Tag: Don Carson

Echoes of Mark in the Gospel of John

~ Bob Hayton ~ 2 Comments

Many people have wondered why the New Testament includes four different Gospels. The differences can be confusing, and critics argue that they betray a difference of opinion among early Christians about Jesus and His message. Evangelical Christians respond by stressing that each of the Gospels is a separate, unique witness to the authenticity of the account of Jesus Christ’s life and ministry. The very fact that they are written from different perspectives and have different points of emphasis, strengthens their ability to independently testify to the truth of the Christian message.

In analyzing the Gospels, scholars have often claimed that John’s Gospel was written by someone who had no clear knowledge of the Synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark and Luke). The theology in John is more advanced, and must come from a later date in the “evolution” of Christian doctrine. From this scholarly debate has come a fresh look at the literary evidence in the Gospels themselves, and the results have been startling (or encouraging, depending on your perspective). NT scholarship is starting to change its tune on this point, in fact. Even for those of us who aren’t scholars (I include myself here for sure), there are meaty takeaways that can improve our grasp of the interplay between the Gospels – and heighten our appreciation of the revelation of Jesus we find there.

In this post, I want to highlight that the author of the Gospel of John (who I hold is John the Apostle), is not only familiar with the Gospel of Mark, but that he also assumes that many of his readers have read Mark. He even structures His Gospel (John) so that it fills out and explains much that Mark does not include in his Gospel. In short, there are echoes of Mark in John’s Gospel, and John intends His Gospel to differ from Mark’s. As Richard Bauckham puts it, “John is explicitly incomplete in aspects which… the Synoptic Gospels supply.”[1]

Puzzling Statements (John 3:24; 11:2)

What follows here is drawn from a chapter titled “John for Readers of Mark” by Richard Bauckham[2]. In reading Jonathan Pennington’s book Reading the Gospels Wisely, I came across a summary of Bauckham’s thoughts on this, and I have dug up more on the topic from simply following the helpful footnotes for more info.[3]

Two small and seemingly insignificant verses reveal John’s knowledge of Mark. And following their lead, a few other verses throw open the door to how John and Mark dovetail together.

John 3:24 “(For John had not yet been put in prison).”

John 3:24 is an aside, a parenthetical expression that is quite odd. Bauckham himself explains this quite clearly:

To understand the reason for the explanation, we are obliged to postulate implied readers/hearers who know more than the Gospel itself has told them. They seem to be expected already to know that John’s ministry came to an end when he was imprisoned, but even this knowledge is not sufficient to account for the explanation. Whether or not readers/hearers already know that John was imprisoned, they do not need to be told the obvious: that he was not yet imprisoned when he was still baptizing.[4]

Of the few references to John the Baptist’s imprisonment in the Synoptics, the one most likely referred to here is Mark 1:14. The comment in John 3:24 is there to let the reader know that this portion of Jesus’ ministry is taking place in between Mark 1:9-13 (which details Jesus’ baptism and subsequent temptation in the wilderness) and Mark 1:14 (which has Jesus going to Galilee to start his ministry there — right after John is imprisoned). This section in John’s Gospel, begins right after Jesus’ baptism (as hinted at in John 1:30) and continues through John 4:43 (where Jesus goes into Galilee for formal ministry — his time at Cana in John 2 was before his public ministry). So John wants his readers to know that John 1:19-4:43 fits between Mark 1:13 and 1:14.

John 11:2 “It was Mary who anointed the Lord with ointment and wiped his feet with her hair, whose brother Lazarus was ill.”

This statement in John 11:2 is similarly puzzling. Why name Mary of Bethany as the one who anointed Jesus one chapter before the story of Jesus’ anointing (by Mary) is told in John (chapter 12)? Readers of Mark (and the other Synoptics) would have known of a woman who anointed Jesus in Bethany. John connects their knowledge of that story with his account by naming the woman here. (She is not named in Mark 14:3-9.) John will go on in chapter 12 to use a different chronology than Mark, putting the anointing before the triumphal entry, rather than after it.

Filling Out, Re-Ordering, and Summarizing Mark

From these two examples, you can almost imagine John as he is writing his account of Jesus’ ministry. He feels the need to re-order a story here or there from Mark, and add a name or highlight a detail. He moves the clearing of the Temple (Mark 11:11-25) to the beginning of Jesus’ Judean ministry (John 2:13-22), and gives a new account of Jesus’ trial before Annas (John 18:13-23) not mentioned in Mark, just prior to the trial before Caiaphas (John 18:24). John’s briefer mention of Caiaphas’ trial is due to it already being discussed in detail by Mark (Mark 14:53-65).

