In his sermon on Romans 4:16–21 (9/26/1999), John Piper directly addresses the children and illustrates how faith glorifies God. Listen from 27:28 to 33:30.

Here’s what’s in the sermon manuscript (which isn’t a transcript):

Let’s illustrate this for the children. Your daddy is standing in a swimming pool out a little bit from the edge. You are, let’s say, three years old and standing on the edge of the pool. Daddy holds out his arms to you and says, “Jump, I’ll catch you. I promise.” Now, how do you make your daddy look good at that moment? Answer: trust him and jump. Have faith in him and jump. That makes him look strong and wise and loving. But if you won’t jump, if you shake your head and run away from the edge, you make your daddy look bad. It looks like you are saying, “he can’t catch me” [i.e., he's incompetent] or “he won’t catch me” [i.e., he's mean] or “it’s not a good idea to do what he tells me to do” [i.e., he's unwise]. And all three of those make your dad look bad.

But you don’t want to make God look bad. So you trust him. Then you make him look good—which he really is. And that is what we mean when we say, “Faith glorifies God” or “Faith gives God glory.” It makes him look as good as he really is. So trusting God is really important.

And the harder it seems for him to fulfill his promise, the better he looks when you trust him. Suppose that you are at the deep end of a pool by the diving board. You are four years old and can’t swim, and your daddy is at the other end of the pool. Suddenly a big, mean dog crawls under the fence and shows his teeth and growls at you and starts coming toward you to bite you. You crawl up on the diving board and walk toward the end to get away from him. The dog puts his front paws up on the diving board. Just then, your daddy sees what’s happening and calls out, “Johnny, jump in the water. I’ll get you.”

Now, you have never jumped from one meter high and you can’t swim and your daddy is not underneath you and this water is way over your head. How do you make your daddy look good in that moment? You jump. And almost as soon as you hit the water, you feel his hands under your arms and he treads water holding you safely while someone chases the dog away. Then he takes you to the side of the pool.

We give glory to God when we trust him to do what he has promised to do—especially when all human possibilities are exhausted. Faith glorifies God. That is why God planned for faith to be the way we are justified.

(This is from sermon 52 of 225 in Piper’s 155-hour series on Romans. I recently began listening straight through it. Rich.)

Philippe Paul-Luc Viguier, “A Biblical Theology of the Glory of God” (MDiv thesis, The Master’s Seminary, 2012 [advised by Michael J. Vlach]), 34–36, 80 (format and numbering added):

A study of key terms concerning the glory of God reveals many common threads which help us define the concept more precisely.

1. First, the glory of God is similar to the power of a king. It marks His superiority, authority and legitimacy. Because of His glory, God enjoys a certain reputation, an unequaled importance, and honor and fame are due to Him. As king He is the possessor of everything good and lovely, which is manifested in His beautiful and exalted array. As the God-King, His glory denotes a power beyond understanding and measurement, yet available to His servants who live humbly before Him.
2. Second, God’s glory is also associated with brilliance and light, which display His purity, otherness and independency. God is the source of radiance, and the manifestation of His presence is too great to be fathomed. He is awe-inspiring, wonderful, beautiful, elevated and worthy of praise. Its pursuit is the most honorable cause, and in it is found joy, fulfillment, and unequaled bliss.
3. Third, seen in His manifestations, God’s glory is ultimately the reflection of His character and essence. It is who He is, and it cannot be taken from Him. In this regard, His glory is exclusive. Only the prideful and the arrogant dare to challenge God’s exalted status by refusing to attribute the honor due to His name, which results in their judgment and fall. As the reflection of God’s inner being, this glory is also personal. To enjoy it is to enjoy God, and to know Him personally. As seen in the Trinity, this glory is communal, relational, and self-giving.
4. Fourth, God’s glory is God’s self-revelation. It is revealed in God’s appearances, through His works, His Word, and His felt-presence. When God displays His glory, it makes Himself known. In this sense, it is cognitive, purposeful and relational. While the popular usage of the term Shekinah has emphasized the revelation of God through His felt-presence, it is important to note that God’s glory is also associated with signs and with His revealed Word.
5. Fifth, God’s glory demands a response. As the created realm enjoys the world made by God, which displays His glory through its beauty, order and continual upholding and providence, a rightful expectation of praise and righteous living is awaited from mankind.
6. Sixth, God’s glory became greater at the revelation of Jesus Christ, who displayed uniquely the essence of God, performing the works of God and speaking the Word of God.
7. Seventh, God’s glory begs for participation. God’s purpose in showing His glory was always to connect with mankind, to dwell with them and be known by them. God’s glory is to be enjoyed and reflected. Through unity in Christ, believers can grow in their participation in His glory as they increase in their likeness to Christ and are filled with His Holy Spirit to obey His Word and work deeds worthy of Him. Participation in God’s glory begins with salvation.
8. Finally, God’s glory is eschatological. Although it is revealed to some degree in this world, it is veiled to some degree because of sin. The hope of believers stands in the knowledge that they will one day be able to perceive and reflect this glory more fully, after the return of Christ and the judgment of this world. . . .

Thus we conclude: God’s glory is

• the ever-increasing revelation of His essence and purposes,
• displayed through His Word, His works and His felt-presence,
• which calls for the receiver’s unity and reflection,
• and tells of His incomparable goodness, beauty, and praise-worthiness
• as perfect King, Savior, Judge and Creator,
• and of the unequaled reputation attached to His name.

Update on 6/12/2013: The thesis is available for free as a PDF on the author’s website.

Related:

1. I interviewed Chris Morgan on the glory of God.
2. Christopher W. Morgan and Robert A. Peterson, eds., The Glory of God  (Theology in Community; Wheaton: Crossway, 2010).
3. John Piper, God’s Passion for His Glory: Living the Vision of Jonathan Edwards: With the Complete Text of The End for Which God Created the World (Wheaton: Crossway, 1998).
4. John Piper, “The Glory of God,” in Doctrine Matters: Ten Theological Trademarks from a Lifetime of Preaching (ed. Jonathan Parnell; Minneapolis: Desiring God, 2013), 23–40.
5. John Piper, Resources on The Glory of God.

Chris Brauns, Bound Together: How We Are Tied to Others in Good and Bad Choices (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2013), 179–82:

In The Problem of Pain, C. S. Lewis set out to write a Christian reflection on suffering. Soon enough, he arrived at the doctrine of original sin. . . .

Inevitably, a consideration of the doctrine of original sin brought Lewis face-to-face with the truth that all humanity was represented by Adam. Lewis allowed that it is hard for us to comprehend that Adam represented all his descendants, but he also noted that our inability to understand something does not mean it is untrue. . . .

