Justin Taylor's Blog, page 305

The Gospel and It-ness

Guest post by Jared Wilson.

And Nehemiah, who was the governor, and Ezra the priest and scribe, and the Levites who taught the people said to all the people, "This day is holy to the LORD your God; do not mourn or weep." For all the people wept as they heard the words of the Law. Then he said to them, "Go your way. Eat the fat and drink sweet wine and send portions to anyone who has nothing ready, for this day is holy to our Lord. And do not be grieved, for the joy of the LORD is your strength." (Nehemiah 8:9-10)

The first step to real gospel joy is real gospel brokenness. We cannot get to real happiness in God until we get to real despair of our sin. "Til sin be bitter, Christ will not be sweet," Thomas Watson tells us.

But once we have despaired of all sin and the gods at their genesis, we are free. Really, truly free. To eat fat juicy steaks and drink rich red wine.

In fact, we cannot really enjoy the good gifts God gives us until he as their Giver is our greatest joy. Until he as their Giver is our greatest joy, we will left trying to enjoy his gifts for things they are not, rather than the things they are.

In Surprised by Joy, C.S. Lewis credited a close friend with cultivating in him "a determination to rub one's nose in the very quiddity of each thing, to rejoice in its being so magnificently what it was." John Piper echoes this enjoyment of quiddity, commenting on this kind of awareness: "To wake up in the morning and be aware of the firmness of the mattress, the warmth of the sun's rays, the sound of the clock ticking, the sheer being of things… " This is in Piper's book Don't Waste Your Life.

If I don't believe the gospel, I will miss out on the joy of the it-ness of things. I will be looking to these things as drugs, as appetite-fillers, as fulfillers, as powers, as gods, as worshipers of the god of myself.

If coffee or chocolate or anything else other than God is the highlight of my day or the ultimate joy of my heart, my joy is temporary, hollow, thin.

But if I believe in the gospel, I can finally enjoy the chocolate-ness of chocolate and the coffee-ness of coffee. Only the gospel frees me to enjoy things as they truly are and as they someday will be.

The Tomb of Philip the Apostle Discovered?

Guest Post by Dane Ortlund

Yes, says an Italian professor who has been at work for 32 years excavating Hierapolis, Turkey, the city where tradition says Philip, one of Jesus' 12 disciples, was buried.

Gene Veith reports.

Ben Witherington is interviewed.

Jesus and Love

Guest Post by Robert Sagers

Theologian and evangelical leader Carl F. H. Henry on Jesus and love:

It may seem an oversimplification to reduce the moral life of Jesus Christ to love. What of the stern side of his nature? the lightning-fierceness with which he assails sin? the sure threat of judgment and hell to come for unrepentant sinners? These emphases guard the definition of love. The gospels know no emotion worthily designated as love, whether applied to God in heaven or to his incarnate Son, which is unconditioned by righteousness and justice.

—Carl F. H. Henry, Christian Personal Ethics (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1957), 414.

Did God Change at the Incarnation?

Guest Post by Dane Ortlund

A wise, careful response from James Anderson at RTS/Charlotte.

Here's the heart of his answer–

According to the Definition of Chalcedon, Jesus Christ is one person with two natures, a perfect divine nature and a perfect human nature, and while those natures are united in one person they must nevertheless be distinguished. The properties of each nature can be ascribed to the one person, Jesus Christ, but not necessarily to the other nature.

So, for example, we're told that Jesus was omniscient (John 16:30) but also that he increased in wisdom (Luke 2:52). To be precise, however, we should say that Jesus was omniscient with respect to his divine nature and gained wisdom with respect to his human nature. On this basis, it seems natural to say that God the Son is timeless and unchangeable with respect to his divine nature but temporal and changeable with respect to his human nature. Since Jesus' death and resurrection pertained to his human nature, this standard Christological distinction suggests a way to reconcile the events of Jesus' life with the immutability of God.

An analogy (albeit an imperfect one) may help to clarify this distinction. In the movie Avatar the protagonist, Jake Sully, is enlisted to operate a Na'vi-human hybrid body. Given the close mental connection between Sully and his 'avatar'—he acts and experiences everything through that body—we might well say that he inhabits the hybrid body and that he now has two bodies. So consider this question: Can Sully run? Well, yes and no. He can't run with respect to human body (he's a paraplegic) but he can run with respect to his avatar body. Similarly, we can say that Jesus was resurrected with respect to his human nature but not with respect to his divine nature. Only in his humanity did he undergo change.

