Andy Naselli

Thoughts on Theology

Carson on the implications of 1 Cor 2:15

by

ὁ δὲ πνευματικὸς ἀνακρίνει [τὰ] πάντα, αὐτὸς δὲ ὑπ᾽ οὐδενὸς ἀνακρίνεται.

But the one who is spiritual discerns all things, yet he himself is understood by no one.

-1 Cor 2:15 NET

Unfortunately, this verse has been ripped out of its context to justify the most appalling arrogance. Some people think of themselves as especially spiritual and discerning Christians and judge that this verse authorizes them, the elite of the elect, to make well-nigh infallible judgments across a broad range of matters. Moreover, they insist, they are so spiritual that others do not have the right to judge them. After all, does not the apostle say that the “spiritual man” is “not subject to any man’s judgment”?This simply will not do. In the context, the “spiritual man” is the person with the Holy Spirit, over against “the man without the Spirit.” The “spiritual man,” in short, is the Christian, not a member of an elite coterie of Christians. . . . “[A]ll things” covers the range of moral and spiritual experience from the rawest paganism to what it means to be a Christian. The Christian has lived in both worlds and can speak of both from experience, from observation, and from a genuine grasp of the Word of God. But the person without the Spirit cannot properly assess what goes on in the spiritual realm–any more than a person who is color-blind is qualified to make nice distinctions in the dramatic hues of a sunset or a rainbow, any more than a person born deaf is qualified to comment on the harmony of Beethoven’s Fifth or on the voice and technique of Pavarotti.

It is important to think through the implications of this verse. Christians in contemporary Western society are constantly being told that they are ignorant, narrow, and incapable of understanding the real world. Paul says the opposite: Christians are as capable as other sinners of understanding the complex and interwoven nature of sin, of grasping the ways in which “wannabe” autonomous human beings reason, and of explaining what the world looks like to modern pagans in our post-modern world. But because they have received the Spirit of God, they are also capable of saying something wise and true about the way the world appears to God. . . . And all this makes them much more comprehensive in outlook than their pagan peers. The really narrow perspective is maintained by the sinner who has never tasted grace, by the fallen human being who has never enjoyed transforming insight, afforded by the Holy Spirit, into God’s wise purposes.

From this perspective, it is idiotic–that is not too strong a word–to extol the world’s perspective and secretly lust after its limited vision. That is what the Corinthians were apparently doing; that is what we are in danger of doing every time we adopt our world’s shibboleths, dote on its heroes, admire its transient stars, seek its admiration, and play to its applause.

–D. A. Carson, “The Cross and the Holy Spirit: 1 Corinthians 2:6-16,” in The Cross and Christian Ministry: Leadership Lessons from 1 Corinthians (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1993), 58-60.

Carson at College Church in Wheaton

by

D. A. Carson recently preached at College Church in Wheaton, Illinois, three Sundays in row: May 20, May 27, and June 3.

  1. May 20: “How to Think About Pastors” (1 Timothy 3:1-7)
  2. May 27: “How to Think About Money” (1 Timothy 6:3-19). In this sermon Carson highly recommends Craig Blomberg‘s Neither Poverty Nor Riches: A Biblical Theology of Possessions.
  3. June 3: “How to Think About the Last Days” (2 Timothy 3:1-17)

College Church is still looking for a pastor. R. Kent Hughes “retired from his pulpit ministry at College Church and was given the title Senior Pastor Emeritus in December 2006.“

D. A. Carson on “Hidden” Elements in Current Discussions over Science and Origins

by

The Spring 2007 edition of The Southern Baptist Journal of Theology just came out (SBTS press release). The editorial and forum are available as PDFs.

D. A. Carson leads the forum by answering this question:

In any complex debate, it is not long before there are “hidden” elements in the discussion, i.e., elements that are gumming up the integrity of debate because one side or the other fails to recognize their existence and significance. What “hidden” elements are there in current discussions over science and origins? (p. 78)

Carson’s 7.5-column answer (pp. 78-81) includes three major points:

“(1) Considerable confusion exists over what a biblically faithful understanding of the relationship between God and the created order ought to be. Consider three possibilities.”