Notice the emphasis here: there may be a tension between individuality and some other principle. I have named this principle “the principle of the rope.” In a sense, this entire book has been an extended reflection on Lewis’s observation that there must be some other principle. Summarized by chapter, the argument has developed as follows:

1. Like it or not, the principle of the rope or corporate solidarity is an undeniable aspect of life taught in Scripture. No man is an island. We are bound together.
2. The doctrine of original sin is the ultimate negative example of the principle of the rope. As The New England Primer summarizes, “In Adam’s Fall/we sinned all.”
3. Union with Christ is the ultimate positive example of the principle of the rope. Those who believe in Christ are united to him. And Christ’s rope to save is stronger than Adam’s rope is to condemn.
4. Scripture illustrates union with Christ by way of several key metaphors. We are united to Christ as stones to a temple, limbs to a body, branches to a vine, a wife to a husband, and adopted children to a father. Our relationship to Christ is even analogous to the relationships between the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.
5. The principle of the rope does not teach fatalism, nor does it remove individual responsibility: “the soul who sins shall die” (Ezekiel 18:4). No one is necessarily doomed because of his or her parents.
6. Part 2 begins at chapter 6, where we considered the application of the principle of the rope. It follows from the truth that we are bound together in Christ that we experience true joy only as we invest ourselves in Christ-centered community.
7. Paul taught in Ephesians 5 that Christ’s relationship with the church of corporate solidarity and a husband and wife’s bond in marriage explain one another. The principle of the rope allows us to better appreciate the loveliness of marriage and to understand the deep pain of divorce and death.
8. In terms of our families, we can be sure that the gospel rope is more powerful than the rope of sin. Live wholeheartedly for Christ; love him with all your heart, soul, strength, and mind—and know that God will do immeasurably more than all you can ask or imagine. But fear the consequences of turning your back on Almighty God, not only for yourself, but also for your family.
9. Christians can face death without fear because we have legitimate solidarity with a champion who has won the victory. For the Christian, there is nothing remote about Christ because we are united to him.
10. Only New Testament churches offer the theology combined with plausibility structures and the realities of community/fellowship necessary to legitimatize solidarity and counter the radical individualism unraveling the fabric of Western culture.

Related: Mike Wittmer reflects on Chris Brauns’s book.

Paul David Tripp, Sex and Money: Pleasures That Leave You Empty and Grace That Satisfies  (Wheaton: Crossway, 2013), 22–23 [22-page sample PDF]:

The dynamic of addiction is that if you look to something that God created, to give you what it wasn’t intended to give you, either you get discouraged quickly, and wisely abandon those hopes, or you go back again and again, and in so doing, you begin to travel down addiction’s road. That created thing will give you a short-term buzz of euphoria, it will offer you temporary pleasure, it will provide a momentary sense of well-being, it will briefly make you feel that you’re something, and it may even make your problems seem not so bad for a bit. It’s all very intoxicating. It all feels great. The problem is that the created thing that you’re looking to has no capacity to satisfy your heart. It wasn’t designed to do that. It cannot give you inner peace. It cannot give you the heart rest of contentment. It cannot quiet your cravings. In a word, it cannot be your savior. And if you look outside of the Savior for something to be your savior, that thing will end up not being your savior but your master.

You’ll love the short-term buzz, but you’ll hate how short it is. So you’ll have to go back again quickly to get another shot, and before long you’ve spent way too much time, energy, and money on something that can’t satisfy; but because of what it has briefly done for you each time, you’re convinced that you can’t live without it. You’re hooked and you may not know it. The thing you once desired, you’re now persuaded that you need, and once you’ve named it a need, it has you.

Sex is powerfully pleasurable, but it cannot satisfy your heart. A shot of unexpected cash in your ATM account will make you smile, but it can’t give you true happiness. The touch of another person will stimulate your body and your heart, but it will never leave you fulfilled. Money has the power to change something in your life, but it has no ability whatsoever to make you a better person.

You see, whether we know it or not, every human being lives in search of a savior. We are all propelled by a quest for identity, inner peace, and some kind of meaning and purpose. And we’ll all look for it somewhere. Here’s the bottom line: looking to creation to get what only the Creator can give you will always result in addiction of some kind. The thing that you hoped would serve you pulls you into its service. What seemed like freedom ends up being bondage. The thing is not the problem; what you’ve asked of it is.

Related:

1. Edward T. Welch, Addictions: A Banquet in the Grace; Finding Hope in the Power of the Gospel  (Resources for Changing Lives; Phillipsburg, NJ: Presbyterian & Reformed, 2001).
2. David Powlison, “Breaking Pornography Addiction,” Part 1 | Part 2.
3. Posts tagged purity
4. Posts tagged money

That’s the title of a sermon I preached on Sunday on Romans 14:1–15:7.

• I open by explaining triage in order to introduce the idea of theological triage. We must distinguish between first-level, second-level, and third-level issues.
• I suggest about 75 disputable matters (grouped into 17 rough categories) that can be extremely divisive in some churches.
• I present 12 principles from Rom 14:1–15:7 about how to disagree with other Christians. I borrow these from a forthcoming commentary on Romans that veteran missionary J. D. Crowley wrote for people in Cambodia:

1. Welcome those who disagree with you (Rom 14:1–2).
2. Those who have freedom must not look down on those who are strict (Rom 14:3–4).
3. Those who are strict must not be judgmental towards those who have freedom (Rom 14:3–4).
4. Each believer must be fully convinced of their position in their own conscience (Rom 14:5).
5. Everything you do, or refrain from doing, must be for God’s glory (Rom 14:6–9).
6. Do not judge each other in these matters because we will all someday stand before the judgment seat of God (Rom 14:10–12).
7. Your freedom to eat meat is correct, but don’t let your freedom destroy the faith of a weak brother (Rom 14:13–15).
8. Disagreements about eating and drinking are not important in the kingdom of God; building each other up in righteousness, peace, and joy is the important thing (Rom 14:16–21).
9. If you have freedom, don’t flaunt it; if you are strict, don’t expect others to be strict like you (Rom 14:22a).
10. A person who lives according to their conscience is blessed (Rom 14:22b–23).
11. We must follow the example of Christ, who put others first (Rom 15:1–6).
12. We bring glory to God when we welcome one another as Christ has welcomed us (Rom 15:7).

MP3 (about 57 minutes)

Related:

1. Posts tagged “judgmentalism“
2. John MacArthur on How to Serve Christians Who Are Needlessly Restrictive

Mitigated speech is communication that is deferential or indirect. I learned about it in Malcolm Gladwell’s Outliers. Gladwell defines mitigation as “any attempt to downplay or sugarcoat the meaning of what is being said.”

It’s important to understand direct vs. mitigated speech because problems may result (1) if you don’t understand how others are communicating with you and/or (2) if you are not communicating clearly yourself. Extreme example: plane crashes.

A more normal result is frustration and relational conflict. Extreme example: a relational plane crash.

People who communicate more directly can often come across as harsh or too forceful to people who prefer mitigated speech.