Read the whole thing.

Tom Sawyer on the Fruitlessness of Faithless, Showy Religion

Guest post by Jared Wilson.

From The Adventures of Tom Sawyer by Mark Twain (Bantam Classic Edition, 1981):

Tom joined the new order of Cadets of Temperance, being attracted by the showy character of their "regalia." He promised to abstain from smoking, chewing, and profanity as long as he remained a member. Now he found out a new thing — namely, that to promise not to do a thing is the surest way in the world to make a body want to go and do that very thing. Tom soon found himself tormented with a desire to drink and swear; the desire grew to be so intense that nothing but the hope of a chance to display himself in his red sash kept him from withdrawing from the order. (138)

A page later Twain through Tom gives us an approximate illustration of how the gospel's freedom from sin diminishes the attraction of sin.

He handed in his resignation at once . . . The funeral was a fine thing. The Cadets paraded in a style calculated to kill the late member with envy. Tom was a free boy again, however — there was something in that. He could drink and swear, now — but found to his surprise that he did not want to. The simple fact that he could took the desire away, and the charm of it. (139)

HT: Justin Taylor

Guest Post by Robert Sagers

If you've spent any amount of time scouring the Christian blogosphere, you've likely encountered the near ubiquitous line at the bottom of many a post: "HT: JT."

That's because Justin Taylor is so good—perhaps the best—at pointing us all to so many resources on the Internet, in print, and elsewhere.

While he's away, I thought the Between Two Worlds readers might enjoy learning a bit more about the man who serves us so faithfully, so well.

Below are some questions that Justin was kind to answer last year—questions about how and why he got into blogging, his work at Crossway (and his past work for John Piper), his current projects, and speaking "with a gospel-accent."

…

Robert Sagers: Justin, please tell the readers a little about yourself—where you're from, your family, and how you came to Christ?

Justin Taylor: I'm from Sioux City, Iowa. I grew up in a great family and first prayed the sinner's prayer when I was 4. And then again when I was 4 1/2. And about a thousand times thereafter!

My wife Lea and I met in elementary school (though she was a year ahead of me) and we went to the same United Methodist Church. I fell in love with her in sixth grade. She reciprocated at the end of college!

I don't know when exactly I became a true believer. As I mentioned, I was a church-going, sinners-prayer-praying kid, but became somewhat cold to the Lord, though was externally a goodie-two-shoes. At an FCA camp in Colorado, between my freshman and sophomore years, I began to understand the work of Christ and the sufficiency of his righteousness for the first time. Whether that was conversion or renewal, I'm not sure it matters. Everything changed after that.

RES: What were you doing before you began working at Crossway? How did the Lord direct you to move to begin working for a Christian publisher?

JT: Before my work at Crossway I was at Desiring God, working as the theological director and serving as John Piper's theological assistant/editor. Our six years at Bethlehem marked me in more ways than I can possibly recall.

I wrestled for years as to whether I should become a Professor (which would mean getting a PhD) or become a Pastor. I have some giftings for both, but neither was a perfect fit. When the opportunity came up to serve as the Managing Editor of the ESV Study Bible, it seemed like the Lord had designed a job fit perfectly for me. Crossway has been a wonderful vocational home for me.

RES: What is your role at Crossway? What is your role at your local church? What is your role with your family? How do you see each of those roles fitting together?

JT: I'm VP of editorial at Crossway. A big part of my work is acquisitions and working with our publishing team. I'm an elder at our church, with some teaching duties and occasional preaching. With my family, I'm a father and a husband—and of course I'm also a son and a brother.

In some ways I suppose the term "shepherding" could apply to each of these roles of work-church-family. In publishing I'm working with our team to help select, steer, shape, and shepherd edifying books through the publishing process. At church I'm trying to work with the other pastor-elders to lead, teach, and love God's people faithfully. And in my family I'm trying to guide and care for my wife and kids in a way that will show them grace, truth, and love.

RES: How, when, and why did you first get into blogging?

JT: In one sense I guess I've always had a blogger's instinct. After all, "show & tell" was my favorite subject in elementary school!

