Monthly Archives: August 2010





Trevin Wax|3:30 am CT

Not Like the Beasts

Guest Post by Robert Sagers

In a recent issue of First Things, Mary Eberstadt surveys America’s growing “sexual obesity.” The article, “The Weight of Smut,” is devoted in part to knocking down three common myths surrounding pornography use. It’s well worth reading in full.

One insight in particular, however, caught my attention. It seems that when one exposes pornography for what it is, it’s “practically guaranteed to elicit malice and venom unique in their potency from its defenders.” Eberstadt continues:

What does it tell us that, when faced with any attempt to make the case that this substance should be harder to get than it is, some reliable subset of defenders can be counted on to respond more like animals than like people? If such is not the very definition of addiction, what is?

It was the insight regarding the animal-response that has stuck with me since I first read this article. It’s not just, it seems to me, those enslaved to pornography who may lash out when their sin is exposed. No.

Instead, it seems to me that any of us is tempted to respond like that whenever the light encroaches on our dark places. And Satan is surely pleased that it can devolve us into beasts.

It may be an aspect of the mystery of lawlessness that causes us, at times, to respond not with gratitude but with (un)righteous indignation when our pet addictions, our personal idolatries, are exposed.

If we respond with disdain when our spending habits come under scrutiny, perhaps we’ve fallen into mammon-worship. If we respond with vitriol when our relationships are questioned, perhaps those relationships are inappropriate. If we respond with hatred when our particular political party is critiqued, perhaps we’re worshiping the wrong king.

Let’s be joyful when our sin is exposed. And then let’s repent, and be grateful for the Spirit’s work.

Satan sees when we treat each other not with the manifestation of the fruit of the Spirit, but the manifestation of the works of the flesh—he sees, and grins. Let’s not give Satan reason to smile.

Let’s make sure that when we speak to one another, perhaps even when our sin is exposed, that we respond like people—like Christians—and not like the beasts.





Trevin Wax|2:30 am CT

Worth a Look 8.31.10

Guest Post by Robert Sagers

—John Mark Reynolds posts some reflections after having read Harriet Jacobs’s, Incidents in the Life of a Slave Girl. “The only possible moral justification for race based slavery collapsed the moment a slave was baptized,” he writes.

—Mollie Ziegler of reflects on some media coverage following the “Restoring Honor” event from this past weekend, calling it “the biggest civil religion event I’d seen since the 2008 Obama campaign.”

Carl Trueman posted yesterday on pastors who know their congregants’ names—a post to which Justin Taylor responded, which elicited then a response from Trueman.

—Are you looking for that perfect compliment for your host at the backyard cookout? Kevin DeYoung points to one that can’t miss.





Trevin Wax|3:30 am CT

HT: Justin Taylor

Guest Post by Robert Sagers

If you’ve spent any amount of time scouring the Christian blogosphere, you’ve likely encountered the near ubiquitous line at the bottom of many a post: “HT: JT.”

That’s because Justin Taylor is so good—perhaps the best—at pointing us all to so many resources on the Internet, in print, and elsewhere.

Justin was kind to answer some questions about how and why he got into blogging, his work at Crossway (and his past work for John Piper), his current projects, and speaking “with a gospel-accent.”

Robert Sagers: Justin, please tell the readers of Kingdom People a little about yourself—where you’re from, your family, and how you came to Christ?

Justin Taylor: I’m from Sioux City, Iowa. I grew up in a great family and first prayed the sinner’s prayer when I was 4. And then again when I was 4 1/2. And about a thousand times thereafter!

My wife Lea and I met in elementary school (though she was a year ahead of me) and we went to the same United Methodist Church. I fell in love with her in sixth grade. She reciprocated at the end of college!

I don’t know when exactly I became a true believer. As I mentioned, I was a church-going, sinners-prayer-praying kid, but became somewhat cold to the Lord, though was externally a goodie-two-shoes. At an FCA camp in Colorado, between my freshman and sophomore years, I began to understand the work of Christ and the sufficiency of his righteousness for the first time. Whether that was conversion or renewal, I’m not sure it matters. Everything changed after that.

RES: What were you doing before you began working at Crossway? How did the Lord direct you to move to begin working for a Christian publisher?