At other points John quickly passes over long sections already mentioned by Mark, and fills out what Mark only hints at. John skips the sending of the 12 (which Mark includes), but gives a fuller account of the feeding of the 5,000 – explaining why Jesus and the disciples have to leave in such a hurry (Mark 6:45 compared to John 6:14-16). John also includes the longer discourse about the Bread of Life (John 6:22-71) which follows the miracle. And this is the closest John gets to mentioning the Lord’s Supper (this omission may serve to interpret/stress the significance of the Lord’s Supper).

Next, the second half of Jesus’ ministry in Galilee (Mark 6:54-9:50) “is summarized by John in a single sentence” (in John 7:1a)[5]. Mark 10:1 mentions a ministry in Judah followed by time beyond the Jordan (where Mark 10:1-31 takes place). John follows along by giving us a long description of Jesus’ Judean ministry (John 7:10-10:39) understood as occurring in the gap implied in Mark 10:1, and then devotes just a few verses (John 10:40-42) to describe the beyond-Jordan ministry that Mark already described more fully (Mark 10:1-31).

One more puzzling reference in John may allude to Mark. John 14:31, ends with the curious words “Rise, let us go from here.” But John 15 continues the conversation from John 14. The words “rise, let us go” or literally “get up, let us be going”, are also found in Mark 14:42, “Rise, let us be going; see, my betrayer is at hand.” Bauckham interprets this echo from Mark as a way John emphasizes that Jesus is voluntarily facing his death (mentioned in the verses just prior to 14:31)[6]. John uses these familiar words (to readers of Mark) as a way to call to mind Jesus’ decision to embrace his suffering.

For a fuller look at the arrangement of John in relation to Mark, the following two articles take Bauckham’s argument, expand on it, and provide tables comparing the two accounts side by side:

Historical Corroboration?

There may even be evidence from Church history that supports the treatment above. We have the following testimony of Eusebius, writing in the fourth century, of what Papias wrote (in the early second century) concerning Mark’s Gospel.

Papias gives also in his own work other accounts of the words of the Lord on the authority of Aristion who was mentioned above, and traditions as handed down by the presbyter John; to which we refer those who are fond of learning. But now we must add to the words of his which we have already quoted the tradition which he gives in regard to Mark, the author of the Gospel.

“This also the presbyter said: Mark, having become the interpreter of Peter, wrote down accurately, though not in order, whatsoever he remembered of the things said or done by Christ. For he neither heard the Lord nor followed him, but afterward, as I said, he followed Peter, who adapted his teaching to the needs of his hearers, but with no intention of giving a connected account of the Lord’s discourses, so that Mark committed no error while he thus wrote some things as he remembered them. For he was careful of one thing, not to omit any of the things which he had heard, and not to state any of them falsely.” These things are related by Papias concerning Mark.[7]

Concerning this passage (and the brief quote evidently from Papias on Matthew), Richard Bauckham draws this conclusion:

The only reason Papias could have had for thinking that the Gospels of Matthew and Mark both lacked the kind of order to be expected in a work deriving from an eyewitness is that he knew another Gospel, also of eyewitness origin, whose chronological sequence differed significantly from Mark’s and Matthew’s and whose ‘order’ Papias preferred.[8]

The presbyter (or elder) John, that Papias mentions, is sometimes understood as John the Apostle and author of John. In any case, a good argument can be made that Papias prefers the chronological order of John’s Gospel to that of Mark. Bauckham points out how the Muratorian Canon (late second century list of New Testament books with brief commentary) betrays influence by Papias, and so it’s statement that John wrote his Gospel “in order” suggests that Papias indeed did prefer John’s order to the lack of order in Mark and Matthew.[9] Here is the quote from the Muratorian Canon:

For so [John] confesses (himself) not merely an eye and ear witness, but also a writer of all the marvels of the Lord in order.[10]

Even More (Interlocking/Transposing Mark’s Theology)