In the fall of 2004 I did a quick read of Hugh Hewitt's book entitled Blog. I think that book helped to nudge a lot of people to start blogging. (Joe Carter is another example.) I was already sharing links to news stories and books with a small group of friends and thought I could just continue doing this to a wider audience. My main principle, I suppose, was that I'd post something if I found it sufficiently interesting and thought others might think the same. I think I've matured a bit since then and "found my voice" (as they say). I still want to keep things interesting but also try to make sure it's edifying in some way.

RES: Many of your readers may want to know how it is that you blog so much. How do you find the time?

JT: I think it's a combo of things: (1) I really enjoy blogging, and when you enjoy something it's easier to find time to do it; (2) there are some things I don't do anymore (e.g., I hardly ever watch sports like I used to—cue the small violin…); (3) a lot of my blogging overlaps with stuff I'm already doing, have already read, etc. (e.g., it's pretty easy to blog about a Crossway book that I've known about for over a year); (4) I'm more of "pointing" blogger than I am a "producing blogger." For example, Tim Challies only posts once a day, but if I tried to produce as much original stuff as him or as thorough of book reviews I wouldn't be able to do it.

RES: People may be helped by hearing a bit about the discernment process you go through in deciding whether or not to post something on your blog.

JT: After a while things become largely intuitive and you have to stop and think about the explicit, unarticulated criteria. I don't really have a checklist or anything. But I try to make sure it's edifying on some level, and that it's something sufficiently interesting. I get asked to blog various books and such, and the thing that often holds me back is not that it's bad, but that I'm not that excited about it. I don't want to blog something merely because someone has asked me to do so.

Also, I tend to run controversial things past a couple of friends whose value and wisdom I trust. If I do go ahead with the post, I usually tweak something as a result of their feedback. And the fact is, I have quite a few blog posts that are drafted but never end up seeing the light of day.

RES: In what way(s) do you think God uses blogs to advance the purposes of the gospel of Jesus Christ? In what way(s) do you think Satan uses blogs to advance the purposes of the gospel of antichrist?

JT: The goal of the gospel of the kingdom is for God's people to become increasingly conformed to the image of Christ. The goal of Satan's counterfeit ministry is for people to be increasingly conformed to anything but Christ.

I think sometimes we put blogs in this unique category of communication. Yes, there are some special contours to the medium, but by and large they are simply one way in which we speak to one another—in exhortation, correction, critique, praise, humor, confession, etc. Insofar as they consciously seek to emulate and advance kingdom values, making much of Christ, they will be Christian. Insofar as they don't, they aren't.

RES: If you could change one thing about the blogosphere, what would it be?

JT: I once wrote in a blog post that we need "more arguments and less arguing." What I meant was that we need better reasoning and less rancor. I think I've seen an improvement—to some degree—in the comments section of my own blog.

I think many of us have a long way to go in letting the grace, beauty, and power of the gospel saturate our heart and mind to the extent that we simply speak with a gospel-accent.

RES: You don't just point to the writings of others; you're also an accomplished author and editor yourself. How did you get into writing and editing? Is there anything that you're working on currently?

JT: With regard to editing: I remember in college helping a friend prepare for a talk he was going to give to a large gathering of Christian students. And I realized—I'm not the one being asked to give these talks but somehow I can help a friend like this take a good talk and make it better.

Working with John Piper was an enormous privilege, especially to edit his materials, which are so rich. I sometimes joke, though, that being Piper's theological assistant is kind of like being the Maytag repair man!

As far as current projects: There are a few things in the works, but the big project, which will extend over a number of years, is a series of books I am co-editing with Steve Nichols called "Theologians on the Christian Life." These will be scholarly-informed but accessible introductions to how key theologians thought about what it means to live the Christian life.

RES: Is there anything else that you'd like to leave with the readers?

JT: I'd just encourage all of us in the "Christian blogosphere"—bloggers, commenters, etc.—to band together to think through what it might look like to put into practice this vision called for by David Powlison:

We should actively intend good, seeking to "give grace to those who hear." That takes thought about one's motives, tone, framing, balance of emphases. . . . Thoughtful work on that topic will break new ground, applying the call to "speak truth in love" into an instant-information context where all errors, blunders, sins, failings, and mere clumsiness are potentially available for public scorn. What does it mean to forebear each other in such a world? What does it mean to cover sins in mercy (not cover-up, but true covering in mercy), to allow others to find care and restoration in their own interpersonal context, rather than attempting to humiliate them before the whole world? What does it mean to express the sort of communal tenderness that Dietrich Bonhoeffer captures so well in Life Together—a communal life that includes reproof as a form of love?