Inversely, Gladwell explains that because a hint is the most mitigated form of speech, it’s “the hardest kind of request to decode and the easiest to refuse.” People who communicate with lots of hints often don’t communicate clearly to people who communicate more directly. And the problem compounds if the former are intimidated by the latter and/or really want the latter to like them and thus try not to say anything that might cause relational tension.

Some relationships could improve significantly if the people understood direct vs. mitigated speech. Consider marriage, for example: Can you imagine what would happen if a husband and wife grew up in families that communicated very differently in this regard? What if the husband consequently tends to communicate very directly and the wife indirectly? When two people communicate so differently, sometimes they misunderstand each other, which may result in unnecessary frustration or offense.

That’s why it’s important to understand direct vs. mitigated speech.

Related:

1. See especially Matt Perman, “Mitigated Speech and Plane Crashes.”
2. Emotional Intelligence
3. How Reliable Is Your Memory? 3 Practical Lessons
4. It’s Not about the Nail: a hilarious short video (HT: Denny Burk)

Sam Storms, Tough Topics: Biblical Answers to 25 Challenging Questions  (Wheaton: Crossway, 2013), 311–12, 314–15 [32-page sample PDF]:

Legalism has been defined in a number of ways, but here is my attempt: Legalism is the tendency to regard as divine law things that God has neither required nor forbidden in Scripture, and the corresponding inclination to look with suspicion on others for their failure or refusal to conform. . . .

2. Do you elevate to the status of moral law something the Bible does not require? . . .

Hold your conviction with passion and zeal, but do not seek to enslave the consciences of others who may disagree with you. . . .

One unmistakable sign of a legalistic spirit is the tendency always to be looking for what’s wrong in other people’s lives in order to judge them, instead of looking for what’s right in order to encourage them. . . .

Legalists feel good when they can identify another person’s errors. It reinforces their feelings of superiority. They actually think themselves more spiritual, more godly, and more favored and loved by God.

Here’s an antidote.

Tim Keller calls this book “the most accessible, readable, and yet theologically robust work on Christianity and the arts that you will be able to find”:

Jerram Barrs. Echoes of Eden: Reflections on Christianity, Literature, and the Arts. Wheaton: Crossway, 2013. (14-page sample PDF)

Chapter 8 is a gem: “Harry Potter and the Triumph of Self-Sacrificing Love” (pp. 125–46). It’s the best treatment I’ve read that (1) responds to Christians who think that the Harry Potter series is evil and (2) exults in its dominant (Christian) theme—self-sacrificing love.

A few years ago I appreciated watching this 7-minute video of Jerram Barrs reflecting on the last book of the Harry Potter series:

Chapter 8 fleshes out what Barrs expresses in that video. Here’s the outline with some excerpts (some numbering added):

The Harry Potter books are an extraordinary success story in the publishing world. . . . Their translation into Chinese was reported to be the biggest publishing event in China’s history. . . .

[T]here have been many passionate attacks on the Harry Potter series, in particular by Christians. . . .

Criticisms of the Harry Potter Books

. . .

1. [T]he strongest criticism has come because the books bring readers into an imaginary world of magic and wizards; and therefore, many Christians say that it is abundantly clear that the books offend against the biblical condemnation of witchcraft and wizardry. . . .
2. [M]any Christians simply say that fantasy is dangerous, and that to present this kind of fantasy or magical world to children is automatically hazardous to them. . . .
3. [T]he books teach a rebellious attitude toward authority. . . .

Why I Like the Harry Potter Books

1. The seven Harry Potter books are great fun to read. . . .
2. Rowling has created a delightful world of the imagination. . . .
3. The Harry Potter books are well written. . . .
   1. One test of a good writer is whether one can read the books over and over with growing pleasure and understanding each time. I read the final book six times over the first six months after its publication and enjoyed it more each time.
   2. Another test is whether one can read a book aloud and find that it communicates well. . . .
   3. A third test is whether these books encourage people to read. . . .
   4. Fourth, are the books well constructed so that each reading reveals more and more of the interconnectedness of every part of the story? The whole series indeed has this interconnectedness, and Rowling herself says that she knew where her final book would go when her first one was published.
4. There are a multitude of interesting characters in the books. . . .
5. These stories are imbued with a strong message about moral behavior. . . . There are beautiful and enjoyable human relationships among the characters, and there is a depth of commitment and faithfulness among them. The characteristics celebrated in the relationships are friendship, loyalty, integrity, kindness, and mutual service. . . .
6. [T]here is a very clear portrayal of the distinction between good and evil. . . .
7. [T]hey consistently include the three fundamental themes—echoes of Eden—that can be found as a subtext in almost all good literature: the beauty of creation, the appalling reality of evil, and the universal human longing for redemption and a better world. . . . [T]he stories show how a better life comes primarily through self-sacrifice. . . .

Responses to the Criticisms from Christians

1. [T]he Word of God calls us to be prepared to celebrate anything that is good and true wherever it is found. . . .
2. [O]ne cause of distress about the Harry Potter books is their critics’ deep suspicion of fantasy. . . . [T]he same criticism is made of the Narnia stories and The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings. . . .
   1. [A]ll children indulge in fantasy play from a very early age. . . . Sometimes these fantasy games that children play will last for weeks or months and will have an extraordinary inner consistency. . . . An active imagination that can create, enter into, and rule over fantasy worlds seems to be an essential part of childhood and development. Parents need to do everything they can to encourage and commend this kind of play rather than discourage and crush it as dangerous. . . .
   2. Lewis is right; by “dipping” good and evil in myth, in fantasy, in an alternative universe, we see them more clearly than we tend to see them in “real life.” The people in a fantasy world are indeed “visible souls.” Adults sometimes lose the capacity they had as children to live in worlds of their imagination, and this is not a gain but a sorry loss. Yet, a good story, a fine fantasy, can restore this capacity to the most jaded adult and help to make his or her own daily life more interesting—and more serious. . . .
3. None of these books encourages occult practice. The magic is simply a part of the imaginative worlds that Lewis, Tolkien, and Rowling have created. In such an imaginary world, people can become invisible, animals talk, mythical creatures like unicorns and centaurs exist, and rings and spells work wonders. In all of these books the magic serves to help us see the battle between good and evil more clearly. Magic is simply a device to unveil the world of virtue and vice to us. . . . Rowling herself has repeatedly stated that she has no interest in the occult or magic and that she certainly does not wish to promote it; indeed, she was astonished when she first heard that people had made this criticism. . . .

Responding to Culture as Christians

Some 450 years ago John Calvin encouraged people to read books by the great writers from Greece and Rome. . . .

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows

At its heart Rowling’s last Potter book is a reflection on the two biblical quotations included in the story: “Where your treasure is, there will your heart be also,” and “The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death.” . . .