Beyond the literary dovetailing described above and the historical pointers that John intended to re-order the Gospel accounts of Mark and Matthew, other testimony to Mark’s presence can be found through observing John’s own theology and points of emphasis. Pennington pointed out what he calls “the interlocking relationship of John and the Synoptics.”[11] This is a broader look at the question, and examines how in John’s theology and inclusion of material he is aware of Mark (and the Synoptics). Pennington draws from D.A. Carson on this point. Carson points out that in “many places… John and the Synoptics represent an interlocking tradition… they mutually reinforce or explain each other, without betraying overt literary dependence…”[12] Carson goes on to list many ways where the Synoptics and John overlap and interlock when it comes to theology and message. Andreas Köstenberger goes further and calls John’s approach a “theological transposition” of the Synoptics. For further study on this, see the resources listed in this note.[13]

Conclusion

I have rambled on and on, but I hope you can now appreciate even more how closely intertwined the Gospels are with one another. A lot of literary crafting is going on here! Readers of John who are unaware of Mark, can still find a coherent account of Jesus’ life and ministry in John. But the pointers are included for those aware of Mark to see how and where John is adding to Mark’s account and providing a fuller picture of the life of Jesus Christ.

Paying close attention to how each Gospel develops vertically (through its own account of Christ’s ministry) and horizontally (through its parallel passages and interlocking/dovetailing with the other Gospel accounts) is important for fully understanding each author’s intent. I also trust that you are better equipped for responding to criticisms directed at the discrepancies between the Gospels. Most of all I hope you can see how the life of Christ and the significance and message of the Gospel transcends any single telling. None of the Gospels alone can contain or explain it, and all four together only scratch the surface, as John himself says:

John 21:25 “Now there are also many other things that Jesus did. Were every one of them to be written, I suppose that the world itself could not contain the books that would be written.”

Footnotes

[1] Richard Bauckham, “The Johannine Jesus and the Synoptic Jesus,” online essay, p. 3 (This essay matches the name of a chapter from Gospel of Glory: Major Themes in Johannine Theology [Baker Academic, 2015]).

[2] Richard Bauckham (editor), “John for Readers of Mark”, The Gospel for All Christians: Rethinking the Gospel Audiences [Eerdmans, 1997], p.  147-172. [Preview available online here].

[3] Jonathan T. Pennington, Reading the Gospels Wisely: A Narrative and Theological Introduction, p. 64-66; also p. 59 note 16 and p. 194 note 12.

[4] Bauckham, “John for Readers of Mark”, 153. This quote is taken from Amazon’s “look inside” preview of the book. I had not yet purchased the book at the time this post was first published.

[5] Ibid, 156.

[6] Bauckham, “The Johannine Jesus and the Synoptic Jesus”, p. 8.

[7] “Eusebius of Caesarea – On Papias – original Greek Text with English translation“, [from Historia Ecclesiastica, 3. 39], paragraphs 14 and 15 accessed 11/13/18.

[8] Richard Bauckham, Jesus and the Eyewitnesses: The Gospels as Eyewitness Testimony [Eerdmans, 2006], p. 226. My attention was brought to this by Kyle R. Hughes, “Papias and the Gospels: Analysis and Evaluation of his Testimony in Eusebius’ H.E. 3.39“, accessed 11/13/18.

[9] Bauckham, Jesus and the Eyewitnesses, p. 425, ff. Note also that Bauckham holds that “presbyter John” is a disciple who was an eyewitness follower of Christ and the author of the Gospel of John, but he does not believe he is the Apostle John (son of Zebedee).

[10] The Muratorian Canon, lines 35-37, accessed 11/13/18.

[11] Pennington, Reading the Gospels Wisely, p. 64-65.

[12] D.A. Carson, The Gospel According to John (Pillar New Testament Commentary), [Apollos/Eerdmans: 1991], p. 52, ff.

[13] Andreas Köstenberger, A Theology of John’s Gospel and Letters [Zondervan, 2009], p. 555-563. Also see a fuller treatment (but without the handy tables) in “John’s Transposition Theology:
Retelling the Story of Jesus in a Different Key”, available online here (this is a chapter in Earliest Christian History: History, Literature, and Theology [Mohr/Siebeck: 2012]).

Image created from icons available here and here.