JT: Before my work at Crossway I was at Desiring God, working as the theological director and serving as John Piper‘s theological assistant/editor. Our six years at Bethlehem marked me in more ways than I can possibly recall.

I wrestled for years as to whether I should become a Professor (which would mean getting a PhD) or become a Pastor. I have some giftings for both, but neither was a perfect fit. When the opportunity came up to serve as the Managing Editor of the ESV Study Bible, it seemed like the Lord had designed a job fit perfectly for me. Crossway has been a wonderful vocational home for me.

RES: What is your role at Crossway? What is your role at your local church? What is your role with your family? How do you see each of those roles fitting together?

JT: I’m VP of editorial at Crossway. A big part of my work is acquisitions and working with our publishing team. I’m an elder at our church, with some teaching duties and occasional preaching. With my family, I’m a father and a husband—and of course I’m also a son and a brother.

In some ways I suppose the term “shepherding” could apply to each of these roles of work-church-family. In publishing I’m working with our team to help select, steer, shape, and shepherd edifying books through the publishing process. At church I’m trying to work with the other pastor-elders to lead, teach, and love God’s people faithfully. And in my family I’m trying to guide and care for my wife and kids in a way that will show them grace, truth, and love.

RES: How, when, and why did you first get into blogging?

JT: In one sense I guess I’ve always had a blogger’s instinct. After all, “show & tell” was my favorite subject in elementary school!

In the fall of 2004 I did a quick read of Hugh Hewitt‘s book entitled Blog. I think that book helped to nudge a lot of people to start blogging. (Joe Carter is another example.) I was already sharing links to news stories and books with a small group of friends and thought I could just continue doing this to a wider audience. My main principle, I suppose, was that I’d post something if I found it sufficiently interesting and thought others might think the same. I think I’ve matured a bit since then and “found my voice” (as they say). I still want to keep things interesting but also try to make sure it’s edifying in some way.

RES: Many of your readers may want to know how it is that you blog so much. How do you find the time?

JT: I think it’s a combo of things: (1) I really enjoy blogging, and when you enjoy something it’s easier to find time to do it; (2) there are some things I don’t do anymore (e.g., I hardly ever watch sports like I used to—cue the small violin…); (3) a lot of my blogging overlaps with stuff I’m already doing, have already read, etc. (e.g., it’s pretty easy to blog about a Crossway book that I’ve known about for over a year); (4) I’m more of “pointing” blogger than I am a “producing blogger.” For example, Tim Challies only posts once a day, but if I tried to produce as much original stuff as him or as thorough of book reviews I wouldn’t be able to do it.

RES: People may be helped by hearing a bit about the discernment process you go through in deciding whether or not to post something on your blog.

JT: After a while things become largely intuitive and you have to stop and think about the explicit, unarticulated criteria. I don’t really have a checklist or anything. But I try to make sure it’s edifying on some level, and that it’s something sufficiently interesting. I get asked to blog various books and such, and the thing that often holds me back is not that it’s bad, but that I’m not that excited about it. I don’t want to blog something merely because someone has asked me to do so.

Also, I tend to run controversial things past a couple of friends whose value and wisdom I trust. If I do go ahead with the post, I usually tweak something as a result of their feedback. And the fact is, I have quite a few blog posts that are drafted but never end up seeing the light of day.

RES: In what way(s) do you think God uses blogs to advance the purposes of the gospel of Jesus Christ? In what way(s) do you think Satan uses blogs to advance the purposes of the gospel of antichrist?

JT: The goal of the gospel of the kingdom is for God’s people to become increasingly conformed to the image of Christ. The goal of Satan’s counterfeit ministry is for people to be increasingly conformed to anything but Christ.

I think sometimes we put blogs in this unique category of communication. Yes, there are some special contours to the medium, but by and large they are simply one way in which we speak to one another—in exhortation, correction, critique, praise, humor, confession, etc. Insofar as they consciously seek to emulate and advance kingdom values, making much of Christ, they will be Christian. Insofar as they don’t, they aren’t.

RES: If you could change one thing about the blogosphere, what would it be?

JT: I once wrote in a blog post that we need “more arguments and less arguing.” What I meant was that we need better reasoning and less rancor. I think I’ve seen an improvement—to some degree—in the comments section of my own blog.