The question at the heart of the book is this: Will Harry keep going with the task that Dumbledore has given him, the task of finding and destroying the Horcruxes created by Lord Voldemort, Horcruxes that contain pieces of his fractured and wicked soul? The central issue is, where will Harry’s treasure lie? For where his treasure is, there will be the devotion of his heart. Will his treasure be the longing for power? Or will his treasure be the commitment to fight against evil, whatever the cost to himself? . . .

Will Harry pursue this task of searching out and destroying the Horcruxes, as this is necessary for Voldemort to be defeated? Or will Harry become distracted by the Deathly Hallows and give himself to searching for these instead? . . . [W]here is Harry’s treasure? Will it be Hallows or Horcruxes? . . .

After struggling with this decision, with even Ron pushing him toward the Hallows—for Ron assumes that the Elder Wand will enable Harry to destroy Voldemort, the evil lord—Harry chooses the path of giving himself to destroy the Horcruxes. . . .

Self-sacrifice is a central theme in all the books. . . .

There are many echoes throughout the book of the temptation narratives in the Gospels, and also of the accounts of Christ preparing for his suffering and death.

Harry has to set his face toward his death, just as Jesus set his face toward Jerusalem. He has to recognize that his free offering of himself to death is what Dumbledore was preparing him for, all through his years of friendship and schooling at Hogwarts. When Harry sees his friends suffering and dying in the fight against Voldemort, he is eager to give himself up, to drink the cup that has been prepared for him. He must leave his dearest friends, Ron and Hermione, behind, lest they try to dissuade him from his chosen path, and he must commit himself to take his final walk alone. . . .

Harry wins his battles not by wisdom and not by strength, but by things thought foolish and powerless by the world. . . .

Above all, he wins his battles by self-sacrificing love. At the climax of the book he walks calmly to his death, and his enemies laugh at his folly. He does not draw his wand; he does not fight; he simply gives himself up and Voldemort curses him with the curse of death. Precisely because he offers himself up to death and to defeat—just as does Christ—he conquers death, for it cannot hold him.

Remarkably, just as with Satan at the cross, Voldemort himself is struck down by his own act of seeking to destroy Harry. He survives this encounter for a brief time, but with his power greatly reduced. . . .

It should be evident to anyone reading the above summary how many remarkable parallels to the gospel story there are in this final book of the Harry Potter series. I found myself weeping with joy many, many times as I read and reread this wonderful reflection on the work of Christ. . . .

Christians should thank God for J. K. Rowling and for her clear presentation of the central values that are at the core of Christian faith and practice.

Related:

1. Rebuked about Harry Potter
2. Harry Potter Is Filled with Implicit and Explicit Christian Themes
3. Successful Rereading: Maintaining the Magic

Ryan Kelly asks Paul Tripp a profound question (26:28–28:46):

(Tripp’s mustache has its own Twitter account.)

Related:

1. What If You Fail?
2. What Is Your Biggest Problem?
3. Differences between You and Others That God Uses to Reveal and Change Your Heart
4. Do You Love Your Spouse?

Gary Millar and Phil Campbell, Saving Eutychus: How to Preach God’s Word and Keep People Awake  (Kingsford NSW, Australia: Matthias Media, 2013), 40–41:

Expository preaching:

1. does justice to the biblical material which makes it clear that God works through his word to change people’s lives—as it ‘uncages the lion’ and allows God’s word to speak.
2. acknowledges that it is God alone, through the Spirit, who works in people’s lives, and that it is not our job to change people through clever or inspiring communication.
3. minimizes the danger of manipulating people, because the text itself controls what we say and how we say it. The Bible leaves little room for us to return repeatedly to our current bugbears and hobbyhorses.
4. minimizes the danger of abusing power, because a sermon driven by the text creates an instant safeguard against using the Bible to bludgeon (or caress) people into doing or thinking what we want them to do or think.
5. removes the need to rely on our personality. While we all feel the weight, at times, of having little ‘inspiration’, energy or creativity, if our focus is on allowing the immense richness of Scripture to speak in all its colour and variety, the pressure is well and truly off.
6. encourages humility in those teaching. While it can be a temptation to think that we are somehow special because we are standing at the front doing most of the talking (and, on a good day, receiving the encouragement), getting it straight that the key to preaching to the heart is simply uncovering the power and freshness of God’s words helps to keep us in our place.
7. helps us to avoid simple pragmatism. If our focus is on working consistently to enable people to encounter the God who speaks through the text, we will not feel under pressure to address every single issue and topic as it comes up in the life of the church. Conversely, working through the Bible week by week will force us to cover subjects that we wouldn’t choose to address in a million years. In other words, expository preaching is the simplest, longest-lasting antidote we have to pragmatism.
8. drives us to preaching the gospel. As we’ll see in more detail in chapter 5, expository preaching is also uniquely valuable in that it persistently drives us to the Lord Jesus Christ (wherever we are in the Bible) and so ‘forces’ us to preach the gospel—that is, to spell out what God has already done for us in the death and resurrection of his Son, and then to move from that grace to what God asks and enables us to do. When we preach the gospel we are not simply telling people how to be good or leaving them to wallow in the overwhelming sense that they are irredeemably bad.

14-page sample PDF

Related:

1. Mike Bullmore’s 2008 Rom Lectures: “The Heart of Preaching and the Preacher’s Heart”
2. Tim Keller: Preaching to the Heart
3. Preaching Christ in a Postmodern World
4. Preach: Theology Meets Practice
5. Performer vs. Herald?
6. Just Preach the Point of the Text
7. The Best Part about Knowing the Biblical Languages

Adapting a book to film is tricky. Sometimes books-to-film turn out surprisingly well (e.g., The Gospel of John—my favorite “Bible” film). Often they don’t (e.g., the recent Narnia films).

The History Channel aired The Bible: The Epic Miniseries throughout March 2013. About 100 million people watched all or part of the series. (I bought the series on DVD after reading two reviews.)

On the one hand, this series will doubtless serve as a means to a good end for some viewers:

1. Some people think that the Bible is a boring old book filled with irrelevant or misguided rules. This series may spark an interest in the Bible that will compel them to actually read it. That’s good.
2. Some people think that the Bible is a collection of unconnected or loosely connected short stories. This series may help people view the Bible as one big story with turning points: from creation to the fall to Noah to Abraham to the exodus to Israel and then climaxing with Jesus. That’s good.
3. Some people are relatively unaware of what the world of the Bible was like culturally. This series may help people better understand what the political scenes were like or how people typically dressed or what various places may have looked like. That’s good.

On the other hand, the series could be far better. While watching it with my wife, we became increasingly disappointed with it. I was planning to watch it with my children but not anymore. I don’t enthusiastically recommend it for at least three reasons:

1. It does not consistently present God as great and good.

The OT stories in particular depict God as capricious, bloodthirsty, and vengeful. It doesn’t root God’s righteous wrath in his glorious holiness. It doesn’t explain, for example, why God pours out his wrath in Noah’s flood or why Jesus came to earth and then died on the cross. Instead, the series focuses on telling part of the Bible’s story in a hip, entertaining way.