But the leading edge of our argument is to place checks on the tendency we all have to snide, sneering, self-righteous, gossipy, malicious words. Any growth we can make in the direction of Ephesians 4:29 will make life much more joyous for all, and bring much glory to our God. And even criticisms I make become more hearable when I the critic am not posturing, but actually care about others. When I don't care, my bad attitude and superiority becomes my actual message. Love is patient, love is kind . . . and then love is candid.

(This interview iss cross-posted, slightly edited, from the Kingdom People blog, where I guest hosted last year.)

A Prayer about Greatness and "First-ness"

Whoever wants to become great among you must be your servant, and whoever wants to be first must be slave of all. For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many. Mark 10:43–45

Dear Jesus, surely the gospel is the most counterintuitive, paradigm-shattering, worldview-transforming force in history. Because of you, true greatness is now measured in terms of being a servant rather than owning the estate. Being first is no longer calculated by how many slaves we own but rather by how many people we serve.

Jesus, tattoo these words on our hearts with indelible ink; make them the most replayed song in the iPod of our soul; keep them before our eyes with neon-flashing brilliance: "The Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many." This one statement—this single affirmation contradicts our most basic instincts about everything, including salvation.

We don't want to be ransomed, as guilty rebels; we want to be coddled, as misunderstood victims. We want a second chance, not a second birth. We don't want a towel for washing feet, we want a scepter for ruling our world. Forgive us, Jesus. Free us. Change us.

What a most gracious Savior you are; gladly giving your life to redeem and cherish a pan-national Bride. What an incredibly powerful Lord you are; defeating the powers of darkness and actively making all things new. What a faithfully caring Shepherd you are; protecting, feeding and guiding us Home safely.

We bow before you in wonder, love, and praise. We rise to dance before you as a people astonished at such compassion and affection. We humble ourselves before you and purpose to follow you in the servant way.

In our marriages, too often we don't come to serve but to be served and to give our criticisms about many things. As parents, we often look to our children to make us proud, rather than loving them well. As leaders in your church, we tend to think of greatness as exercising power and authority, rather than praying for and nurturing your lambs. Forgive us, Jesus. Free us, Change us.

Continue to liberate us from self-centered upward mobility for downward covenant faithfulness. Help us to treasure what you treasure and let go of our fool's gold—only you have the right to determine the value and price tags for everything. Make us a people who actually prefer the hidden place of sacrificial service over the public place of being celebrated.

By the grace and power of the gospel, transform us, Jesus. We tremble to ask this, but we do; expose our pride, gentle our attitudes and soften our hearts. Make us glad to be your servants. So very Amen we pray, in your tender and majestic name.

Remember Your Leaders

Guest post by Dane Ortlund

"Remember your leaders, those who spoke to you the word of God." -Hebrews 13:7

Thanks, Robbie, for collecting below the links to these meaningful words of appreciation for John Stott.

I was moved to see this brief clip of how Stott would like to be remembered.

Misfocused Focus on "Gospel-Centeredness"

Guest post by Jared Wilson.

Mike Leake shares these words from Andrew Fuller circa 1786, noting his hope that this won't happen with the concept of "gospel-centrality":

It seems to be one of Satan's devices, in order to destroy the good tendency of any truth, to get its advocates to [make it trite] out of its senses, dwelling upon it in every sermon or conversation, to the exclusion of other things.  Thus the glorious doctrines of free and great grace have been served in the last age, and so have fallen sadly into disrepute.  If we employ all our time in talking about what men ought to be and to do, it is likely we shall forget to put it into practice, and then all is over with us.

It is a very real danger to be gospel-centrality-centered rather than gospel-centered, just as it's a very real danger to talk for miles about Jesus without following him an inch.

But for those of us who traffic in this "gospel-centered" stuff, we ought to keep a close watch on our life and doctrine, lest we revel in the reveling. And reveling in the reveling can easily turn into a promotion of gospel-centeredness that is less than gospel-centered. I remember the vivid realization, born of the Spirit's in-the-moment conviction, as I was concluding a sermon one Sunday morning that I was chastising my flock toward gospel-centrality. "Be gospel-centered!" I was essentially saying. And of course, as Luther says, It is the supreme art of the devil to turn the gospel into law. That's what I was doing, unwittingly. In the heat of the moment, in my passion for my congregation's obedience to the gospel, I had become a nag. "Be gospel-centered!" is a good command, in the right spirit and in the right measure. But this command piled on and muddled with grace evinces forgetfulness of how the Spirit produces obedience to it.