  • “(a) In an open universe (not to be confused with “open theism”), God interacts openly with the created order.”
  • “(b) The direct opposite of the first option is the closed universe. By this I mean that everything that happens in the universe is caused by other things in the universe. There is no outsider, and certainly no God who reaches in and controls things. Cause and effect take place within the closed order of creation.”
  • “(c) An alternative to both is the ordered and controlled universe. Here everything that happens takes place within God’s control: not a bird falls from the heavens, Jesus reminds us, apart from God’s sanction.”
  • “My point, in any case, is simple: all sides often bring certain assumptions about this relationship to the table, and rule certain arguments out of order simply because they cannot see beyond their assumptions.”

“(2) Two views of what science is are battling to prevail in the public square.”

  • “Although the two overlap, the first is more narrowly methodological than the second. The first asserts that science is tasked with understanding as much as possible of the physical order, using the time-tested tools of careful observation, measurement, controlled experiments that can be replicated, deploying testable hypotheses that win consensus or are modified or overturned by subsequent advances, and so forth.”
  • “The second view of what science is adopts all the methodological commitments of the first, but adds a philosophical commitment: science in this second view steadfastly refuses to allow into the discussion, at any level, any appeal whatsoever to anything supernatural.”
  • “But my point is at the moment a simpler one: Very often conflicting definitions of ‘science’ lurk behind the intensity of our debates.”

“(3) Hermeneutical discussions regarding the opening chapters of Genesis often hide another set of assumptions. . . . [M]y point is the simpler one: on all sides of this discussion, very often hidden elements gum up the quality of the discussion.”

Read the whole article.

Osborne on Preaching Figures of Speech

by

Grant R. Osborne ends his section “Figures of Speech” with some concluding advice for preachers (The Hermeneutical Spiral: A Comprehensive Introduction to Biblical Interpretation [2d ed.; Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 2006], 130, emphasis added):

Figures of speech are especially rich sources of imagery. While the discussion primarily has centered on the hermeneutical aspects, I want to note also their value for the sermon. It is my contention that some of the best illustrations come not just from cute stories or clever repartee but from the text itself and specifically from the background behind figurative language. Ricoeur’s view of the world-referential value of metaphor is helpful in reminding us that our task is to immerse the audience not merely in entertaining anecdotes but in the Word itself. We are to help our congregation to live anew the message God has revealed in the text and to feel its power to change their situation as well. The startling reverberations of meaning inherent in the Bible’s figurative language is the best place to start, for it is alive with powerful, colorful ideas. In recapturing the vitality and forceful presentation of the language, we will help our listeners to place themselves in the shoes of the original hearers and both to relive and to apply anew that eternal message. Every figure of speech is an illustration waiting to be unlocked. All we have to do is contextualize the metaphor for our day, and it will be an exciting illustration.

Dignified Translations

by

Update: See an updated version of this post here.

Yesterday Jenni and I went on a long walk and listened to Robert Stein‘s first three lectures for his course on hermeneutics. He told some very funny stories about various Bible translations, and two rather shocking ones were news to me. These two translations occur below, each at the end of its list, and they illustrate the importance of dignified translations.

1 Samuel 20:30a

  • NASB (cf. KJV, RSV, NRSV, ESV, NIV) Then Saul’s anger burned against Jonathan and he said to him, “You son of a perverse, rebellious woman!“
  • NET Saul became angry with Jonathan and said to him, “You stupid traitor!“
  • Message Saul exploded in anger at Jonathan: “You son of a slut!“
  • NLT Saul boiled with rage at Jonathan. “You stupid son of a whore!” he swore at him.
  • The original Living Bible Saul boiled with rage. “You son of a bitch!” he yelled at him.