I think many of us have a long way to go in letting the grace, beauty, and power of the gospel saturate our heart and mind to the extent that we simply speak with a gospel-accent.

RES: You don’t just point to the writings of others; you’re also an accomplished author and editor yourself. How did you get into writing and editing? Is there anything that you’re working on currently?

JT: With regard to editing: I remember in college helping a friend prepare for a talk he was going to give to a large gathering of Christian students. And I realized—I’m not the one being asked to give these talks but somehow I can help a friend like this take a good talk and make it better.

Working with John Piper was an enormous privilege, especially to edit his materials, which are so rich. I sometimes joke, though, that being Piper’s theological assistant is kind of like being the Maytag repair man!

As far as current projects: There are a few things in the works, but the big project, which will extend over a number of years, is a series of books I am co-editing with Steve Nichols called “Theologians on the Christian Life.” These will be scholarly-informed but accessible introductions to how key theologians thought about what it means to live the Christian life: Sean Lucas on Edwards, Steve Nichols on Bonhoeffer, Fred Sanders on Wesley, Derek Thomas on Bunyan, Timothy George on Augustine, Carl Trueman on Luther, Phil Johnson on Spurgeon, etc.

RES: Is there anything else that you’d like to leave with the readers of Kingdom People?

JT: I’d just encourage all of us in the “Christian blogosphere”—bloggers, commenters, etc.—to band together to think through what it might look like to put into practice this vision called for by David Powlison:

We should actively intend good, seeking to “give grace to those who hear.” That takes thought about one’s motives, tone, framing, balance of emphases. . . . Thoughtful work on that topic will break new ground, applying the call to “speak truth in love” into an instant-information context where all errors, blunders, sins, failings, and mere clumsiness are potentially available for public scorn. What does it mean to forebear each other in such a world? What does it mean to cover sins in mercy (not cover-up, but true covering in mercy), to allow others to find care and restoration in their own interpersonal context, rather than attempting to humiliate them before the whole world? What does it mean to express the sort of communal tenderness that Dietrich Bonhoeffer captures so well in Life Together—a communal life that includes reproof as a form of love?

But the leading edge of our argument is to place checks on the tendency we all have to snide, sneering, self-righteous, gossipy, malicious words. Any growth we can make in the direction of Ephesians 4:29 will make life much more joyous for all, and bring much glory to our God. And even criticisms I make become more hearable when I the critic am not posturing, but actually care about others. When I don’t care, my bad attitude and superiority becomes my actual message. Love is patient, love is kind . . . and then love is candid.





Trevin Wax|2:30 am CT

Worth a Look 8.30.10

Guest Post by Robert Sagers

—Theologian Donald Bloesch has gone to be with the Lord. Chad Brand, who wrote his doctoral dissertation on Bloesch’s theological method—and who often assigns a Bloesch volume in his classes—remembers him here, and Fred Sanders reflects on the man and his work here.

—Yesterday, August 29, was the five year anniversary of Hurricane Katrina‘s hitting the Gulf Coast. View some photographs of the destruction here (HT: Z). Here’s Russell Moore on “Of Christ and Katrina, Five Years Later.”

—Speaking of Russell Moore, Trevin wanted to make sure that I posted his take on the weekend’s festivities in Washington, D.C.: “God, the Gospel, and Glenn Beck.”

Tony Jones responded last week to Brett McCracken’s widely circulated Wall Street Journal article on “wannabe cool” Christianity. (And remember, as you read: hipsters need Jesus, too!)





Trevin Wax|3:55 am CT

Les Misérables: Quotes to Ponder (2)

Julie Rose’s new translation of Victor Hugo’s Les Miserables has been part of my summer reading. On Saturdays, I am sharing some quotes worth pondering (see first collection here):

“Pain everywhere is an occasion for goodness always.” (49)

“And yet, the details, which are wrongly described as little – there are no little facts in the human realm, any more than there are little leaves in the realm of vegetation – are useful. The face of the century is made up of the lines of the years.” (102)

“Puns are the droppings of the mind in flight.” (114)

“Indigestion was invented by God to force morality on stomachs.” (115)

“Whether a person sits or stands – fate hangs by threads like these.” (127)

“What a gravedigger does becomes cheery when done by a child.” (128)

“Certain natures can only love someone when they hate someone else.” (132)