Most serious of all, the series doesn’t emphasize the Bible’s ultimate doxological purpose. It doesn’t compel viewers to think, “Wow. God is amazing! God is glorious! God is great, and God is good.”

After my wife read a draft of this essay, she replied,

I am not sure point 1 is strong enough. This is a way bigger deal than getting Cyrus and Darius confused. It rather “turned off” my faith. I was left thinking, “Wow, these stories are really strange. I can’t believe people actually believe this.” It feels like Greek mythology or other weird religious stories. It does not ring true or make me worship God.

For the millions of viewers who are biblically illiterate or have a very sketchy understanding of the Bible, I’m not sure that this series helps them understand God much better. At best it may contribute to stirring up their interest about God so that they actually read the Bible.

2. It gratuitously displays graphic violence.

The Bible is a violent book, but it doesn’t glory in the gore like these films do. The graphic violence is relentless and gratuitous. It’s Peter Jackson-esque.

The Samurai-angel

For example, my wife and I couldn’t believe it when a Samurai-angel who was delivering Lot and his family from Sodom dramatically pulls two swords strapped to his back and starts slaying people in Sodom with flashy Samurai-moves. And we lost count of the number of times the film graphically shows executions by throat-slitting or sword-piercing or decapitation, complete with blood-squirting and intense sound effects.

We got to the point where I would fast-forward through gory scenes on 2x or 4x speed while my wife looked away. This is definitely not for children.

What is the warrant for displaying graphic violence like this? Is it to keep the interest of people who have become desensitized to graphic violence and no longer recoil at it? Whatever the reasons, I can’t think of a good one.

3. It repeatedly changes important details.

Obviously, a short video-overview of the Bible (like a children’s story-Bible book) can’t include all the details, but the details it chooses to include should be accurate. This series repeatedly changes important details in at least three ways:

1. It portrays stories inaccurately. Nine examples:
   1. God’s people walk through the Red Sea on muddy ground in the midst of a rain storm (rather than on dry ground).
   2. 

      Azariah and Daniel

      In the story of Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, no soldiers die, but instead the king intentionally burns his hand during the attempted execution to see if the fire is real (rather than the furnace burning so hot that the flames kill the soldiers who cast the three men into the fiery furnace).

   3. Satan temps Jesus on a desert cliff (rather than the Temple Mount).
   4. Herod Antipas orders John the Baptist’s execution when John tells him about Jesus the Messiah (rather than reluctantly decapitating him after Antipas rashly promises to grant the wish of a dancing girl at his birthday party).
   5. Jesus walks into Lazarus’s tomb and gives a mini-discourse in the presence of the sisters before raising Lazarus from the dead (rather than shouting from outside the tomb, “Lazarus, come out!”).
   6. Caiaphas tricks Judas to betray Jesus, and Judas basically sins against his will. The film portrays Judas as a sympathetic figure.
   7. When Peter tells Jesus that he is willing to die for Jesus, Jesus responds with gratitude and emotionally embraces Peter, but in the middle of the hug, he apparently receives a revelation that Peter will deny him and then sadly breaks that news to Peter. Then Peter denies Jesus the following day after Jesus is arrested (rather than that very night).
   8. After Peter heals the lame beggar in Acts 3, he says, “It is through Jesus. He did not die.” Similarly, Stephen later says, “They tried to kill him, but they failed.” That is a really poor choice of words. (I realize that they are trying to communicate that Jesus didn’t stay dead and that he is alive.)
   9. Stephen got stoned to death without a trial, and Saul instigated and led the stoning.
2. It conflates important details. Five examples:
   1. David confronts King Saul with Saul’s torn robe in the cave immediately after he cuts the robe, and Saul responds with defiance rather than an apology.
   2. The king who throws Daniel into the lion’s den is Cyrus (not Darius), and when Daniel comes out of the lion’s den, the king promptly decrees to Daniel that the Jews can go back to Jerusalem.
   3. Lazarus’s sisters inform Jesus that Lazarus has died when Jesus and his disciples arrive in Bethany, and the concerned Jesus asks to see the tomb immediately.
   4. The meeting between Nicodemus and Jesus (John 3) occurs on Wednesday of the Passion week.
   5. Thomas is present when Jesus appears to his disciples for the first time and expresses doubt that what they are seeing is actually Jesus.
3. 

   Young Moses

   It adds subplots that are not in the Bible. One rationale that projects like this make for changing details is that they have such little time to present such a massive story. But if you have such limited time to present what is actually in the Bible, why spend so much time on subplots that are not in the Bible? Here are three examples:

   1. Moses and Ramses have a childhood rivalry.
   2. Daniel tries to persuade his three friends to bow down to the statue of Nebuchadnezzar.
   3. 

      Pilate

      During the life, arrest, trial, and crucifixion of Jesus, prominent characters include Pilate, Caiaphas, Nicodemus, Malchus, and Barabbas with all sorts of added twists—mostly political ones, such as Pilate’s looming threat to cancel Passover and close the temple if there is further Jewish unrest.

(Wikipedia lists other discrepancies as well.)

The examples above don’t include less egregious changes. Four examples:

1. 

   David prepares to fight Goliath

   David starts speaking Psalm 23 to himself while he walks to face Goliath.

2. Jesus tells the story of the praying pharisee and tax collector when he calls Matthew to follow him.
3. Paul quotes parts of 1 Corinthians 13 while defending himself to a group of Christians who are skeptical that he no longer persecutes Christians.
4. Peter tells John, “Good luck,” when John leaves Jerusalem for Ephesus.

These sorts of changes may have only minor effects on people who watch this series and know little about the Bible. Many will think, “Oh! So that’s where that comes from! David spoke Psalm 23 right before he killed Goliath!’” Ideally, this will compel people to read the Bible for themselves. But I suspect that it will mislead and confuse people regarding details.

*******

That’s why I don’t enthusiastically recommend the series. I wish I could. I wanted to.

Catharsis:

1. Read the Bible.
2. Watch The Gospel of John.

Related: Why John Piper Doesn’t Own a TV

My favorite all-around book on Bible translation is a general introduction to the issue.

This more focused book is now my second favorite:

Dave Brunn. One Bible, Many Versions: Are All Translations Created Equal? Downers Grove: IVP, 2013. 205 pp.

You can survey it via Google Preview.

Here’s what D. A. Carson says about it:

This interesting and important book, written by someone who has devoted many years of his life to Bible translation, is particularly fascinating because it avoids jumping from disputed theory to hard examples. Rather, it jumps from thousands of examples to genuine wisdom on translation issues—along with at least some of the bearing of these examples on theory. This book will diffuse some of the polarizations that characterize many of the disputes. It will also encourage us to recognize we are not as far apart as some of us have supposed, and remind us of how difficult good Bible translation is and how grateful we should be for the wonderful and even complementary choices we have in English Bibles.

