would have been no proclamation of God's omnipotence. Thus, Paul sees hardening as the key to the proclamation of the divine name. That Paul understands Exod 9:16 in terms of hardening is clear from his summary of this allusion in Rom 9:18b ("he hardens whom he wills").

(4) Does the hardening involve God's dealing with certain individuals or nations only on the plane of history or does it have reference to a general principle concerning God's eternal rejection of man from salvation?

. . . God's hardening and rejection of Pharaoh (and the Egyptians) does not appear to be limited to divine dealings only on the temporal, historical level, but appears to have a continuity with a rejection from eternal salvation. This may be evident from the following considerations in Exodus:

(1) hardening of the heart probably has implications in the spiritual realm affecting Pharaoh's eternal destiny, since in the OT leb ("heart") refers very often to the inner, spiritual center of one's relationship with God, as is also true of "heart" in the Egyptian literature;

(2) this is supported by observing that Pharaoh's hardening of his heart is referred to as "sin against the Lord " for which he needs "forgiveness" (10:16-17; cf. 9:34).  Therefore the hardening does not merely concern Pharaoh's intellectual-volitional faculty, but also the spiritual center of his being, since he repeatedly disobeyed God's command and deserves judgment.  This is significant in the Exodus account, since the Egyptians viewed Pharaoh as divine and sinless while living, and believed at death he was exempt from judgment but became the god (Osiris) presiding over judgment after his death. In addition to this, other terms in the immediate context of the Rom 9 hardening statement are used there and elsewhere in the pauline corpus with reference to the eternal destinies of people, so that it would appear likely that Paul has the same concerns in Rom 9:17 and that he likewise understood the Exodus hardening.  The context also points to a concern for eternal destinies in Rom 9, since Rom 8:29-39 refers to assurance of eternal salvation and Rom 10-11 focus on the problem of why national Israel is not in such a salvific condition.

Could Paul have expressed such grief about his hardened brethern and wished himself "accursed" on their behalf if issues of eternal destinies were not at stake? Therefore the hardening is not limited to unique historical situations, but is an expression of a gnomic principle of God's eternal dealings.  The principle of such dealings is based on God's unconditional nature, as Paul's use of Exod 9:16 has shown.  That such a principle is in Paul's mind is apparent from Rom 9:18, where he generalizes the individual OT examples of the divine dispensing of mercy and hardening; the former explains God's dealings with the Israelite remnant and Gentiles, while the latter explains the present rejection of the majority of the Jewish nation.

The Ephesians 5:12 Question

Carl Trueman asks: "Would it make any difference to you—any difference at all to the way you talk, to what you watch, to the way you 'engage culture'—if Eph. 5:12 had never been written?"

What Is Sustaining Grace?

John Piper's answer:

Not grace to bar what is not bliss,

Nor flight from all distress, but this:

The grace that orders our trouble and pain,

And then, in the darkness, is there to sustain.

How the Paradoxical Trees of Calvinism Grow in the Bible-Saturated Soil of Chesterton's "Elfland"

A great post from John Piper on G. K. Chesteron's Orthodoxy (the only book outside the Bible he's read more than twice), the ethics of Elfland, and Calvinism.

After celebrating their common ground, Piper asks, "But how then can Calvinism awaken such joy in me, and such hate in Chesterton?" His answer: "Because they aren't the same Calvinism."

* * *

He thinks Calvinism is the opposite of all this happy wonder that we have in common. The Calvinism he hates is part of the rationalism that drives people mad. Exhibit A:

Only one great English poet went mad, Cowper. And he was definitely driven mad by logic, by the ugly and alien logic of predestination. Poetry was not the disease, but the medicine; poetry partly kept him in health. . . . He was damned by John Calvin; he was almost saved by John Gilpin.

No, Mr. Chesterton, William Cowper was not driven mad by Calvinism. He was driven mad by a mental disease that ran in his family for generations, and he was saved by John Newton, perhaps the humblest, happiest Calvinist who ever lived. And both of them saw the wonders of "Amazing Grace" through the eyes of poetry. Yes, that was a healing balm. But the disease was not Calvinism — else John Newton would not have been the happy, healthy, holy friend that he was.

Here's the reason Chesterton's bowshots at Calvinism do not bring me down. The Calvinism I love is far closer to the "Elfland" he loves than the rationalism he hates.

He would no doubt be baffled by my experience. For me the biggest, strongest, most beautiful, and most fruitful tree that grows in the soil of "Elfland" is Calvinism. Here is a tree big enough, and strong enough, and high enough to let all the paradoxical branches of the Bible live — and wave with joy in the sunshine of God's sovereignty.

In the shade of this tree, I was set free from the procrustean forces of unbiblical, free-will presuppositionalism — the unyielding, alien assumption that without the human right of ultimate self-determination human beings cannot be accountable for their choices. When I walked away from this narrow, rationalistic, sparse tree, into the shade of the massive tree of Calvinism, it was a happy day. Suddenly I saw that this is what all the poetry had been about. This is the tree where all the branches of all the truths that men have tried to separate thrive.

* * *

Read the whole thing.