“No one pries as effectively into other people’s business as those whose business it most definitely is not.” (150)

On the virtuous: “Their lives have a sequel.” (153)

“They say slavery has vanished from European civilization. That is wrong. It still exists, but now preys only on women, and it goes by the name of prostitution.” (158)

“Curiosity is a form of greed. To see is to devour.” (160)





Trevin Wax|3:29 am CT

Trevin's Seven

Seven links for your weekend reading:

1. J.D. Greear on “small applauders”. Or “why we should seek to be large applauders and small critics”

2. Another way the internet is changing everything: “Scholars Test Web Alternative to Peer Review”

3. My friend and fellow blogger, Zach Nielsen, has recorded a jazz EP called Songs in a Minor Key. Five songs for $4.95. Check it out.

4. Tiny Seattle apartment (I am fascinated by unique uses of tight spaces.)

5. Jim Wallis apologizes to Marvin Olasky after the Sojourners funding controversy.

6. The Christian Index interviews Barry McCarty, well-known SBC parliamentarian. McCarty offers some fascinating reflections on the SBC presidents with whom he has served.

7. The International Mission Board and the North American Mission Board are asking for prayer on August 28 as both organizations search for presidents.





Trevin Wax|3:33 am CT

Book Notes: Jesus the Fool / Collected Writings on Scripture

Brief notes on two books I have read recently:

Collected Writings on Scripture
D.A. Carson
Crossway (2010)
My Rating: **** 1/2

This collection includes D.A. Carson’s essays and book reviews which touch on a variety of Scripture-related subjects, from the use of redaction criticism to the pitfalls of postmodern hermeneutics. The book is intended for an academic audience, yet Carson’s intricate argumentation is punctuated by his brilliant wit:

  • Reviewing a book by J.D.G. Dunn: “There is an important place for superficial books, but it is sad to see a superficial book claiming to present a profound argument.” (126)
  • On the “spiritual benefits” of studying Bultmann: “I think it likely that few are spiritually uplifted in any distinctively Christian sense by being assured by Bultmann that angels, miracles, resurrection, and self-incarnating God are all impossible…” (217)
  • On a recent book that downplays propositional truth: “This book abounds in assertions about how unimportant assertions are.” (313)

The best part of Carson’s work is his insistence that students of Scripture seek not to master the text, but be mastered by the Bible.

Jesus the Fool:
The Mission of the Unconventional Christ

Michael Frost
Zondervan (2010)
My Rating: ***

Michael Frost believes that followers of Jesus should seek to be the kind of fool Jesus was – intentionally conspicuous, selfless, and defying the world’s standards of success, prestige and influence. We need a good does of biblical “foolishness” that enhances our ministry.

Frost’s book builds on the work of New Testament scholar Kenneth Bailey and focuses primarily on Jesus’ teachings and parables. Though I don’t agree with everything in this book, I am puzzled by the Brian McLaren endorsement on the back cover, since Jesus the Fool fits well into mainstream evangelical thought. Frost casts a traditional understanding of Jesus in a creative light that reminds us of the social barriers Jesus tore down.





Trevin Wax|2:40 am CT

Worth a Look 8.26.10

I may have written a strong critique for Michael Spencer’s book, Mere Churchianity, but I absolutely loved certain parts – like this one, which I selected for inclusion in Christianity Today.

Amid Furor on Islamic Center, Pleas for Orthodox Church Nearby:

It was the news media, and then a number of political candidates, who first brought attention to the purported disparity in the official treatment of the developers of the Islamic center and of the Orthodox church, the bishop said.

Hurdles to Financial Peace (Dave Ramsey):

Debt is so ingrained into our culture that most Americans can’t even imagine a car without a payment, a house without a mortgage, or a student without a loan. Debt is sold with such repetition that most people cannot comprehend a life without payments.

We’ve bought into the myth that we can get rich quick. But it will never happen. Living a financially healthy lifestyle is a slow-cooker concept that isn’t always popular in our microwave society.

A good article from Christianity Today exploring the issues and controversy surrounding Dinesh D’Souza’s recent appointment as president of King’s College:

The King’s College surprised many higher education observers by choosing Dinesh D’Souza, widely identified as a Roman Catholic, as president of the New York City school. As a best-selling author and Christian apologist, D’Souza brings prominence and a network of influential leaders to the position. But King’s decision to put a Catholic at the helm could create tension within a historically evangelical institution.





