Justin Taylor is a long-time electronic friend of mine.  He has always struck me as a good brother when I have met him face to face, and I very much enjoy his blog.  A couple of years ago I interviewed him by email. This video is him turning the tables on me.  We talk about my book Raised With Christ. This first appeared on Justin’s Blog. Let him know if you think he makes a good interviewer as he is considering doing similar films with other authors in the future. I think he did really well and am beginning to get used to having the tables turned on me!

OK, so that title got your attention! In fact, Justin Taylor’s blog Between Two Worlds will no longer be updated at its old address. But Justin has not, thankfully given up blogging. Instead his wonderful blog has moved to be hosted at The Gospel Coalition. I cannot commend his posts enough, he provides the Christian world with a fantastic service. So, add his new feed to your feed reader or follow him on twitter. You can also read Justin Taylor’s blog on the kindle, and as I for some reason only discovered today adrianwarnock.com is also available that way.

Incidently, the Gospel Coalition has also started its own official blog today. Like Justin, I am very supportive of the aims of the Coalition, and happy to be a member of it. Their blog has started very well and as a result I have given it a warnie award today. This means that from now own, headlines from the Gospel Coalition posts will join Justin’s and others in my sidebar, as well as in the Warnies Twitter feed which is an easy way of keeping up to date with some great Christian blogs.

Only one book is absolutely essential to save us, to equip us to obey God’s will, and to glorify Him in whatever we do. Only one book gives us undiluted truth–the whole truth and nothing but the truth. Only one book serves as our ultimate and final authority in all that it affirms. That book, of course, is the Bible, God’s Holy Word. . .

And yet the irony is that if we use only this book, we may in fact be in disobedience to it. We should count good teaching about the Bible–whether through commentaries, books, sermons, study Bibles, and so on–to be a gift from God for the good of His church (see Eph. 4:11; James 1:17). So what may look pious on the outside (“Just me and my Bible!”) can actually mask pride on the inside. . . READ MORE

My buddy Mike shared this video of his new ESV Study Bible. Enjoy.

You can purchase an ESV Study Bible online.

In an incredibly helpful discussion, chaired by Justin Taylor at the recent DGM conference, Driscoll defined friends as follows:

As you read this, I have just returned from a blog holiday. Thanks to Blogger’s scheduling feature, I have been able to give this blogger a rest without any interruption of posts while I was away. Although I am now back, and while I do have to return to work, I want to maintain some sense of the rest and relaxation that hopefully I was able to enjoy. Therefore the auto-published posts will continue without the usual attention from my editor, as I am giving her a break, too.

Since I am basically away, it’s a good time to introduce you to a new blog. It’s by my friend, Joel Virgo, and some of his fellow elders at Church of Christ the King. There are lots of cool posts already, including a report from the recent New Day Youth Conference. So go read it right now! I have decided to give this blog a “Warnie Award,” and their posts will appear in my sidebar from now on.

The next fifteen days will see me release the top thirty posts here on the blog as defined by their readership from the 1st of January 2008 through the 31st of July 2008. I will share links to two such posts a day, and I hope that you will find it a useful chance to catch up with some of my older material that you may not have seen before. Posts that are similar or in a series will only be represented by the most popular post.

Let me introduce you to the 30th most read post, which is no small thing when there are over 3,000 others that didn’t make the top thirty. The post is a short one, giving my response to John Piper’s announcement that he plans to attach a Bible college to his church, which will have a very different philosophy and charging structure.

In 29th place is my interview with my friend, Justin Taylor.

No. 19 on the list of the most widely read posts on this blog appeared on January 17, 2006, and was a lengthy chat I had with Justin Taylor. Few editors are as well-known as Justin. He has expertise in editing others’ writings, highlighting interesting posts around the blogosphere, and creating his own work. He is now an integral part of the Crossway Books team. He is also someone I am pleased to be able to call a friend.

Adrian
It is a real pleasure to be able to welcome to the blog, Justin Taylor, who is known to some as John Piper’s right hand man. First off, Justin, perhaps you can tell us all a little bit about yourself and how you came to be working with John Piper.

Justin
Adrian, it’s a pleasure to chat with you. Before I answer, let me first express my gratitude for your work in the blogosphere in producing thoughtful edifying material, as well as your work in encouraging and connecting with other bloggers.

About myself? At the risk of boring your readers, I was raised in a Christian family. I first prayed the sinner’s prayer at age 4. Then I prayed it again at ages 5, 6, 7, 8, etc. I consider my decisive conversion to be after my freshman year in high school, when I truly understood the nature of Christ’s finished work on my behalf.

When I went off to college four years later, I took a humanities course with a professor who would later become my advisor. I was captivated and frustrated with the first lecture—which was a passionate plea for the idea that a belief in moral absolutes was the source of great evil in the world!

I soon became a Study of Religion major, and almost lost my faith in the process. I had never really encountered intellectual arguments against Christianity, and they were now flying at me fast and furious. After one particularly vigorous discussion, based on the implications of Gordon Kaufman’s Theology for a Nuclear Age, I remember being pretty shaken. I had no interest in believing a Christianity that wasn’t true. Walking back from class, I sat down and leaned against a large tree, staring at the stars and expressing my doubts and confusion to God. God was very kind and merciful to me, and in that moment granted me a sense of peace and assurance. From that point on, I continued with my questions, but I knew that only a fool could deny his Creator.

