Andy Naselli

Thoughts on Theology

D. A. Carson

“Know Your Roots” Video: Kantzer, Henry, Carson

by

“Know Your Roots: Evangelicalism Yesterday, Today, and Tomorrow” (1991) is a video that was professionally recorded on the campus of Trinity Evangelical Divinity School. It consists of four parts that are about thirty minutes each:

  • Video 1: Carl F. H. Henry, introduced by John Woodbridge, lectures on evangelicalism.
  • Video 2: Kenneth S. Kantzer, introduced by John Woodbridge, lectures on evangelicalism.
  • Video 3: D. A. Carson interviews Kantzer and Henry on evangelicalism (part 1).
  • Video 4: D. A. Carson interviews Kantzer and Henry on evangelicalism (part 2).

Many thanks to The Carl F. H. Henry Center for Theological Understanding for making this 120-minute video available digitally!

Aside: I wish this would have been available earlier! I wanted to watch these videos last year, but they were available only in VHS format. And since Jenni and I live in the twenty-first century, we don’t own a VHS player. So I checked out the VHS videos from the TEDS library during Christmas break and brought them with us on our visit to Greenville where family members have VHS. It was worth it—not least to compare and contrast how Drs. Carson and Woodbridge look and sound today!

D. A. Carson recounts one of the video’s highlights in Basics for Believers: An Exposition of Philippians (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1996), p. 58 (19:23–21:21 in video 4):

Several years ago I was asked to interview Dr. Carl F. H. Henry and Dr. Kenneth S. Kantzer for a videotaping. These two American theologians have been at the heart of much of the evangelical renaissance in the Western world, especially, but not exclusively, in America. Each was about eighty years of age at the time of the videotaping. One [i.e., Henry] has written many books; the other [i.e., Kantzer] brought to birth and nurtured one of the most influential seminaries in the Western world. They both have been connected with Billy Graham, the Lausanne movement, the assorted congresses on evangelism, the influential magazine Christianity Today, and much more. The influence of these Christian leaders extends to the countless numbers of younger pastors and scholars whom they have helped to shape not only by their publications and public teaching but by the personal encouragement at which both have excelled. Both men gave lectures for the video cameras before several hundred theological students, and then I interviewed them. Toward the end of that discussion, I asked them a question more or less in these terms: “You two men have been extraordinarily influential for almost half a century. Without wanting to indulge in cheap flattery, I must say that what is attractive about your ministries is that you have retained integrity. Both of you are strong, yet neither of you is egotistical. You have not succumbed to eccentricity in doctrine, nor to individualistic empire-building. In God’s good grace, what has been instrumental in preserving you in these areas?”

Both spluttered in deep embarrassment. And then one of them [i.e., Henry] ventured, with a kind of gentle outrage, “How on earth can anyone be arrogant when standing beside the cross?”

That was a great moment, not least because it was so spontaneous. These men had retained their integrity precisely because they knew their attitude should be the same as that of Jesus Christ (Phil. 2:5). They knew that they had been called not only to believe in Christ but also to suffer for him. If their Master had viewed equality with God not as something to be exploited for personal advantage but as the basis for the humiliating path to the cross, how could they view influential posts of Christian leadership as something they should exploit for personal advantage?

Are you passionate about the gospel?

by

Chris Anderson‘s “Lost Lessons and Preserved Passions” is exactly right. Since the gospel of Jesus the Messiah is central, it must be central in our passions.

Carson wrote a communion hymn entitled “A Shocking Thing” that includes these convicting words:

A shocking thing, this, that we should forget
The Savior who gave up his life—
To turn from the cross, indifferent, and let
Our minds veer toward self-love and strife.
This Table, this rite, is habit—and yet
Christ’s words pierce our shame like a knife:
While breaking the bread, the Lord Jesus said,
“Do this in remembrance of me.”

Enamored with power, surrounded by praise
We set out ecclesial plans.
Efficiency hums, and we spend our days
Defending, promoting our stands.
Techniques multiply, our structures amaze—
The gospel slips out of our hands.

D. A. Carson on “The Gospel of Jesus Christ”

by

An edited manuscript of D. A. Carson‘s “The Gospel of Jesus Christ (1 Corinthians 15:1-19)” is now available at The Gospel Coalition site. Carson preached this message in May at The Gospel Coalition’s first conference: video | audio.

Other resources at TGC site: articles (including an RSS feed for new articles), audio & video (including interviews), foundational documents.

The Gospel Coalition Interviews

by

The Gospel Coalition now has dozens of short video interview clips available. Four men, at least in the interviews posted so far, answer various questions: D. A. Carson, Tim Keller, John Piper, and Mark Driscoll. I reserved a few hours today to watch these, and it was well worth the time—regardless of whether one completely agrees with every viewpoint expressed. Some of the clips are especially thoughtful and moving, especially those by Carson and Piper. (Cf. TGC’s articles, audio & video, foundational documents, and stakeholders.)

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.

“Expository lecturing”?

by

“Expository lecturing is not the same thing as expository preaching; the Word must not only inform but also wound and heal, sing and sting.”

On the other hand,

“[P]ractical concerns can so control the text that no one hears the Word of God. Worse, the search for relevance frequently degenerates into the trite or the trivial.”

–D. A. Carson, New Testament Commentary Survey (6th ed.; Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2007), 17.