Brunn is warm and irenic, not polemical. He argues that we English-readers should appreciate and benefit immensely from our wealth of good Bible translations, which “are often mutually complementary—even mutually dependent” (p. 17).

Brunn demonstrates with hundreds of clear examples that sometimes the translations that have a reputation for being more “literal” (like the NASB or ESV) are often not “literal” at all. And sometimes mediating translations (like the NIV) are more “literal.”

The author, Dave Brunn, spent over twenty years in Papua New Guinea serving the Lamogai people through church planting, literacy training, and Bible translation and consultation. He translated the entire New Testament into the Lamogai language. And the most distinctive contribution his book makes to the English Bible controversy is what he emphasizes in chapter 7: “The Babel Factor: God Speaks in Languages Other Than English” (pp. 133–46):

Chapter seven demonstrates that the challenge of trying to achieve word-for-word translation escalates sharply when we move from English to languages outside of the Indo-European family. One reason we are able to achieve the level of literalness that exists in some English versions (especially of the New Testament) is that English and Greek are both Indo-European languages. (p. 16)

There is a problem with limiting our discussion to English translations: some of the standards that have been suggested for English Bible versions do not apply to many other languages. (p. 133)

English is related to New Testament Greek. How many times have you heard a preacher or Bible teacher mention a particular word in Greek and say, “This is the Greek word from which we get our English word _____”? I have often made that kind of statement myself—when I was teaching the Bible in English. Can you guess how many times I said that sort of thing when I was teaching in the Lamogai language? If you guessed zero, you nailed it! (p. 134)

If the only faithful translation is one that is primarily word-focused like the NASB, ESV or KJV, then most of the world’s languages cannot have a truly faithful translation. (p. 135)

I have my own theory on why there is often disagreement among English-speaking Christians about Bible translations. I believe it is in part due to the fact that most of us live in monolingual societies. The majority of native English speakers have never learned a second living language to full fluency. And of those who have, most learned another Indo-European language—which of course, would be related in some ways to English. Many English speakers base their view of New Testament translation entirely on translating from Greek into its Indo-European relative, English. I believe this narrow perspective is a major reason for many of the disagreements that exist regarding English translations. (pp. 145–46)

We English-speakers often emphasize how different English translations are. Brunn acknowledges a spectrum of differences, but throughout the book he focuses on how similar English translations are (pp. 189–90, numbering added):

1. Every version translates thought for thought rather than word for word in many contexts (chap. 1).
2. Every version gives priority to meaning over form (chap. 2).
3. Every version gives priority to the meaning of idioms and figures of speech over the actual words (chap. 2).
4. Every version gives priority to the dynamics of meaning in many contexts (chap. 2).
5. Every version uses many renderings that are outside of its ideal range (chap. 3).
6. Every version allows the context to dictate many of its renderings (chap. 4).
7. Every version steps away from the original form in order to be grammatically correct in English (chap. 5).
8. Every version steps away from the form to avoid wrong meaning or zero meaning (chap. 5).
9. Every version steps away from the form to add further clarity to the meaning (chap. 5).
10. Every version steps away from the form to enhance naturalness in English (chap. 5).
11. Every version translates some Hebrew or Greek words many different ways (chap. 6).
12. Every version changes some of the original words to nouns, verbs, adjectives, adverbs or multiple-word phrases (chap. 6).
13. Every version sometimes translates an assortment of different Hebrew or Greek words all the same way in English (chap. 6).
14. Every version leaves some Hebrew and Greek words untranslated (chap. 6).
15. Every version adds English words that do not represent any particular word in the Hebrew or Greek text (chap. 6).
16. Every version changes single words into phrases, even when it is not required (chap. 6).
17. Every version translates concepts in place of words in many contexts (chap. 6).
18. Every version sometimes gives priority to naturalness and appropriateness over the ideal of seeking to be transparent to the original text (chap. 6).
19. Every version sometimes chooses not to use a literal, transparent rendering even though one is available (chap. 6).
20. Every version substitutes present-day terms in place of some biblical terms (chap. 6).
21. Every version paraphrases in some contexts (chap. 6).
22. Every version uses interpretation when translating ambiguities (chap. 7).
23. Every version makes thousands of changes that amount to much more than dropping a “jot” or a “tittle” (chap. 8).
24. Every version adds interpretation, even when it is not absolutely necessary (chap. 9).
25. Every version replaces some masculine forms with gender-neutral forms (chap. 9).
26. Every version often sets aside the goal of reflecting each inspired word in order to better reflect the inspired naturalness and readability of the original (chap. 9).

The Lamogai translation of the Scriptures is not perfect. But no English translation is perfect either. The difference is that in English-speaking countries, we have the huge advantage of being able to compare dozens of Bible versions side by side. In this sense, we are incredibly rich beyond the wildest dreams of most of the rest of the world. Yet sometimes, I think we squander this great wealth. Not only do we fail to take full advantage of it; we also allow it to become a source of disagreement among us. (p. 193)

Related:

1. Rod Decker recommends Brunn’s book.
2. Thank God for Good Bible Translators and Translations
3. How to Disagree about Bible Translation Philosophy
4. Which Bible Translation Should I Use? A Comparison of 4 Major Recent Versions: ESV, NIV, HCSB, NLT
5. The History of the NIV Translation Controversy

This book releases today:

Bunmi Laditan. The Honest Toddler: A Child’s Guide to Parenting. New York: Scribner, 2013.

I follow @HonestToddler on Twitter because it’s so entertaining, especially since my wife and I care for three little children.

The central theme in all the tweets and throughout the book is that toddlers are the center of their universe and have an unchecked sense of entitlement. (And it’s convicting to think that we adults can be the same way but with a little more sophistication.)

The book isn’t the type you’ll want to read cover-to-cover in one sitting. It’s something you may want to dip into occasionally for a laugh.