Thus began an interest for me in apologetics and theology. During the summer break following my freshman year, my friend Matt Perman (now the Internet and radio director at Desiring God) was writing me long letters seeking to persuade me that Calvinism was biblical. In the mail he sent me a tape by John Piper on definite atonement. I was intrigued by the message because Piper was clear, winsome, and intellectually challenging. (My general view of pastors at that time was one of well-meaning anti-intellectuals.) I began listening to more and more Piper tapes.

Our public University of Northern Iowa had about 13,0000 students. By my junior year, 1,000 students a week were attending a weekly Christian meeting. And the interesting thing is that John Piper, along with corollaries like Calvinism and Christian hedonism, became one of the main topics of conversation among the Christian student body.

I made a couple of trips to Bethlehem Baptist Church (just a few hours drive away) to hear Piper preach. One Sunday I was there with my brother. I said to him at one point, “I’d love to just come here for a year or two and hear him preach—even if I had to clean toilets as an excuse to hear the sermons!” I inquired as to whether Bethlehem did apprenticeships, and it turned out that The Bethlehem Institute, a two-year, seminary-level apprenticeship program, was being planned at that time.

When I graduated from UNI in 1998, I applied for TBI. I was the first applicant. Not knowing if any more would apply, I was accepted! So I did an apprenticeship from 1998-2000. And one of my jobs during that time was as a janitor at Bethlehem—cleaning toilets! (I’ll let the debate rage in the comments section as to whether my previous utterance in this regard was prophetic!)

In 2000, I was planning to go to the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville to complete my MDiv. Piper’s editor was asked to take over a church, and thus the job opened up. Desiring God prevailed upon me to stay for just one year. At the end of one year, we had a moving van lined up to take us to Southern. But DG prevailed again, and I’ve been at DG ever since. In mid-January, however, we’ll be moving to Wheaton, Illinois, where I will take a job at Crossway Books as the Managing Editor for the forthcoming ESV Study Bible.

Adrian
You may have seen some discussion about discipleship on my blog following a post by Tim Challies about being jealous of Josh Harris. That inspired my interview with Josh Harris, which focused on his relationship with C. J. Mahaney. I guess it was also part of my motivation behind asking you today. Do you get the impression that your relationship with John is similar to the relationship Josh has with C. J.?

Justin
I’m not sure there are very many people in the world who have a relationship like C. J. and Josh have! One of the differences is that C. J. was specifically grooming and mentoring Josh to step into C. J.’s pastoral role, whereas I was first a student of John’s, and then his employee. So our relationship of necessity has looked quite a bit different. John has been a wonderful mentor, friend, and counselor to me. No one has taught me more about the centrality of God in Christ and his supremacy over all things for his glory and the good of his people.

The question most people ask me about John is whether or not he’s the real deal. I can say with absolute confidence that he is. What you see is what you get. He lives modestly (he doesn’t personally receive a single penny from his book royalties), he is teachable, he is humble, and he goes hard after God. It has been such a privilege and joy to study under him and to work for him these past seven years.

Read more . . . Adrian Interviews Justin Taylor

Photo of Justin Taylor courtesy of Tony S. Reinke, The Shepherd’s Scrapbook. Used by permission.

In conclusive proof that there is nothing new under the sun, we see in this quote on John Owen a devoted conviction to both Word and Spirit. How we need churches today who will bring both emphases to the fore, as did Martyn Lloyd Jones in the quote I posted yesterday.

May God raise up an army of believers who can say “Amen!” to the following quote where Owen is described by the editors of Communion With the Triune God as follows:

“Central to Puritan thinking was an effort to make sure their activities held together two realities—Word and Spirit. Thus, even when Puritans spoke of the vital importance of the Word—whether preached or read—they always linked this with the Spirit. For them, Spirit and Word should always be united; when they are separated, problems quickly arise. John Owen self-consciously viewed himself as a theologian of the Spirit, and as such he poured more time and energy into exploring questions related to the third person of the Trinity than anyone else in his day, and possibly even before him.”

Owen, John. Communion With the Triune God, Eds. Kelly M. Kapic and Justin Taylor, Crossway Books, Wheaton, Illinois, 2007, p. 42.

You may remember a simple definition of the word charismatic I shared from a recent book review which began: “Those who recognize that the gift of the Spirit is to be received . . .”

While it is anachronistic to ask if John Owen was a charismatic, it is very interesting indeed that, like John Piper and Martyn Lloyd-Jones, he makes a clear distinction between the work of the Spirit in saving us and another experiential work that is available to those who desire a dynamic relationship with God. Here is how the introduction to Communion with The Triune God explains this:

“. . . when Owen unpacks the work of the Spirit, he makes a distinction between the Spirit being received in terms of “sanctification” and the Spirit’s work of “consolation.” 15 When he refers to sanctification in this context he means the work whereby the Spirit sets us apart, uniting us to Christ and making us alive. This is “a mere passive reception, as a vessel receives water.” 16 This is the movement from being outside the kingdom of God to becoming a child of the King.