“The New Calvinism Considered: A Personal and Pastoral Assessment” by Jeremy Walker

~ Bob Hayton ~ 2 Comments

The New Calvinism Considered by Jeremy WalkerBook Details:
  • Author: Jeremy Walker
  • Category: Church & Ministry
  • Book Publisher: Evangelical Press (2013)
  • Format: softcover
  • Page Count: 128
  • ISBN#: 9780852349687
  • List Price: $11.18
  • Rating: Highly Recommended

Review:
The resurgence of Calvinism in the English speaking world in the last few decades has recently attracted a lot of attention. Christianity Today devoted an issue to the “Young, Restless, [and] Reformed” movement, and Time magazine dubbed the “new Calvinism” as one of the top ten ideas changing the world in 2009. And like any movement it has its detractors. Liberals inside and out of evangelicalism, are alarmed by its bold stand for complementarian (as in, non-egalitarian and anti-feminist) family values. Theological progressives deplore its “barbaric” insistence on penal, substitutionary (and by nature, blood-y) atonement. Mainstream evangelicals — charismatics, Baptists and non-denominationalists alike — are suspicious of the movement’s unabashed celebration of Calvinism. Groups who are more similar to the new Calvinism often decry the movement the loudest. The Reformed (with a capital “R”) are tempted to begrudge or belittle this movement: they were real Calvinists all along (and don’t see any need for a resurgence) and by nature, they are suspicious of anything not grounded in a several-hundred year-old Church confession or creed. Fundamentalists and those of their ilk, see a real threat in this movement: it can’t be easily pinned down and there is too much variety and not enough healthy separation from error.

New Calvinism is not exactly new anymore. And like any movement, it isn’t perfect. There are blind-spots, foibles and let-downs. Yet no one can deny the infusion of spiritual life that has accompanied this wide-ranging return to the Reformation. New and revitalized churches, a no-holds-barred approach to evangelism and mission, and a passionate advocacy of theology (and truth) are hallmarks of the movement. Even if you have quibbles with where some land on any number of doctrinal or practical issues, you should appreciate that by and large, the heart of this movement is one that yearns for God’s glory, that prizes a gospel of Grace, revels in the freedoms won by the cross of Christ, and both reveres Scripture and listens to the moving of the Spirit.

While the “new Calvinism” as it is often called, is mostly an American phenomenon, its influence is spreading to the United Kingdom and beyond. And it is from England that a new critique and thoughtful evaluation of new Calvinism has come. Jeremy Walker, a young pastor who contributes to the influential Reformation21 blog, has written a short examination of the movement: The New Calvinism Considered: A Personal and Pastoral Assessment (Evangelical Press, 2013).

This work is the first book-length critique of new Calvinism I have read, although throughout its pages Walker refers to countless internet discussions where critiques first surfaced. Having lived online through my blog, and interacting with some and reading others of the discussions first-hand, I can appreciate much that Walker is saying that some readers may miss. But I’m getting ahead of myself.

The book attempts first to characterize and classify the movement of new Calvinism. This in itself is a chore, I’m sure. And after he helps readers have a better sense of what he is talking about, he begins by pointing out several good qualities and positive effects of the movement. He then rounds out the book with cautions, concerns and his concluding counsel.

At the onset, Walker lays out his motives and the nature of his critique – a personal and pastoral assessment. He understands that he won’t be able to avoid generalizations, but does a good job underlining the fact that there is a broad spectrum in this movement and that not every critique will be valid for all. That being said, we must still evaluate how successful he is in his attempts to fairly characterize the movement. In describing new Calvinism, I felt that Walker’s Britishness hampered his ability to clearly assess and comprehend the movement. He acknowledges as much when he claims “I have something of an outside perspective on those [American] aspects of it” (pg. 11). This is evident as he points out the movement’s tendency to lift up individuals as standard-bearers to rally around – a very American trait which is as common among most of new Calvinism’s American critics as it is in new Calvinism itself. For every critic who singles out someone like John Piper as being a personality around which people “fawn” and hang on his every word, there is an equal part of adulation for someone like John MacArthur and his ability both as a teacher and as one who points out the flaws in parts of the new Calvinism movement. Another example where Walker misjudges the movement is in his criticism’s of the movement’s pragmatism and commercialism. It could be argued that a significant portion of the movement has made great strides in pulling themselves and their churches away from the pragmatism-driven American Church circus of the 80’s and 90’s. Bill Hybels and Rick Warren aren’t new Calvinists, and it is their influence among others, that has propelled a market-driven approach filled with business practices that John Piper has so eloquently decried in his book Brothers, We are Not Professionals. The Together for the Gospel conference can look big, staged and pragmatic from afar, but in comparison to some of the over-the-top, marketing-focused, gimmicky Church growth conferences that abound in America, it is really quite tame.