33 excerpts:

1. Toddlers are misunderstood and the one in your life is probably disappointed in you. (p. 1)
2. The worst part about running errands is that actual running is discouraged. (p. 6)
3. We can hear you; we are just not interested. (p. 8)
4. Adults spend 80 percent of their lives pretending to care about people that matter very little to them (Facebook). (p. 10)
5. Sharing is stupid. . . . Sharing is a socially accepted form of theft. (pp. 14–15)
6. The only time a toddler can be injured is when a parent views the accident. The gaze of a parent is like kryptonite and immediately weakens the child. (p. 20)
7. If you’re so dedicated to having a calm dinner experience, why did you have children in the first place? (p. 31)
8. People you don’t know are always full of ideas about raising a child they’ve never met. (p. 34)
9. I love my parents, but I love my grandparents. They know how to treat a person. Your toddler should spend as much time as possible with his grandma and grandpa in order to be loved properly. (p. 35)
10. Grandmas are moms without all the judgment. (p. 36)
11. Salad breaks hearts on a daily basis. (p. 51)
12. Pouring one third of a sippy cup of juice and cutting it with lukewarm tap water is disrespectful and shows that you know nothing about friendship. (p. 60)
13. Most of your toddler’s food problems have been caused by poor parenting. (p. 64)
14. Seeing another toddler sitting quietly in his cart reading a newspaper will make you think there is something wrong with your child. Don’t compare, because that child is probably sick. You don’t know anything about him. He could be a spy. Pointing at this dummy while saying to your child, “Why can’t you act like that?” is Level 10 wrong. (p. 69)
15. STOP BEING SELFISH. You’ve had your whole adult life to sleep. Rest time is over. (p. 77)
16. Do not expect your toddler to stay asleep for longer than two to three hours at a time. (p. 79)
17. Toddler Rule: one minute of car sleep = one hour of bed sleep. (p. 88)
18. [Facebook] is the go-to website for parents seeking congratulation. (p. 98)
19. You can’t love your toddler and think about your own needs at the same time. (p. 114)
20. If [on Saturdays] you sit on the couch like you’re an iPhone on a charging dock, it will force your toddler to throw your debit card in the trash again. (p. 151)
21. The most common recipe [for smoothies] calls for three parts ice cream to one part juice. (p. 169)
22. If you pick up strangers from the airport, they should never be seated next to your toddler. (p. 175)
23. Church/Synagogue/Mosques/Any Places of Worship [a toddler "danger zone"]: Children under four have only one volume level: disruptive. Our vocal cords are not capable of whispering. (p. 181)
24. [on story time at the public library] “What sound does a duck make?” Who cares? When will I need to know that? How is this knowledge of barnyard animals and their corresponding noises going to improve my life? (pp. 182–83)
25. There is NOTHING more exhilarating than hearing an adult you love pursue you. The footsteps pounding behind you as your heart races, the frantic calls becoming shrieks. The final moment before they grab you by the midsection and swoop you into their arms. (p. 186)
26. Make sure the stroller isn’t too heavy, as most of the time you’ll be holding your child in your arms while pushing it. (p. 187)
27. Stop counting to three. Nobody’s scared. What are you going to do after you get to three? Freeze time? (p. 188)
28. If you knew how you look when you’re enforcing rules, you’d stop. Your face takes on a werewolf-esque snarl. And you actually smell different (like trash in the summer). (p. 188)
29. Socialization is not a real reason to enroll your child in school. Toddlers will learn to pretend they like people on their own time. (p. 190)
30. Popular Medicine Avoidance Methods . . . Sit-and-spit: . . . It starts with faux compliance. When the parent figure lets down his guard, the child spits the medicine in his face or lets it drip out of her mouth. So funny. (p. 198)
31. Did someone tell you that vacations are supposed to be relaxing? That’s hilarious. (p. 209)
32. Hotel sleep is like home sleep but less. Forget everything you know about bedtime, because in hotels, kids don’t fall asleep; they pass out around midnight and wake up at five A.M. (p. 212)
33. Toddlers feel most powerful after eating doughnuts. (p. 230)

11 Related Resources:

1. This Is How We Pray for Our Children
2. Give Them Jesus: Parenting with the Gospel
3. Douglas Wilson on Parenting
4. A Security Camera for Parents
5. Bible Memory for Young Children
6. The Pilgrim’s Progress for Children
7. A Good Bible-Story Book with Thousands of Pictures
8. The New City Catechism and 5 Related Resources
9. C. S. Lewis Letters to Children
10. Ten Narnia Resources
11. Ten Resources for Enjoying Tolkien’s The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings

Herbert W. Bateman IV, Charts on the Book of Hebrews (Kregel Charts of the Bible; Grand Rapids: Kregel, 2012), 126:

(This is from a helpful book of charts. It’s endorsed by George Guthrie, David Alan Black, Jon Laansma, Sam Lamerson, and David Allen.)

Short answer: No.

Longer answer: I tried to unpack this in a radio interview on 7/14/2009: Are Millennial Views Essential? I had recently highlighted (1) Tom Schreiner’s move from an amillennial to a premillennial position and (2) Mark Dever’s argument that it’s a sin to sever cooperation with other believers over certain types of eschatological issues.

Even longer answer: Peter Hubbard, teaching pastor of North Hills Community Church in Taylors, South Carolina, wisely walked his church through this issue in September 2009. Up to that point the church had required members to affirm a pretribulational rapture and premillennialism, but the elders agreed that it was wiser to change that policy. Even though the church still teaches premillennialism, it does not require that members hold that view, and the elders themselves are not unanimous on their tribulation views. For example, Peter Hubbard is historic premillennial (i.e., posttribulational). I recently listened to the three sermons in which Peter addressed this issue in September 2009, and they are full of wisdom about how dogmatic we should be about some aspects of eschatology:

1. Jesus Is Coming! A Family Chat | MP3 | notes | 9/13/2009
2. Is the Rapture at the Return? | MP3 | notes | 9/20/2009
3. The Millennium | MP3 | notes | 9/27/2009

Related:

1. Why You Should Not Be Dogmatic about All of Your Convictions: Lloyd-Jones on Silk Stockings, Baths, Radios, and More (Peter Hubbard uses this quote in the first of his three sermons above. Listen from about 3:20 to 5:15 in the MP3.)
2. Ten Books Schnabel Recommends on the End Times

David Martyn Lloyd-Jones was one of the greatest English preachers of the twentieth century, and I esteem him highly.

But when he was 24 years years old, he shared some convictions (i.e., firmly held opinions) in March 1924 in a way that I suspect he later regretted. This is instructive for the rest of us.

• I cannot possibly understand a man who wears silk stockings or even gaudily coloured socks; rings, wrist-watches, spats, shoes instead of boots, or who carries a cane in his hand.
• The modern method of installing a bath in each house is not only a tragedy but it has been a real curse to humanity. . . . If I had to spend a life-time with a companion who had one bath a day or with one who had one bath a year, I should unhesitatingly choose the latter, because a man’s soul is more important than his skin. [But what about their smell?!]
• When I enter a house and find that they have a wireless apparatus [a radio] I know at once that there is something wrong. . . . Your five-valve sets may do wonders, they may enable you to hear the voice of America, but believe me, they will never transmit the only Voice that is worth listening to.

—Quoted in Iain H. Murray, D. Martyn Lloyd-Jones: The First Forty Years 1899–1939 (Edinburgh: Banner of Truth, 1982), 65–66 (bullet points added).

(Peter Hubbard uses this quote in the first of his three sermons on how dogmatic we should be about some aspects of eschatology. Listen from about 3:20 to 5:15 in the MP3.)

The newest film in the Dispatches from the Front series is episode 6: The Power of His Rising .