When Owen speaks of the Spirit’s work of consolation, he has in mind the comforting activity of the Spirit in the life of the believer. Christians need not be passive in the hope that the Spirit will bring comfort; rather, they should (1) seek his comfort by focusing on the promises of God realized in the Spirit, (2) call out to the Spirit of supplication to bring consolation, and (3) attend “to his motions,” which take us to the Father and Son. In all of this we rightly and actively receive him who freely comes to bring comfort and grace. Again, our union with God in Christ is never in jeopardy, but our sense of fellowship with God does necessitate appropriate human agency and response.

Keeping in mind Owen’s distinction between union and communion, one is better able to make sense of his conclusion: “The Spirit as a sanctifier comes with power, to conquer an unbelieving heart; the Spirit as a comforter comes with sweetness, to be received in a believing heart.” 20 Though the Spirit will never abandon a believer, it should not surprise us that neglecting such receptivity to the Spirit’s movement compromises our sense of intimacy. For Owen, grace must be understood as the ground of this relationship, from first to last, from justification to preservation of the saints, from God’s acceptance of us to his glorifying the saints—grace is the bottom of the entire understanding of the saints’ security and privilege before God. 21 This grace, however, demands rather than denies human response” (page 22-23).

Sometime ago I posted about the fact that it is Jesus who best reveals to us the attributes of God. It was therefore thrilling to see that this concept echoed down the centuries in the writings of John Owen. “The great revelation of Christ to us is that of “God as a Father,” and this matters greatly, “for the love of the Father is the only rest of the soul” (page 31). Those words are worthy of much thought and meditation. Owen’s thinking is explained further as follows:

“While Owen’s theological approach is unapologetically Trinitarian, he is not shy about being Christ-centered—Jesus Christ is the mediator between God and man who grounds our knowledge and communion in God. To know God, we are called to look to Christ. We are often tempted to formulate views of God without reference to Christ, and in this way we run the risk of constructing a philosophical rather than biblical conception of the divine. In truth, Scripture in general and Christ in particular must govern our notion of God.

To Know God, Look to the Son

Divine attributes, or truths about God, should always be viewed through the lens of Christ. Owen argues that we will never understand “some of the most eminent and glorious properties of God” unless we see them as revealed in “the Lord Christ, but only by and in him.”

. . . For the Son is the great revelation of the Father (Hebrews 1:3), and the Spirit always draws believers to the Son, who is the perfect image of God. By Jesus Christ “alone we have our understanding to know him that is true.” Elsewhere he writes: “There is no acquaintance with God, as love, and full of kindness, patience, grace, and pardoning mercy . . . but only in Christ.”

To appreciate Owen’s Christ-centered approach we must recognize that for him, the incarnate Lord is the “medium of all communication between God and us. In him we meet, in him we walk . . .

By emphasizing Christ, Owen is not meaning to pit the divine persons against one another, but is aiming to maintain the biblical pattern and method for framing our communion with God. We come to the Father through the Son in the Spirit . . .

So discussions about the attributes of God are best viewed, not vaguely, but clearly through a christological lens. To speak of these attributes as philosophical abstractions, and not in light of the incarnation, is to risk opening up all kinds of sub-Christian conceptions of God.

On the other hand, Owen argues that discussing God’s attributes in light of Christ yields not just greater understanding but also strong comfort for God’s people. These attributes apart from Christ bring only feelings of terror, misery, and uncertainty. “There is no saving knowledge of any property of God, nor such as brings consolation, but what alone is to be had in Christ Jesus, being laid up in him, and manifested by him” (pages 32-33).

Some today argue that the Trinity is a relatively novel concept. Owen demonstrates this is not true and cites Gregory of Nazianzus’ statement: “No sooner do I conceive of the One than I am illumined by the Splendour of the Three; no sooner do I distinguish Them than I am carried back to the One” (cited on page 28 of Communion with the Triune God). We can learn much from Owen’s teaching on the Trinity:

“We do not have competing gods, but rather one God in three persons, free and united, wise and deliberate—One God, yet having distinction in himself. While distinctions among the persons can be made, God always works in perfect harmony and is worshiped in light of that. Three examples may prove helpful. First, consider the example of faith—it is given by the Father as the source, directed toward the Son who secures and increases faith, and empowered by the Spirit of life. Second, Owen employs the model of God giving diverse gifts: different gifts come from the same Spirit, and varieties of service from the same Lord, and various empowerments come from the same God: “so graces and gifts are bestowed, and so are they received.” They come from the divine persons, and thus from God, and we respond to the persons, and thus to God himself.

Third, holiness for the saints is the will of the triune God for his people. Thus, the Father has “appointed it” (Ephesians 2:10), the Son also ordains or appoints it “as the mediator” (John 15:16), and the Spirit “appoints and ordains” this holiness in believers (Acts 13:2). Christian obedience is placed in the context of the desire and empowerment of the triune God” (page 26).