Of necessity, Walker points out concrete example after example to illustrate his concerns. And while they do help gain a sense of where he is coming from, they can also blunt his critique when the example doesn’t quite fit, or the context of an incident is missed in his use of it. Several times he singles out Mark Driscoll as an someone who embodies his particular critique. I don’t know many new Calvinists who are total Driscoll fan-boys. Many of us have concerns with some of his ministerial choices and don’t hold him as a true bell-ringer for this movement. Another problem with his examples is that at times it feels like he is rehashing blog-wars in a book to expand their influence. Often the blog-wars are dirty and statements and events are blown out of proportion to make a point, and this book suffers from the same problem at times. John Piper is taken to task for inviting Douglas Wilson and Rick Warren at different times to his Desiring God National Conference. Yet the nature of such conferences and the way they are handled at Desiring God, is a forum for discussion more than a blanket endorsement of the speakers. And while, Walker admits that the new Calvinism is not a denomination or a Church, he laments that no official action is taken for errors or misjudgments like this. The Gospel Coalition’s lack of [enough] action in the case of the Elephant Room incident where James McDonald and Mark Driscoll invited T.D. Jakes and treated him like a brother in Christ (not directly challenging him on his anti-trinitarianism and prosperity gospel teachings) is a case in point. The Coalition can’t really act, and respects the privacy of its inner workings. Not long after the incident both Driscoll and McDonald stepped down from official positions with TGC. And TGC’s leaders, Tim Keller and Don Carson drafted a statement about the matter explaining their actions taken. This isn’t enough for Walker, and it wasn’t enough for many bloggers either. But it is some action, and it is short of an official churchly action precisely because TGC is not a church.

As an appreciative member of the “Young, Restless, Reformed” movement (although the middle descriptor doesn’t exactly fit, I think), I cannot but speak in defense as I have above. But let me stress, there is much in this book that is worthy of your time. He does point out some important issues, and we do ignore thoughtful critique of our movement at our own peril. He points out the openness to the charismatic gifts and a looser, more open view of culture as areas of concern. Both areas are places where one can easily drift along in the movement unthinkingly following the ethos of others. Each item warrants thoughtful and personal study of the Scriptures and we ignore this to our peril. His other most poignant critique hits hard on the area of sanctification and holiness. In new Calvinism’s zeal for the gospel of grace, he fears we run hard to the opposite error: antinomianism. Having been freed from legalism, we tend to view laws of any kind as the problem, rather than our hard hearts. He makes the intriguing parallel that while many profess to be recovering Pharisees, almost no one admits to being the “recovering tax collector” (pg. 79). He is worthy of quoting on this point:

Again, let me point out that legalism is the pursuit of obedience with the intention of earning acceptance or merit and not the pursuit of obedience in accordance with God’s law as one redeemed by grace….

My fear is that this view will become very attractive to people who want the privileges and benefits and eased conscience of a Christian profession without the demand for holiness being pressed into their hearts resulting in the vigorous pursuit of godliness. Clearly this is not the intention of the new Calvinists by and large… But my concern is that this teaching may create an atmosphere in which liberty is made a cloak for license. (pg. 82-83)

Walker challenges his readers to just “be Calvinists” (pg. 107). He wants them to stay true to God’s Word no matter what movements swirl around them. His call is right even if some of his criticisms are ill-founded or off-base. We do need to be careful to pursue godliness. We should be wary of the deceitful pull of ecumenism and the dangers of an arrogant triumphalism that some are seeing as a byproduct of new Calvinism. We serve Christ not the latest fad. I do have confidence that much that has been gained through the rise of new Calvinism is not mere chaff to be blown around with the winds of change. I have seen lives transformed as they discover the gospel of Grace and the doctrines of Grace through the writings and ministry of many of the new Calvinist leaders. I trust that while I became a Calvinist through this new movement, that I will remain true to the Word of God and “be a Calvinist” no matter what happens as seasons come and go.

