Taking God at His Word

Andy Naselli —  April 24, 2014 — 1 Comment

takingSeveral years ago I attempted to write a short, accessible chapter on the doctrine of Scripture as part of a book that Kevin DeYoung edited. Now Kevin’s most recent work is a short, accessible book on the doctrine of Scripture:

Kevin DeYoung. Taking God at His Word: Why the Bible Is Knowable, Necessary, and Enough, and What That Means for You and Me. Wheaton: Crossway, 2014.

It’s what we’ve come to expect from Kevin: sound, edifying, accessible, and witty. This is the best overall popular-level book on Scripture that I’m aware of.

  1. This 20-page PDF sample includes the front matter and chapter 1.
  2. Two DeYoung interviews: (a) TGC and (b) Books at a Glance
  3. Kevin preached on this topic at T4G a few weeks ago: “Never Spoke a Man Like This Before: Inerrancy, Evangelism and Christ’s Unbreakable Bible.” My school’s president called this sermon “powerful and massively important.”

Themelios 39.1

Andy Naselli —  April 22, 2014 — 3 Comments

ThemTGC published the latest issue of Themelios this morning.

I reviewed the Baker Academic Biblical Studies Bundle from Logos Bible Software.

Two highlights:

  1. the back-and-forth between Tom Schreiner and Gerald Bray on biblical and systematic theology
  2. the understated review article by Bob Yarbrough on a recent book that advocates historical criticism

boundsWayne Grudem, “Why, When, and for What Should We Draw New Boundaries?” in Beyond the Bounds: Open Theism and the Undermining of Biblical Christianity [free PDF] (ed. John Piper, Justin Taylor, and Paul Kjoss Helseth; Wheaton: Crossway, 2003), 369 (numbering added):

Some wrong questions to ask

It is important to add that there are some questions that should not be part of our consideration in deciding which doctrinal matters to exclude with new boundaries. These are questions such as the following:

    1. Are the advocates my friends?
    2. Are they nice people?
    3. Will we lose money or members if we exclude them?
    4. Will the academic community criticize us as being too narrow-minded?
    5. Will someone take us to court over this?

Such questions are all grounded in a wrongful fear of man, not in a fear of God and trust in God.

A Theology of Matthew

Andy Naselli —  April 15, 2014 — 1 Comment

QuarlesThis book released in November 2013:

Charles L. Quarles. A Theology of Matthew: Jesus Revealed as Deliverer, King, and Incarnate Creator. Explorations in Biblical Theology. Phillipsburg, NJ: Presbyterian & Reformed, 2013. 15-page sample PDF. Continue Reading…

tocC. Ben Mitchell, Ethics and Moral Reasoning: A Student’s Guide (Reclaiming the Christian Intellectual Tradition; Wheaton: Crossway, 2013), 95–96:

Below is a suggested procedure for finding ethical guidance from the Bible: Continue Reading…

Two quotes from John Piper:

1. “How Shall People Be Saved? Part 1,” a sermon preached to Bethlehem Baptist Church on June 1, 2003 (transcript of the audio from 12:22 to 12:51; not in the manuscript):

There are a lot of women—probably some in this church—who spend a lot of time on their hair and a lot of time on their eyes and a lot of time on their lips and a lot of time on their clothes and their feet and don’t spend any time on becoming beautiful. . . . This [i.e., Rom 10:13–21] is a text about what makes a person beautiful.

2. “Her Body, Her Self, and Her God,” Taste & See, October 28, 1997:

Expressing God, not self, is what a godly woman wants to do. Excessive preoccupation with figure and hair and complexion is a sign that self, not God, has moved to the center. With God at the center—like the “sun,” satisfying a woman’s longings for beauty and greatness and truth and love—all the “planets” of food and dress and exercise and cosmetics and posture and countenance will stay in their proper orbit.

One of my prayers: “Lord, may my three daughters grow up to be as beautiful as their mother.”


  1. John Piper, “Feminine Beauty in God’s Eyes,” Ask Pastor John, Episode 268, January 31, 2014.
  2. True Beauty

How to Grade Papers

Andy Naselli —  April 3, 2014 — 3 Comments

Mark Boda prepared this rubric for grading written assignments:


Grading papers is obviously more subjective than grading multiple choice or true/false, and Boda’s criteria help make the process a little more objective.

tocThe table is from p. 87 of this book:

Stanley E. Porter, ed. Those Who Can, Teach: Teaching as Christian Vocation. McMaster General Series 3. Eugene, OR: Pickwick, 2013.

Just because a person earned a PhD doesn’t mean that they can teach well. (Many of us have painful personal anecdotes from our experiences as students!) Continue Reading…