It is clear from all this that the Trinity should not be the object of a dispassionate academic study. No, it is only as we contemplate God in all his unity and distinctions that we will both learn to love him and understand more about him. Our contemplation of God is more like the love of a child for his parents than a professor for his expert topic.

Yesterday we shared a great definition of the Gospel taken from the Forward to the forthcoming Crossway book, Communion with the Triune God.

Today we will share more words from the introductory portions of that book which will explain this further and show the emphasis Owen placed on an experience of God: “I pray God with all my heart that I may be weary of everything else but converse and communion with him.” (John Owen, letter to Sir John Hartop, cited on page 14.) The editors explain this further:

. . we will begin by considering our relationship with God. To experience communion there needs to be fellowship and communication—e.g., shared affections, response, delight, and satisfaction. In other words, when Owen speaks of our communion with God, he really means active communion, and not merely a state of passivity. “Communion consists in giving and receiving.”

But to appreciate how this informs his view of spirituality, it is important to note that Owen maintains an essential distinction between union and communion. Believers are united to Christ in God by the Spirit. This union is a unilateral action by God in which those who were dead are made alive, those who lived in darkness begin to see the light, and those who were enslaved to sin are set free to be loved and to love. When one speaks of “union,” it must be clear that the human person is merely receptive, being the object of God’s gracious action.

This is the state and condition of all true saints. Communion with God, however, is distinct from union. Those who are united to Christ are called to respond to God’s loving embrace. While union with Christ is something that does not ebb and flow, one’s experience of communion with Christ can fluctuate.” (Page 21)

Yesterday I began a series of posts inspired by the introductory materials to the forthcoming Crossway book, Communion With the Triune God by John Owen.

One major preoccupation of this blog which has been overarching much of my writing has been that of the Gospel itself. In an age which tends to assume or even deny the Gospel, I have been eager to examine it again. This major theme has been inspired by the Together for the Gospel Statement, which I will return shortly to blogging my way through. I have also looked at the atonement, which is the foundation of the Gospel, how we are to preach that Gospel, and how we can be missional and share that Gospel. Owen’s emphasis on the goal of the Gospel is vital for us today.

The theme of Owen’s book is an experiential relationship with God, which is also no stranger to this blog. I love the way that Owen identifies this with the Gospel. It reminds me of John Piper, who insisted in one of his books that it is God himself who is the Gospel.

In the following quote from the Forward of Communion With the Triune God we find the following Owen-inspired definition of the Gospel:

“The gospel is the good news that in Christ there is union and communion with God. According to Owen, communion involves “mutual relations” between God and humankind—a giving and receiving—but it does not follow that God and humankind are equal partners. Only God can bring about the union that establishes and enables the subsequent communion. Humans enjoy fellowship with God, therefore, only by actively participating in what God has unilaterally done for them in Christ through the Spirit. Owen may here have something to teach contemporary theology concerning the nature of human participation in God’s triune life, namely, that participation, like communion itself, is neither a legal fiction nor idle piety, but rather the meat and drink of the Christian life. We appropriate the friendship God offers through the workings of his Word and Spirit in and through our natural human faculties.” (page 12)

I pray that the 21st century Church will learn to “appropriate the friendship God offers.” What better description of the Christian experience could there be? Join me tomorrow as I share another gem from this forthcoming book.

Every now and then a book arrives in my hands that I realize is too important for me to wait until I have finished reading it before I comment on it here. The book I want to discuss is so important that I knew before I had even finished the introduction I had to tell you about it.

Justin Taylor and his friend, Kelly Kapic, have done it again. Following the advice of his previous boss, John Piper, Justin knows that dead Christian leaders have much to teach us. Sadly, with the passing of time it becomes ever harder for readers to understand the writings of these great divines. I have been aware of John Owen for many years. I even picked up one or two of his books before and tried to read them. I didn’t get far. So I was pleased this time last year when Justin and Kelly brought out an edited version of Owen’s works on sin called Overcoming Sin and Temptation.

Taylor and Kapic’s approach to this work was simple. Without abridging or changing the meaning of what Owen had to say, they cast their expert editors’ eyes over the book in light of the 21st century reader. Archaic spellings and forms were changed. ‘Thou’ was replaced with ‘you,’ footnotes were referenced, and so on. The result was a book that is much easier to read, and yet true to the author’s intent.

I did not review Overcoming Sin and Temptation at the time of launch, largely because at the time I thought I should wait until I had read every word before I mentioned the book here. I have decided not to make the same mistake with their second offering—Communion with the Triune God. There is so much for us to learn from this vital book that I plan on spending a number of days blogging about the introductory material that has been included before Owen’s original book begins. As the themes of this book by Owen were outlined, I realized that the things he held dear were very much related to many issues that I have come back to often in my own writing. It almost felt as though Owen had been reading this blog (and decided to greatly improve upon it!). Join me tomorrow as I reflect on the first of a series of quotes that have resonated with me like few others I have ever read.

Justin Taylor has shared a number of statements on which Mark Dever agreed with David Coffin from the PCA about baptism. The following extracts stood out to me (hence the odd numbering), but they are all worth reading. Do any of you, my readers, disagree with any of these?

