Andy Naselli

Thoughts on Theology

Systematic Theology

Did Jesus Believe in the Bible’s Inerrancy?

by

WTS Books just stocked this book:

John Wenham. Christ and the Bible. 3rd ed. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1994. Repr., Wipf and Stock, 2009.

Here’s what Mark Dever says about it in the last paragraph of his essay “Inerrancy of the Bible: An Annotated Bibliography“:

I’ve saved the best for last. If I could just recommend one book on the inerrancy of the Bible it would undoubtedly be this one—John Wenham, Christ and the Bible (Tyndale Press, 1972 [UK]; IVP, 1973 [US]). Wenham’s book has been through three editions and makes the simple point that our trust in Scripture is to be a part of our following Christ, because that is the way that He treated Scripture—as true, and therefore authoritative. (Robert Lightner, a professor of Systematic Theology at Dallas Seminary published a similar book a few years later, A Biblical Case for Total Inerrancy: How Jesus Viewed the Old Testament [Kregel, 1978].) Wenham had first put these ideas in print with a little Tyndale pamphlet in 1953 called Our Lord’s View of the Old Testament. In Christ and the Bible, Wenham, who taught Greek for many years at Oxford, an Anglican evangelical, has done us all a great service in providing us with a book which understands that we do not come by our adherence to Scripture fundamentally from the inductive resolutions of discrepancies, but from the teaching of the Lord Jesus. Only because of the Living Word may we finally know to trust the Written Word. May God use these resources of those who’ve gone before us to equip and encourage us in so trusting.

Dever concludes by giving Wenham his top recommendation:

To get up to speed on this issue, and to help you with your ministry, consider the following recommendations.

MUST READ: Wenham

SHOULD READ: Warfield, Packer’s “Fundamentalism” and the Word of God, Lindsell [The Battle for the Bible and The Bible in the Balance], any one of the edited volumes of your choosing!

Defending the Bible Is Like Defending a Lion

by

authorityDavid Martyn Lloyd-Jones, Authority (Chicago: IVP, 1958), 41:

The authority of the Scriptures is not a matter to be defended, so much as to be asserted. I address this remark particularly to Conservative Evangelicals. I am reminded of what the great Charles Haddon Spurgeon once said in this connection: “There is no need for you to defend a lion when he is being attacked. All you need to do is to open the gate and let him out.” We need to remind ourselves frequently that it is the preaching and exposition of the Bible that really establish its truth and authority.

Antinomy

by

Is antinomy a good word to describe the relationship between God’s sovereignty and human responsibility? It depends what you mean by antinomy.

D. A. Carson, How Long, O Lord? Reflections on Suffering and Evil (2d ed.; Grand Rapids: Baker, 2006), 201n13:

Owing to the popularity of the little book by J. I. Packer, Evangelism and the Sovereignty of God, it has become common to designate the two truths, that God is utterly sovereign and human beings are morally responsible, as an antinomy. [Cf. my summary and outline of Packer’s Evangelism and the Sovereignty of God.] But there is some confusion over the term, and a comment may help.

According to the Oxford English Dictionary, an antinomy is: (1) “a contradiction in a law, or between two equally binding laws”; (2) “a contradictory law, statute, or principle; an authoritative contradiction”—and here an illustration is drawn from Jeremy Taylor, who in 1649 wrote that certain signs of grace “are direct antinomies to the lusts of the flesh”; (3) “a contradiction between conclusions which seem equally logical, reasonable, or necessary; a paradox; intellectual contrariness”—and this last meaning OED attributes to Kant.

Packer means none of these things. [Read more…] about Antinomy

John Piper Small Group Series

by

Three more DVD series and corresponding study guides are now available in the John Piper Small Group Series.

1. TULIP: The Pursuit of God’s Glory in Salvation (DVD | Study Guide)

2. Why We Believe the Bible (DVD | Study Guide)

3. What’s the Difference? Manhood and Womanhood Defined According to the Bible (DVD | Study Guide)

I recently watched almost all of TULIP and most of Why We Believe the Bible with my parents and siblings, and we thoroughly enjoyed them. The professionally filmed DVDs are superb. Piper teaches from an overhead using transparencies and engagingly interacts with the text of Scripture. Very effective. Great resources.

Are Millennial Views Essential?

by

knowing_the_truthKevin Boling, host of “Knowing the Truth” radio program, contacted me a couple of hours before his hour-long radio program this afternoon and asked me to be his guest to discuss the issue I highlighted in my recent blog post on Schreiner’s and Dever’s positions on millennial views.

Kevin, a gracious host, entitled the program “Are Millennial Views Essential?” The interview is available from SermonAudio as a 55-minute MP3.

Update: See “Mark Dever on the Function of Statements of Faith.”

Schreiner: From Amil to Premil

by

Tom Schreiner, professor of NT interpretation and associate dean at Southern Seminary and preaching pastor for Clifton Baptist Church, just finished preaching through the book of Revelation.

  • In “The Millennium,” his sermon on Revelation 20:1–15 (preached on June 14, 2009), Schreiner begins by explaining that he recently changed his millennial position from amillennial to premillennial, largely as a result of studying that text (HT: Ben Wright).
  • Jason Button transcribes some of Schreiner’s wise introductory remarks here.

Updates:

  1. See A. J. Gibson’s “It’s a Sin to Sever Cooperation with Other Believers over Eschatological Issues,” which comments on the sermon on Revelation 20 that Mark Dever preached yesterday (July 12).
  2. See Ben Wright’s “‘I’m saying you are in sin if you lead your congregation to have a statement of faith that requires a particular Millennial view.’” (Ben is a member of Capitol Hill Baptist Church.)
  3. Justin Taylor weighs in.
  4. Kevin Bolin interviewed me on this issue on July 14: “Are Millennial Views Essential?“
  5. See Ben Wright’s “Amillennialists and Premillennialists: What Do We Agree On?“
  6. See “Mark Dever on the Function of Statements of Faith.”

Mostly Dead vs. All Dead

by

This video clip from The Princess Bride is my favorite light-hearted illustration of the Arminian view of human depravity (an issue integrally related to prevenient grace):

http://vimeo.com/28442042

This is the notable part of the exchange:

“Well it just so happens that your friend here is only mostly dead. There’s a big difference between mostly dead and all dead. . . . Now mostly dead is slightly alive. All dead—well, with all dead, there’s only usually one thing that you can do.”

“What’s that?”

“Go through his clothes and look for loose change.”

Another good illustration of the effectual call and regeneration:

Jesus called in a loud voice, “Lazarus, come out!”

The dead man came out . . . . (John 11:43–44)

Recommended resources:

  1. William W. Combs, “Does the Bible Teach Prevenient Grace?” Detroit Baptist Seminary Journal 10 (2005): 3–18.
  2. John Piper, “Total Depravity,” in “TULIP” (a nine-part seminar available in audio and video), 2008.
  3. Thomas R. Schreiner, “Does Scripture Teach Prevenient Grace in the Wesleyan Sense?” in Still Sovereign: Contemporary Perspectives on Election, Foreknowledge, and Grace (ed. Thomas R. Schreiner and Bruce A. Ware; Grand Rapids: Baker, 2000), 229–46.