Walker’s admonition to his audience of people not quite sure what to do with new Calvinism can be equally applied to those of us who are tempted to bristle at any criticism of our movement:

We are not called, first and foremost, to spend all our time worrying about other shepherds, but more to give ourselves to following the Great Shepherd in our convictions and actions. We must look first to ourselves in this regard and ensure that our doctrine and our practice marry, that we manifest degrees of heat and of light that are coordinate with and complementary to one another. We neither know all we should, nor do all that we know, and it is in the equal march of faith and life, knowing and doing, telling and showing, that we gain the platform that will enable us to serve our friends who differ from us in other respects. (pg. 107-108)

This kind of thoughtful reflection and eloquence of speech characterize this work. Walker is bold and forthright but he aims to be fair and charitable. His message deserves to be read widely, and his conclusion heeded by all on every side of this. May we all be found faithful, and my the Lord’s work continue, come what may.

About the author

Jeremy Walker was born to godly parents and was converted to Christ during his teenage years. he serves as a pastor of Maidenbower Baptist Church, Crawley, and is married to Alissa, with whom he enjoys the blessing of three children. He has authored several books and blogs at Reformation21 and The Wanderer.

Where to Buy:
  • Amazon.com
  • Christianbook.com
  • Direct from Evangelical Press

Disclaimer:
This book was provided by Evangelical Press. The reviewer was under no obligation to offer a positive review.

Book Giveaway: “Collected Writings on Scripture” by D.A. Carson

~ Bob Hayton ~ 3 Comments

For those who couldn’t come to The Gospel Coalition Conference last week, here’s your chance to win a free copy of D.A. Carson’s book Collected Writings on Scripture (edited by Andrew Naselli). You can read my review of the book here.

Use the Google form below to enter the contest. One random person will receive a copy of Collected Writings on Scripture by D.A. Carson, compliments of Crossway Books. As I’m fitting the bill for postage, the contest is limited to the 48 continental US states.

Only one entry per person, duplicate or questionable entries will be rejected. Contest runs through Wednesday April 27 at 9pm Central. Winner will be notified by email.

Click on the “Read Inside PDF” link at the Westminster Bookstore book detail page, to answer the bonus question, below. (You can find it through Crossway’s product page or Amazon’s read inside link, too.)

Contest is now closed.

Congratulations go to Brandon Lehr, the winner of the free copy of Collected Writings on Scripture by D.A. Carson.

“Collected Writings on Scripture” by D.A. Carson (edited by Andrew Naselli)

~ Bob Hayton ~ 4 Comments

Crossway gave all the attendees of The Gospel Coalition Conference a copy of this book, last week. I thought I’d post my review, and host a book giveaway for my blog readers who have followed my blog updates from The Gospel Coalition Conference. No, I didn’t read and review the book in one week; I already had received 2 copies of this book from Crossway. Look for details on the giveaway, tomorrow.

Solomon said “there is nothing new under the sun”. In theology, however, this often appears not to be the case. With the preponderance of scholars today divided up into numerous different biblical disciplines, a constant barrage of books and controversies threatened to inundate us in a tidal wave of “new” ideas and opinions. Against such a barrage, we need seasoned, Christian scholars who can navigate through this sea of scholarly opinion without losing their bearings on the north star of Christian orthodox truth.

D.A. Carson is just such a scholar. Over thirty plus years of ministry, Carson has plotted a faithful course and in the process has given the Church an abundance of incredibly helpful books and articles along the way. He’s also had a hand in training many Christian ministers of the gospel to cling to the Word of God in today’s dark world. As I read through a recent compilation of many of Carson’s writings on Scripture, I was amazed at how relevant his treatment of the doctrine in the controversies of 20 years ago was to today. Maybe Solomon was right after all!

In Collected Writings on Scripture, recently published by Crossway, Andrew Naselli has compiled some of D.A. Carson’s most helpful articles, essays and book reviews on the subject of Scripture. Most of these writings are chapters in a book somewhere or an article in a journal from 20 years ago elsewhere. Naselli has helpfully collected them in one volume, and after working my way through the book, I agree this was a wise decision.

Carson has the ability to cut through the fog and get to the heart of a controversy, while at the same time staying dispassionate and irenic. His clear reason and forceful logic require even those being critiqued to agree that he has correctly captured their viewpoint even as he finds some fault with it. For the reader, Carson takes one on a journey across the last thirty years and indeed over the past two thousand. He surveys new developments in the doctrine of Scripture and compares them to church history and Scripture itself. Some of the essays or reviews are more technical and focus on a particular author or controversy, but Carson takes pains to show how what is at stake in an individual work applies to the broader picture. Along the way, a robust doctrine of Scripture is hammered out on the anvil of controversy and I found that my confidence and trust in the orthodox doctrines of verbal inspiration and inerrancy were strengthened.