You will note that, for once, I’m standing on the sidelines of this debate, simply pointing out what various people are saying. I should, however, at least say that there are a couple of the statements on Dever’s list with which I am not sure I totally agree, and some that I would be surprised to find that David Wayne (and other paedobaptists whom I love) would sign.

• (#1) No one disagrees with professor baptism (except Quakers).

• (#10) Infant baptism is widely practiced by the late second [century] A.D.
• (#11) There are some who are baptized who are not in fact saved.
• (#12) There are some who are not baptized who are in fact saved.
• (#15) The texts urging “believe and be baptized” or referring to “household” baptisms do not of themselves constitute conclusive evidence for either side.
• (#17) Children of believers enjoy particular privileges and have special obligations.

Lig has written about his main reasons for believing in paedobaptism. What he hasn’t said is whether he thinks he should be allowed to become a member in a baptist church if he wanted to, or whether a baptist would be free to join his church. Here are Lig’s arguements for christening babies:-

1. God, in both the Old and New Testaments, explicitly makes a promise to believers and to their children (Genesis 17:7; Acts 2:39).

2. God, in both the Old and New Testaments, explicitly attaches specific signs (respectively, circumcision [Genesis 17:10] and baptism [Acts 2:38, cf. Colossians 2:11-12], to this promise that he gives to believers and their children.

3. Therefore, since God has given an explicit promise to believers and their children, in the New Testament, and attached a sign to this promise, and enjoined us (in the new covenant) to administer that sign [baptism, Matthew 28:19-20], then we should give the sign of the promise he has made to believers and their children, to believers and their children, in humble obedience to biblical command and example. QED.

Just in case those arguments are causing any good baptists out there to wobble in their convictions, Justin Taylor has constructed a quick reply to Lig though he is planning a fuller one soon. He said -

. . . as a credobaptist, I think that Peter’s command and promise says more than the paedobaptists want it to say. It reads:
38 And Peter said to them, “Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. 39 For the promise is for you and for your children and for all who are far off, everyone whom the Lord our God calls to himself.”
Note the portion I’ve italicized. “You,” “your children,” and “all who are far off” are all on the same level. In other words, (1) the condition and the command (repent and be baptized) as well as (2) the promise (you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit) are designed not only for you and your kids, but also for all people . , ,

UPDATE
In January 2008, the following post was identified as the 19th all-time most popular post with readers of this blog. The 20th most-read post was “Twelve Literary Features of the Bible.”

Few editors are as well known as Justin Taylor. He has expertise in editing others’ writings, highlighting interesting posts, and creating his own work. He is now an integral part of the Crossway Books team. He is also someone I am pleased to be able to call a friend.

***************

Adrian
It is a real pleasure to be able to welcome to the blog, Justin Taylor, who is known to some as John Piper’s right hand man. First off, Justin, perhaps you can tell us all a little bit about yourself and how you came to be working with John Piper.

Justin
Adrian, it’s a pleasure to chat with you. Before I answer, let me first express my gratitude for your work in the blogosphere in producing thoughtful edifying material, as well as your work in encouraging and connecting with other bloggers.

About myself? At the risk of boring your readers, I was raised in a Christian family. I first prayed the sinner’s prayer at age 4. Then I prayed it again at ages 5, 6, 7, 8, etc. I consider my decisive conversion to be after my freshman year in high school, when I truly understood the nature of Christ’s finished work on my behalf.

When I went off to college four years later, I took a humanities course with a professor who would later become my advisor. I was captivated and frustrated with the first lecture—which was a passionate plea for the idea that a belief in moral absolutes was the source of great evil in the world!

I soon became a Study of Religion major, and almost lost my faith in the process. I had never really encountered intellectual arguments against Christianity, and they were now flying at me fast and furious. After one particularly vigorous discussion, based on the implications of Gordon Kaufman’s Theology for a Nuclear Age, I remember being pretty shaken. I had no interest in believing a Christianity that wasn’t true. Walking back from class, I sat down and leaned against a large tree, staring at the stars and expressing my doubts and confusion to God. God was very kind and merciful to me, and in that moment granted me a sense of peace and assurance. From that point on, I continued with my questions, but I knew that only a fool could deny his Creator.

Thus began an interest for me in apologetics and theology. During the summer break following my freshman year, my friend Matt Perman (now the Internet and radio director at Desiring God) was writing me long letters seeking to persuade me that Calvinism was biblical. In the mail he sent me a tape by John Piper on definite atonement. I was intrigued by the message because Piper was clear, winsome, and intellectually challenging. (My general view of pastors at that time was one of well-meaning anti-intellectuals.) I began listening to more and more Piper tapes.

Our public University of Northern Iowa had about 13,0000 students. By my junior year, 1,000 students a week were attending a weekly Christian meeting. And the interesting thing is that John Piper, along with corollaries like Calvinism and Christian hedonism, became one of the main topics of conversation among the Christian student body.