I shifted gears in the middle of my cajoling. And instead of holding up "gospel-centrality" as some kind of hoop to jump through, I instead began to hold up Christ as preeminent and supreme and his gospel as astonishing, trusting the Spirit to open up eyes and ears so he might be beheld as beautiful and found worthy of orbiting around.

Related: Bill Streger, pastor of Kaleo Church in Houston, Texas, preached an excellent message on this subject at last year's LEAD Conference in Auburn, Maine. He titled it Gospel Hype.

Greidanus: Six Ways to See Christ in the Old Testament

Guest Post by Dane Ortlund

Today there is a blessed proliferation of books and articles, blogs and conferences exploring what Jesus meant when he said that "everything written about me in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms must be fulfilled" (Luke 24:44). Not so a generation ago, when Edmund Clowney and Sidney Greidanus, with one or two others, were more isolated voices advocating a Christ-as-the-key hermeneutic.

Greidanus' main book is Preaching Christ from the Old Testament: A Contemporary Hermeneutical Method (Eerdmans, 1999), the rich fruit of many years' teaching at Calvin Seminary. It is a bit quote-heavy, and at times the structure is not easy to follow. But the book is a real gift to the church. It is well worth a slow, careful read for those who want not only to preach but also to read the Bible as Christ encourages us in Luke 24.

The heart of the book, and its most significant contribution, is six ways in which the New Testament writers see Christ in the Old Testament (pp. 203-77). These are overlapping and interconnected, but it is helpful nevertheless to see how Greidanus treats each distinctly. They are:

1. The Way of Redemptive-Historical Progression. This interpretive strategy connects Christ to events of redemptive significance in the OT which now find their true home in Jesus–Adam's garden testing, exodus, return from exile, and so on. Luke is perhaps the NT writer who emphasizes this the most, though it is present throughout the NT. Greidanus says this first way is "the bedrock which supports all the other ways that lead to Christ in the New Testament" (234).

2. The Way of Promise-Fulfillment. The promises of the OT, according to the NT writers, all find satisfying fulfillment only in Jesus. This includes, but is far broader than, mere one-to-one identity correspondence (Micah 5:2 speaks of a coming ruler to be born in Bethlehem; Jesus fulfills the promise of Micah 5:2). When Matt. 13:35 quotes Ps. 78:2, for example, there is seemingly no "promise" in this OT text, yet Matthew tells us that Jesus is "fulfilling" it.

3. The Way of Typology. God sovereignly acts in observable, historically-embedded patterns. For this reason the NT writers see Jesus as the final and ultimate instance (antitype) of earlier repeated patterns (types). For example, the sacrificial system anticipates a final sacrifice (cf. 1 Cor. 5:7). Hebrews is perhaps the most typologically-loaded book in the NT.

4. The Way of Analogy. By this Greidanus means the application of OT categories to describe NT realities. The main example here is the way the NT speaks of the church using language that applies to Israel in the OT. (Dispensational readers will understand the use of such language differently from Greidanus.) For example, OT Israel is called the bride of Yahweh (Jer. 2:2; Hos. 2:14-20), and this language is picked up by the NT to speak of Christ's relationship to the church.

5. The Way of Longitudinal Themes.  By "longitudinal themes" Greidanus means motifs that develop as God gradually reveals more of himself and his ways over the course of history. Big ones include covenant, God's kingdom, law, mediation, or the presence of God. This is the strategy most closely bound up with the discipline of biblical theology.

6. The Way of Contrast. This final strategy for seeing Christ in the OT, unlike the previous five, focuses on how Christ is different from what has come before. Greidanus suggests as an example the way God called Israel out in the OT as a single nation, destroying other nations, whereas Jesus sends out his disciples to all the nations, to win them (Matt. 28:19-20).

Greidanus's good work is not the final word on how a Christ-illuminated hermeneutic works, but for those wishing to grow in their understanding of how the OT finds its climactic Yes in Jesus (2 Cor. 1:20) Greidanus' sixfold framework is a good place to start.

See also Collin Hansen's good interview with Greidanus this past February.