Romans 3:3-4a

  • KJV For what if some did not believe? shall their unbelief make the faith of God without effect? God forbid:
  • NASB What then? If some did not believe, their unbelief will not nullify the faithfulness of God, will it? May it never be!
  • ESV (cf. RSV, NRSV) What if some were unfaithful? Does their faithlessness nullify the faithfulness of God? By no means!
  • NET (cf. HCSB) What then? If some did not believe, does their unbelief nullify the faithfulness of God? Absolutely not!
  • NIV What if some did not have faith? Will their lack of faith nullify God’s faithfulness? Not at all!
  • Message So, what if, in the course of doing that, some of those Jews abandoned their post? God didn’t abandon them. Do you think their faithlessness cancels out his faithfulness? Not on your life!
  • NLT True, some of them were unfaithful; but just because they were unfaithful, does that mean God will be unfaithful? Of course not!
  • Cotton Patch Version All right, so some of them are hypocrites; does their hypocrisy nullify God’s sincerity? Hell no. [fn.: “Just about the proper strength for the Greek phrase.”]

Update on 3/31/2017: In my latest attempt to explain how to interpret and apply the Bible, I include a chapter on Bible translation (pp. 50–81).

Willing and Doing in Rom 7:18 and Phil 2:13

by

This morning I was reading Romans 7, and when I read verse 18b, I immediately connected the two infinitives (θέλειν and κατεργάζεσθαι) with the two infinitives in Philippians 2:13 (θέλειν and ἐνεργεῖν). I had not made this connection before, so I quickly double-checked about ten prominent commentaries on Romans and didn’t see the connection made there either (though I’m sure many others have already thought of this). It appears to be a significant connection, regardless of your view of the “I” in Rom 7:7-25. See what you think.

Romans 7:18b

  • τὸ γὰρ θέλειν παράκειταί μοι, τὸ δὲ κατεργάζεσθαι τὸ καλὸν οὔ
  • NASB for the willing is present in me, but the doing of the good is not.
  • KJV for to will is present with me; but how to perform that which is good I find not.
  • ESV For I have the desire to do what is right, but not the ability to carry it out.
  • HCSB For the desire to do what is good is with me, but there is no ability to do it.
  • RSV, NRSV I can will what is right, but I cannot do it.
  • NIV For I have the desire to do what is good, but I cannot carry it out.
  • NET For I want to do the good, but I cannot do it.
  • NLT I want to do what is right, but I can’t.
  • Message I can will it, but I can’t do it.

Philippians 2:13

  • θεὸς γάρ ἐστιν ὁ ἐνεργῶν ἐν ὑμῖν καὶ τὸ θέλειν καὶ τὸ ἐνεργεῖν ὑπὲρ τῆς εὐδοκίας.
  • NASB for it is God who is at work in you, both to will and to work for His good pleasure.
  • KJV For it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure.
  • ESV for it is God who works in you, both to will and to work for his good pleasure.
  • HCSB For it is God who is working in you, enabling you both to will and to act for His good purpose.
  • NRSV for it is God who is at work in you, enabling you both to will and to work for his good pleasure.
  • NIV for it is God who works in you to will and to act according to his good purpose.
  • NET for the one bringing forth in you both the desire and the effort–for the sake of his good pleasure–is God.
  • NLT For God is working in you, giving you the desire and the power to do what pleases him.
  • Message That energy is God’s energy, an energy deep within you, God himself willing and working at what will give him the most pleasure.

Selah.

Piper on Romans 8:18-25

by

I’ve heard dozens of John Piper‘s sermons on MP3, but yesterday at the The Gospel Coalition conference, I had the privilege of hearing Piper preach in person for the first time.

  • It was the most moving sermon I’ve ever heard Piper preach. It compelled me to worship my sovereign God, long to be with Him, and hate what He hates.
  • The Gospel Coalition’s site will have audio and video from the conference available for free in about three weeks, but Desiring God has already posted the manuscript and MP3 of Piper’s sermon entitled “The Triumph of God in the New Heavens and the New Earth,” an exposition of Romans 8:18-25.
  • The MP3 does not include D. A. Carson‘s introduction in which he gave an anecdote about D. Martyn Lloyd Jones‘ powerful preaching and then described John Piper as the modern-day Lloyd Jones.