I made a couple of trips to Bethlehem Baptist Church (just a few hours drive away) to hear Piper preach. One Sunday I was there with my brother. I said to him at one point, “I’d love to just come here for a year or two and hear him preach—even if I had to clean toilets as an excuse to hear the sermons!” I inquired as to whether Bethlehem did apprenticeships, and it turned out that The Bethlehem Institute, a two-year, seminary-level apprenticeship program, was being planned at that time.

When I graduated from UNI in 1998, I applied for TBI. I was the first applicant. Not knowing if any more would apply, I was accepted! So I did an apprenticeship from 1998-2000. And one of my jobs during that time was as a janitor at Bethlehem—cleaning toilets! (I’ll let the debate rage in the comments section as to whether my previous utterance in this regard was prophetic!)

In 2000, I was planning to go to the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville to complete my MDiv. Piper’s editor was asked to take over a church, and thus the job opened up. Desiring God prevailed upon me to stay for just one year. At the end of one year, we had a moving van lined up to take us to Southern. But DG prevailed again, and I’ve been at DG ever since. In mid-January, however, we’ll be moving to Wheaton, Illinois, where I will take a job at Crossway Books as the Managing Editor for the forthcoming ESV Study Bible.

Adrian
You may have seen some discussion about discipleship on my blog following a post by Tim Challies about being jealous of Josh Harris. That inspired my interview with Josh Harris, which focused on his relationship with C. J. Mahaney. I guess it was also part of my motivation behind asking you today. Do you get the impression that your relationship with John is similar to the relationship Josh has with C. J.?

Justin
I’m not sure there are very many people in the world who have a relationship like C. J. and Josh have! One of the differences is that C. J. was specifically grooming and mentoring Josh to step into C. J.’s pastoral role, whereas I was first a student of John’s, and then his employee. So our relationship of necessity has looked quite a bit different. John has been a wonderful mentor, friend, and counselor to me. No one has taught me more about the centrality of God in Christ and his supremacy over all things for his glory and the good of his people.

The question most people ask me about John is whether or not he’s the real deal. I can say with absolute confidence that he is. What you see is what you get. He lives modestly (he doesn’t personally receive a single penny from his book royalties), he is teachable, he is humble, and he goes hard after God. It has been such a privilege and joy to study under him and to work for him these past seven years.

Adrian
How important is such a relationship to someone’s development as a Christian leader, or for that matter as a Christian full-stop.

Justin
It’s crucial, I think, to have someone like this in your life. One of the simple, yet remarkable, benefits is to see a real person who truly and faithfully loves God whom you can imitate. We read about great heroes of the faith in books, but sometimes that can feel distant, and we never know for sure if the biographer is downplaying the warts or exaggerating the virtues. To interact on a regular basis with an older, sanctified sinner saved by grace who can be imitated is a great privilege indeed.

I would add two caveats to this:

1. Don’t think that you have to find C. J. Mahaney or John Piper in order to have an effective mentor. There is only one C. J. in the world and there is only one John. Don’t bypass the mentoring opportunity in your midst just because you are waiting for the perfect relationship to materialize somehow.

2. Be careful not to see mentorship as only something that you receive. One of the goals of being mentored should be for the mentoree to become a mentor. The Navigators, who take discipleship very seriously, love to quote 2 Timothy 2:2: “And what you have heard from me in the presence of many witnesses entrust to faithful men who will be able to teach others also.” I sometimes see guys who are a bit more concerned with being mentored than with modeling maturity and godliness to younger men. I would encourage everyone—male or female, young or old—to be on the lookout for people to serve, and to develop the spiritual maturity such that others will want to learn from and to imitate you.

Adrian
My response to Tim’s post was to put the responsibility on the seeker to do whatever it takes to find such a relationship, if that is what they really want. I suggested that changing churches might even be necessary in some cases. Do you agree that it is so important that at times radical action is necessary?

Justin
Radical action is indeed needed at times. But I tend to think that believers should be generally hesitant to leave a church where they have covenanted to worship and serve. I do think that those who desire to be mentored need to be proactive. But there are some personality types that are overly ambitious who could create problems by seeking this too aggressively. I’d counsel someone in this position to be bold before God in prayer on this, and humble and meek before others in seeking such relationships.

Adrian
Moving onto a different subject, what makes you get up in the morning?

Justin
Either our 2-year-old daughter, our 7-month old son, or the alarm clock! On a more serious note—I know that despite my weaknesses and the slowness of my sanctification, God has called me to fulfill a role in his kingdom. I’m thankful that he has looked upon one as undeserving as me and given me work to do, whether that be as a husband, as a father, as a member of my church, as an editor, as a friend, or as a blogger. Those joyful responsibilities, along with God’s ever-fresh mercies, get me up in the morning.

Adrian
Many people today are somewhat despondent about the Church. Are you one of those people? What do you feel the future holds for the Church?