Trailer:

I love these DVDs because they widen my limited perspective on how God is working right now in other places in the world.

My family watched episode 6 a few weeks ago and loved it. It focuses on how a Christian family from South Carolina is spreading the gospel in a “closed” country in South Asia, gaining access with their business skills to operate an excellent coffee shop. Ingenious.

• The DVD is now available from Frontline Missions (sale for $10 through June 1).
• It is available from Amazon (it will ship as soon as the stock is available—probably this week).
• It is available from WTS Books, which plans to begin a 3-day sale on Tuesday, April 23. WTS is also selling a 6-DVD set.

Over two billion people in the world have no access to the Gospel—no Bible, no church, no Christians, no hope. Since many of them live in countries closed to traditional missionaries, how will they hear the Good News? One way is that Christ is calling and equipping men and women with skills—professionals—to use their talents to reach people who are hard to get to. The Power of His Rising is an inside look at how this is unfolding in South Asia, where baristas and bakers, pilots and farmers are a force for the Gospel! It’s an amazing journey by land, sea and air—down crowded streets and remote rivers—to find light shining in darkness and persecuted believers singing because of Jesus! Dispatches from the Front opens yet another window to see Christ at work in the world through His endless life and relentless grace!

Due to security issues, please do not share any part of this DVD on the Internet or through social media, including making specific comments about people or places in the program.

Related:

1. Frontline Missions: Dispatches from the Front
2. Advancing the Gospel in the World’s Difficult Places
3. A New Dispatches from the Front Film [Episode 5]
4. My Favorite Part of the “Dispatches from the Front” Films

Lars Kierspel, Charts on the Life, Letters, and Theology of Paul (Kregel Charts of the Bible; Grand Rapids: Kregel, 2012), 167:

(This is from a helpful book of charts. It’s endorsed by Stan Porter, Mark Seifrid, John Polhill, and others.)

Related:

1. The most comprehensive online bibliography on union with Christ that I’m aware of
2. The most comprehensive book on union with Christ = Constantine R. Campbell, Paul and Union with Christ: An Exegetical and Theological Study (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2012). Though one might quibble with some of the use-labels Campbell applies to prepositions in particular passages, the overall theological method and synthesis is robust.

I’ve read the end of this chapter by Jim Hamilton several times because it motivates me to do biblical theology:

James M. Hamilton Jr. “Biblical Theology and Preaching.” Pages 193–218 in Text Driven Preaching: God’s Word at the Heart of Every Sermon. Edited by Daniel L. Akin, David L. Allen, and Ned L. Mathews. Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 2010.

For example:

HOW DO I DO BIBLICAL THEOLOGY?

The kind of biblical theology advocated here has been described as reflection upon the results of the exegesis of particular passages in light of the whole canon. Another way to say it is that biblical theology is exegesis of a particular passage in its canonical context. This means that, in order to do biblical theology, we must know the Bible and meditate on it. The only way to do biblical theology is to read the Bible, a lot, in the original languages. We must know the texts so well—words, phrases, sequences—that we notice when later authors reuse words, phrases, and sequences from earlier texts. There is no substitute for knowing the texts in the original languages, for only this will enable us to see the subtlest of allusions, parallels, echoes, and partial quotations.

. . . One must be able to read the texts in Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek if one wants to do biblical theology.

So the prescription for doing biblical theology is really simple: know the Bible in the original languages backward and forward. Read it a lot. Ask God for insight. Memorize the Bible and meditate on it day and night. And read books that will help you put the whole Bible together. (pp. 213–14)

So Jim basically argues this: “BT is really simple. Just know the entire Bible in the original languages forwards and backwards, meditate on it day and night, and read libraries of books on BT. Piece of cake.” Oh, that’s all? I didn’t know it was so easy! I was shaking my head and bouncing in laughter when I first read this (I tried not to laugh out loud since a baby was sleeping next to me). But Jim is right: this is what good BT requires.

Here’s one other motivating section. I’ve meditated on this repeatedly:

CAN GOD’S PEOPLE HANDLE THIS?

Can God’s people operate those complicated remote controls that come with everything from their new flat-screen TVs to their new cars? Can God’s people use computers; navigate grocery stores; hold down jobs; and acquire homes, cars, toys, and all the stuff they jam into the garage?

Let me be frank: I have no patience for suggestions that preachers need to dumb it down. Preachers need to be clear, and they need to be able to explain things in understandable ways. But human beings do not need the Bible to be dumbed down. If you think that, what you really think is that God the Holy Spirit did not know what He was doing when He inspired the Bible to be the way it is. Not only does the suggestion that the Bible is more than God’s people can handle blaspheme God’s wisdom; it also blasphemes His image bearers. People are made in the image of God. Human beings are endowed with brains and sensibilities of astonishing capacity.

Do you want people to think that everything that is interesting or artistic or brilliant comes from the world? Dumb down the Bible.

Do you want them to see the complexity and simplicity of God? The sheer genius of the Spirit-inspired biblical authors? The beauty of a world-encompassing metanarrative of cosmic scope? Teach them biblical theology.

Do not discount the capacities of God’s people. They may be stupid and uninformed when their hearts are awakened, but do not punish them by leaving them there. Show them literary artistry. Show them the subtle power of carefully constructed narratives. Show them the force of truth in arguments that unfold with inexorable logic. If they are genuine believers, they will want to understand the Bible. Show them the shouts and songs, the clamor and the clarity, the book of books. Let their hearts sing with the psalmist, weep with Lamentations, and ponder Proverbs. Give them the messianic wisdom of the beautiful mind that wrote Ecclesiastes. Preach the word!

Unleash it in all its fullness and fury. Let it go. Tie it together. Show connections that are there in the texts from end to end. Tell them the whole story. Give them the whole picture. Paint the whole landscape for them, not just the blade of grass. (pp. 216–17)

Related:

1. Jim Hamilton’s Whole-Bible Biblical Theology
2. Exegesis, Biblical Theology, Historical Theology, Systematic Theology, and Practical Theology: What the Categories on My Blog Mean
3. D. A. Carson’s Theological Method
4. Master Scripture Index for New Studies in Biblical Theology

In a recent chapel message at Bethlehem College and Seminary, Jason Abell explains why administration is important.

Jason is BCS’s Vice President for Administration. I am so encouraged by this message and by the interaction I’ve had with Jason and others at BCS. (I’m eager to join the team in several months.)

I’ve witnessed some situations where the relationship between a school’s faculty and administration is unhealthy. Not good.

Jason closes with a provocative analogy that I hadn’t heard someone (let alone an administrator) apply to administration and faculty before:

administration : faculty :: shaft : tip of the spear

That is,

• administration = the shaft, the wood that holds the tip of the spear
• faculty = the tip of the spear
• the spear = one thing (or to change the metaphor: one body—and both faculty and administration are members of that body)

Watch the video (less than 23 minutes):

Related: Called to Work