Carson doesn’t just preach to the choir. He chastens the church for the diminishing role of the authority of Scriptures. He doesn’t hesitate to use the work of others, either. Whether it’s a jewel of a quote from Calvin, or a painstaking new explanation of the New Testament witness to inerrancy by Grudem, Carson is both aware of the contribution of others and applies it winsomely to the current discussion.

Carson’s ability to dissect a book and both appreciate its good points and show its weaknesses is nothing short of amazing. A few of the chapters deal with three books on Scripture at once. Seeing Carson interact with these books strengthened my critical eye and informed me of Carson’s perspective at the same time. I was particularly helped by his discussion of Peter Enns’s book Inspiration and Incarnation. Carson is disturbed by Enns seeming goal of overthrowing the confidence in Scripture that many of his readers have: “Wow. So are we explaining how evangelical faith accommodates biblical scholarship, or are we asserting that a Copernican revolution must take place within evangelical faith so as to accommodate biblical scholarship?” (pg. 367). He goes on to show that while incarnation can be a helpful analogy for understanding Scripture, Enns fails to explain what view of incarnation he has, how exactly Jesus’ humanity equates to Scripture’s humanness (if Scripture has errors does that mean Jesus had sin??), and how he uses the analogy. Carson concludes, rather, that “‘Incarnation’ is merely a rhetorically positive word to approve Enns’s argument” (pg. 269).

Carson’s review of Enns’s book leads to my one disappointment with this collection. Carson deals a lot with hermeneutics in dealing with Peter Enns’s claims. Carson concludes concerning the apostles that their “hermeneutic… overlaps with that of the Jews, is distinguishable from it, and at certain points is much more in line with the actual shape of Scripture: it rests on the unpacking of the Bible’s storyline.” (pg. 282). It is here that I wish Carson would elaborate. I was hoping this collection would include Carson’s thoughts on hermeneutics along with inspiration and canonization. I’m not sure if Carson has given us an extended treatment of hermeneutics, so that might be why it is excluded. Still, what is included is superb and furthers my belief that Carson’s scholarship is one of the incredible blessings God has given the Church today.

This book is not for everyone. Some familiarity with current controversies over inerrancy and Scripture is required. Students and pastors alike will be blessed and challenged by reading this book. And even if it is a stretch for you, you should benefit. I know I did. I recommend the book highly.

Disclaimer: This book was provided by Crossway Books for review. I was under no obligation to offer a favorable review.

You can pick up a copy of this book at Amazon.com or through direct from Crossway.

Bob’s Blog Finds: Magic, Polygamy, Abortion, Politics & More

~ Bob Hayton

In my blog finds I highlight some of the best articles I’ve found online recently. You can see all my blog finds in my sidebar, under the Bob’s Blog Finds & Bob’s on Twitter sections.

Magic

Barry Wallace of Who Am I? has an interesting post examining the question “Is All Magic Evil?” It has special reference to reading books about magic such as the Chronicles of Narnia or even Harry Potter. I left my reasons for reading (and enjoying) the Harry Potter series in the comments there.

Polygamy in America

Albert Mohler directed my attention to a fascinating article in National Geographic re: polygamy in America. The profile of the Mormon Fundamentalist Church of the Latter Day Saints is shocking, interesting and sad at the same time.

Abortion

Speaking of Al Mohler, he has a good article on a new trend among abortionists. They are leaving the profession largely due to their encounters with ultrasound images of babies and abortions. Read his post entitled, “Mugged by Ultrasound“.

Politics

I didn’t listen to the State of the Union address. And all accounts I’ve seen of it make me glad I didn’t. I don’t like to get mad over politics and I would have been! La Shawn Barber pointed out (via her twitter feed), a good review of the speech at Politics Daily.

Profiles: Tony Dungy & Don Carson

I also found a fascinating write up of Tony Dungy by ESPN. It examines his character and his role as one who helps troubled sports starts gain reconciliation. The article elevated my respect for the man (which was already quite high). It’s worth the read.

Sharper Iron also recently posted a tribute to Don Carson. He truly is the epitome of a Christian Scholar who serves the church. It is good to see fundamentalists learning from people like Carson, and respecting him while disagreeing with his “non-fundamentalist” actions. I appreciated the article and you might to.