Justin
It’s hard to be despondent about the future of the Church when you know that the gates of hell shall not prevail against it (Matthew 16:18). Certainly there is great reason to be concerned. The Osteenification and Oprahization of evangelicalism—where the emphasis in on the therapeutic and on surface feelings and the trivial—is deeply troubling to me. Some, however, see evangelicalism as a monolithic mass sliding downward. I tend to have a different view. I think that the bad is getting worse and the good is getting better. On the one hand there are throngs of people that are attracted to anything new, but nothing weighty. On the other hand we see a growth in reformed theology and ministries dedicated to strengthening the Church. For example, all of the following ministries are led by pastors dedicated to reformational theology and committed to the local church:

• 9 Marks (Mark Dever)

• Grace to You (John MacArthur)
• Desiring God (John Piper)
• Sovereign Grace (C. J. Mahaney)
• Ligonier Ministries (R. C. Sproul)
• Truth for Life (Alistair Begg)
• The Alliance of Confessing Evangelicals, among others.

Just as the mainstream media can become addicted to highlighting only what’s wrong with the world, so those of us in the blogosphere can sometimes get too caught up with all that’s wrong with the Church. Criticism and correction has its place—I engage in it myself—but we also need to do a better job of pointing people to the edifying evidences of grace in the Church today. I get tired of people saying that they love Jesus, but they don’t like his bride.

Adrian
Looking at the Church in the 21st century, what do you feel are the biggest challenges it faces? What are the biggest dangers for us?

Justin
The biggest challenge for the Church in the 21st century is the same challenge of the first century, and all centuries in-between. I believe it’s the issue of belief versus unbelief. Will we lose sight of the grace and beauty of God’s grandeur and glory in the face of Jesus Christ? Will we trust God’s precious promises? Will we bow to the authority of King Jesus, and obey his Word? Will we base the imperatives of our ethics upon the indicatives of the gospel? The temptations for unbelief take different forms throughout the ages, but they are essentially manifestations of the question Satan asked in the Garden, “Did God really say . . .?”

Adrian
How important do you feel the charismatic issue is? I was beginning to feel that it was a dead issue that no one cared about any more. What I now realize is that we have become so separated that no one even seems to know what people on the other side of this particular fence even think any more. Do you think that the controversy will ever go away? Can we ever actually understand each other?

Justin
It’s been hard for me to get too worked up about it, and frankly I don’t follow the discussion in the blogosphere all that much. I think the entire controversy would go away and we would all get along if only everyone would read and heed Vern Poythress article! Obviously I believe there are real differences, but I do wish more folks would follow Poythress’ lead in examining and rejoicing in the common ground that both sides share.

Adrian
Thanks for that link by the way, I do agree that Vern’s article should be read by everyone involved in this particular discussion. I do think it’s possible that charismatics and non-charismatics can have some degree of rapprochement. I’m not quite so sure about the emergents, however. What do you think about the emergent church?

Justin
Ah, there’s so much to say! Just a few thoughts for you:

1. I think we should distinguish between “Emergent” and “emerging.” All that is Emergent (U.S. organization) is emerging (loosely connected, international, ecclesiastical movement). But not all that is emerging is Emergent. For example, there are those like Mark Driscoll of Mars Hill Church in Seattle who would be described as emerging or missional, but who have distanced themselves from Emergent as an organization.

2. I believe, with Mortimer Adler [see How to Read a Book] that one is not entitled to critique until he has demonstrated understanding. I think we should first try hard to restate the Emergent arguments and self-identification in such a way that they would say, “Yes, you’ve got it.” I don’t see that reciprocated very often. Which of the major Emergent proponents could one point to and say, “Ah, that person knows and is restating the best of evangelicalism in such a way that I agree.”

   As a couple of examples—has anyone ever seen an Emergent proponent describe Calvinism or complementarianism in such a way that Calvinists and complementarians would be happy with it? (Obviously I haven’t read all the literature or blogs out there, but I haven’t come across any examples thus far.) I also hasten to add that some evangelicals need to do a better job of understanding before critiquing (as the former invariably affects the latter).

3. I wonder if Emergent folks have made “conversation” and “tone” into a virtual idol. It almost seems to be treated as an end in itself. If you were to do a poll among Emergent folks (leaders, bloggers, commenters, etc.) and ask them what they dislike so intensely about Don Carson’s Becoming Conversant with Emergent, at the top of the list would be the fact that he didn’t talk to them first. Now I think conversing is wise and can help, but I don’t think it’s a necessary or sufficient condition for understanding someone’s thought, especially if they’ve put it in print.

   I find that many of the critiques and reviews of Emergent stuff are dismissed because it is supposed they are written in such a way that is “not helpful” or “won’t win an audience” or a hearing. I think that all Christians should have high standards with regard to accuracy and civility, speaking the truth in love.

   But it is possible to elevate tone and manner in such a way that any critique or concern must be couched in such nuance and qualification that it loses all of its prophetic edge. Compare how Paul wrote to the Galatians and the Philippians. To the churches at Galatia he was justifiably angry and condemnatory due to the introduction of a false gospel. But we don’t find that same attitude when he writes to the Philippians. There are people there who are preaching in order that Paul would be persecuted. (More gospel preaching meant more persecution.) But Paul rejoices! What’s the difference? In the one situation the tone and attitude is ungodly, and yet Paul is overjoyed because the truth is nonetheless being proclaimed. In the other situation the motives may have been sincere, but the content of the no-gospel led Paul to speak in the harshest of terms. I think this example should be instructive for us not to put tone out of its biblical perspective.

