Andy Naselli

Thoughts on Theology

Piper: “Turn off the television”

by

In “Preaching as Worship: Meditations on Expository Exultation” (Trinity Journal 16 [1995]: 29–45), Piper ends with six pointed applications, including this one (p. 44):

2. Turn off the television.

It is not necessary for relevance. And it is a deadly place to rest the mind. Its pervasive banality, sexual innuendo, and God-ignoring values have no ennobling effects on the preacher’s soul. It kills the spirit. It drives God away. It quenches prayer. It blanks out the Bible. It cheapens the soul. It destroys spiritual power. It defiles almost everything. I have taught and preached for twenty years now and never owned a television. It is unnecessary for most of you, and it is spiritually deadly for all of you.

IMAK SmartGlove

by

I use a laptop for the majority of my theological research, and I’ve intermittently encountered symptoms of carpal tunnel. I’ve made two useful additions that minimized this at my main study: an external keyboard and a second monitor. [Update in May 2014: How I Set Up My Desks: One for Sitting, One for Walking.] I recently made a third addition that has virtually eliminated the problem: the IMAK SmartGlove. (I wear size medium. It’s also available in sizes large and small.)

I became aware of this product in May at The Gospel Coalition’s pastor’s colloquium. The man hired to transcribe the proceedings used his laptop and an IMAK SmartGlove on each hand. He highly recommended them to me when I asked about them. I now regularly and gratefully use them myself and am happy to commend them.

Jenni Naselli Reviews “The Gospel of Ruth”

by

The fall 2008 issue of the Journal for Biblical Manhood and Womanhood is now available, and five of the articles or reviews are available online now. One of the reviews available now is written by my wife:

Jennifer J. Naselli, “Is This Good News for Women? A Review of Carolyn Custis James, The Gospel of Ruth.” Journal for Biblical Manhood and Womanhood 13.2 (2008): 79–81.

She wrote this review in June during a small window of time right after she completed four years of full-time teaching and then gave birth to our first child. No doubt I am biased, but I must say that the (controversial) review is well done!

“If God displays his mercy in some and his justice in others, there is goodness in his justice and justice in his mercy”

by

Stephen Westerholm movingly summarizes Augustine’s view on election and reprobation (Perspectives Old and New on Paul: The ‘Lutheran’ Paul and His Critics [Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2004], 19):

Augustine can offer no explanation why God chooses some and not others. Any explanation based on a difference in the human beings concerned would mean there was something in some human beings that God recognized and rewarded; their salvation would no longer depend on his grace alone. [n. 26: Note, however, Augustine’s earlier thinking in De div. quaest. 68.4.] If, on the other hand, the decision rests exclusively on God’s sovereign will, then it must remain impenetrable for human minds.

But Augustine does insist on the justice of what God does. Blame for human sin rests on humans alone—God has not compelled them to sin [n. 27: Texts that speak of God “hardening” sinners can only mean that God leaves them in their sinful ways; Augustine will not allow that God plays any active role in promoting sin (Ad Simpl. 1.2.15–16).]—and all merit condemnation. The condemned are justly condemned (Ench. 24.94); and since justice itself is a good thing, there is even goodness in their condemnation. Furthermore, that some are condemned reminds the forgiven of what their sins merit and of the magnitude of God’s mercy (De don. pers. 12.28). As one to whom many owe money can decide to cancel the debts of some and exact payment from others, and it would be presumptuous of the debtors either to think the decision should be theirs or to fault their creditor for exercising a creditor’s prerogative, so God is free to show mercy as he pleases without doing injustice to any (Ad Simpl. 1.2.16). If God displays his mercy in some and his justice in others, there is goodness in his justice and justice in his mercy (De don. pers. 12.28).

The New Media Frontier

by

Yesterday I read a fascinating book set to release on September 30:

John Mark Reynolds and Roger Overton, eds. The New Media Frontier: Blogging, Vlogging, and Podcasting for Christ. With a foreword by Hugh Hewitt. Wheaton: Crossway, 2008. 254 pp.

More info (the content online, endosements, etc.) are likely forthcoming on the Crossway site. In the mean time, here are a few highlights: [Read more…] about The New Media Frontier

Themelios 33.2

by

The latest issue of Themelios was just published online today, and there is now a Themelios RSS feed. This issue is available in HTML and as a 126-page PDF. Here’s the TOC:

I contributed three of the thirty book reviews:

  1. Review of C. J. Mahaney, ed., Worldliness: Resisting the Seduction of a Fallen World. Themelios 33:2 (2008): 116–18.
  2. Review of J. Julius Scott Jr., New Testament Theology: A New Study of the Thematic Structure of the New Testament. Themelios 33:2 (2008): 85–87.
  3. Review of Carl R. Trueman, Minority Report: Unpopular Thoughts on Everything from Ancient Christianity to Zen-Calvinism. Themelios 33:2 (2008): 91–92.

Kevin Bauder on Biblical Separation

by

Kevin Bauder recently presented a ten-part seminar on “Biblical Separation” at International Bible College in Tempe, Arizona.

    1. Images of Christian Unity: The Flock and the New Humanity (9.16.2008)
    2. Images of Christian Unity: Body (9.16.2008)
    3. The Basis of Christian Unity and Jesus’ High-Priestly Prayer — Part 1 (9.16.2008)
    4. The Basis of Christian Unity and Jesus’ High-Priestly Prayer — Part 2 (9.16.2008)
    5. The Nature of the Gospel (9.17.2008)
    6. The Notion of Fundamentals and Levels of Doctrine (9.17.2008)
    7. Departures from the Gospel and Basic Separation (9.17.2008)
    8. The Whole Counsel and Levels of Christian Fellowship (9.18.2008)
    9. Discipline Offenses in the Church and Beyond (9.18.2008)
    10. The Problem of Indifferentism (9.18.2008)

      I have not listened to the MP3s yet (they are downloading as I type), but I would be surprised if this seminar is not a thoughtful, reasonable, respectful, logical argument for separation as held by historic fundamentalists. Kevin Bauder is a sharp thinker and gifted theologian. If you don’t have much exposure to fundamentalism or if the exposure you’ve had to it has been disappointing, you may be pleasantly surprised with Bauder. (Some of his writings are available here.)