4. I’m always suspicious of movements where there are continual complaints that critics misunderstand or just don’t get it. Now it’s always going to be the case that some critics won’t get it right or will miss some nuance. But if you make that response too often, it’s probably the case that the proponents either have a lack of clarity or are hypersensitive. In this case, I think both explanations are at play.
5. I do think there is some value in the questions that Emergent is raising (although I’m much less impressed with the answers they have given). Carson has pointed out that in someone like Tim Keller, you have all the positives of Emergent, but none of the troubling negatives. I think that Keller’s writings are very provocative and gospel-centered. (The link will take you to a list of his online articles.)

Adrian
You have become quite well-known in the Christian blogopshere. What is your view of the God bloggers scene? How do you see it progressing?

Justin
I’m not sure I have much insight on the God blog scene. I’m delighted that there are an increasing number of Christian bloggers, and for the most part, I think that much of the interaction is thoughtful and fruitful. Honestly, I don’t read that many Christian blogs (maybe four or five), so others would have more insight than me. One thing I’d like to see more of is some sustained engagement with unbelievers on current cultural issues. That was one of the motivations behind the Ethics Symposium that Joe Carter and I pulled together.

Evangelicals often want to be part of the discussion and to have a seat at the table. But if we wait around to be invited, it’ll never happen. I’ve been trying to co-sponsor something similar with another ministry partner. I’d like to see more things like that. In each issue, Modern Reformation used to interview a non-Christian or someone outside of their tradition. I think that can be fruitful, engaging with those outside our camp, as well as modeling how to do so. There is a danger that we can become “of the world,” but there’s also a danger that we remain “outside” the world.

Adrian
Do you believe that blogging can have spiritually good effects in a blogger’s life? Might it even have positive effects for the Church as a whole?

Justin
Like almost everything, it has the potential for both good and bad. One of the most important benefits, I think, is that it requires thinking, reading, and writing. Most of our thinking is hazy and muddled until we attempt to express ourselves in writing. Good reading and good writing are important disciplines for Christians to cultivate, and blogging can help if done correctly. Another positive effect of blogging is a form of accountability for one’s thoughts and expressions. Bloggers have audiences, and careless words become part of the “permanent record” as it were. The same is true in a spiritual sense for everyone. But I think that the blogging enterprise helps to reinforce that, which is a good thing.

On the other side, the blogosphere can also become addictive, with people reading and writing and commenting on blogs obsessively. There is something amiss, I would suggest, when the majority of your communication throughout the day is electronic, and you don’t have very much face-to-face fellowship and interaction. There are also temptations to gossip and to respond with rudeness.

Bob Kauflin and Mark Roberts (at the World Mag sub-blog, Theologica) have done some helpful posts on how Christians should blog.

Adrian
We have seen some quite well-known Christians start blogs recently. Do you think that is a trend that will continue?

Justin
I hope so. Albert Mohler, president of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, has certainly led the way. Not only is he one of the most respected and influential evangelicals today, but he has also become a prolific blogger. I’m also happy to be a part of the Reformation 21 Blog, where Ligon Duncan, Philip Ryken, Rick Phillips, and Carl Trueman (who rarely posts under that name!) all contribute. And I’d love to see the Together for the Gospel guys get together to start a blog. Well-known New Testament scholars like Ben Witherington and Scot McKnight have started blogs and gained quite a following. Both are to the left of me theologically and politically, but they almost always have something interesting to say.

Adrian
What are your own plans for the future, Justin? Do you see your blog becoming an ever more important part of your ministry? Can you tell us anything about any new books you are working on?

Justin
We are in the process of a move to Wheaton, Illinois for my new job. The past seven years in Minneapolis at Desiring God and Bethlehem have been a wonderful season for us. But we’re also excited about this new chapter of our lives. After years of uncertainty of what I would like to do when I grew up, I now feel fairly confident that I would like to stay in the publishing industry long-term.

I’m not really sure what the future plans for my blog will be. (Perhaps someday I’ll get around to moving to a different location than Blogger.com.) I enjoy blogging, and I enjoy the interaction that goes on because of it. But it’s not my primary calling, and I have to be careful that I don’t let the tail wag the dog.

As for new books—I’m currently under contract with Crossway to edit a new edition of John Owen’s three main writings on sin: Mortification of Sin, Temptation of Sin, and Indwelling Sin. Kelly Kapic of Covenant College, who will be publishing an academic book on Owen’s Communion with God, will be my co-editor. We will be providing introductions, adding headings, footnotes, a glossary, etc.

I’ll also be editing Suffering and the Sovereignty of God, the follow-up book to Desiring God’s conference in 2005, with speakers like John Piper, Joni Eareckson Tada, Mark Talbot, David Powlison, Carl Ellis, and Steve Saint.

Adrian
Thanks very much for joining us here on the blog. That’s all we have time for, I am afraid!

Photo of Justin Taylor courtesy of Tony S. Reinke, The Shepherd’s Scrapbook. Used by permission.