Trevin Wax|3:13 am CT

Holiness, Love and the Church: A Conversation with Jonathan Leeman

A couple weeks ago, some of our church members were listing ways that we can be a more loving church. Many ideas were suggested:

  • Welcoming guests
  • Caring for each other in times of trial
  • Celebrating with one another over successes, etc.

Eventually, the discussion arrived at the need for challenging one another to holiness. One comment in particular stood out. In some churches, when a couple gets divorced, others will gossip and say, “I’ve seen that coming for years.” The question came up: How is it loving to see a family self-destructing, but to not intervene, challenge, rebuke and restore?

That conversation brings me to a recent book by Jonathan Leeman: The Church and the Surprising Offense of God’s Love: Reintroducing the Doctrines of Church Membership and Discipline (Crossway, 2010). This book was given away at the 2010 Together for the Gospel. I had the chance to work my way through it this summer and found it to be a very helpful resource for thinking through the nature of Christian love and church leadership. Today, Jonathan joins me for a conversation about his book.

Trevin Wax: What I like about your work, Jonathan, is that you are challenging us to adopt a more biblical view of love. Why is it that this view seems so “offensive?”

Jonathan Leeman: Great question, Trevin. The offensiveness of God’s love and Christian love is that it calls us to holiness. It grabs us wherever we are, but then it refuses to leave us wherever we are. It calls us to conform to Christ’s image.

As sinners who are in love with our sin, we don’t always like being asked to let go of our idols. But Christian love is willing to offer the socially awkward word of rebuke. Christian love is willing to risk stepping on someone’s toes because you don’t want to see them continue heading down the path of sin and self-destruction.

Think about this in our culture in particular. We are suspicious of anyone who claims to have “the truth.” But Christian love (which John’s epistles tell us always comes together with truth–just read 2 John!) not only claims to have the truth, as revealed in the Bible, it’s presumptuous enough to say to someone, “Oh, friend, this truth applies to you and you need to hear it and give up that idol which you love so much. That idol is a liar and only promises more bondage. I love you, please hear me.”

In a word, God’s love is offensive because it refuses to tolerate our sin. It calls us to life and freedom, but we prefer our slavery.

Trevin Wax: So God’s love calls us to holiness, but it doesn’t mean that our church will be perfect, right? I’m recalling a section in your book when you expound on the “love chapter” in 1 Corinthians 13 and show how the biblical understanding of love takes place within the context of a church that has a myriad of problems.

Jonathan Leeman: Perfect? Goodness no. That’s like asking whether a car repair garage is for perfect cars. No, it’s a place for broken down cars! Come one, come all! But come recognizing that we’re a repair shop, and we’re going to get to work.

Think of 1 Corinthians 13′s words: “Love does not delight in evil but rejoices in the truth.” In the car repair garage of the church, we’re going to “always trust, always hope, always persevere” in pointing people away from the evils of broken down engines and the truth of life-giving engines. Okay, so this analogy is getting ridiculous. I have no idea what that last sentence means.

Let me drop the analogy: Sometimes churches emphasize, “We’ll love you right where you’re at.” That’s exactly right. Jesus’ work of atonement covers you right where you’re at. As the hymn writer puts it, “If you wait until you’re better, you will never come at all.’” But it’s just the first step.

A second emphasis needs to follow: “Not only does Jesus’ blood cover your sins, The Holy Spirit has the power to change you, and give you new life, new affections, new freedom, and a new obedience to God’s perfect way.” This is where the whole emphasis on kingdom living comes in.

Bottom line: A church is a place where a bunch of broken sinners help one another battle sin.

Trevin Wax: So then the key here isn’t sin. It’s repentance. The church isn’t separate from the world in that we’re sinless; it’s that we seek that the whole of our life be one of repentance (to borrow from Martin Luther).

You write about church discipline and the sad necessity of excluding people from membership. Talk of excluding someone smacks of meanness and hate, not love, for most people. How can discipline or even exclusion be an act of love?

Jonathan Leeman: Well, think of Hebrews 12 where we’re told that God disciplines us like a father who disciplines the son he loves, so that we might grow in righteousness and peace. This is a theme you see throughout the Scriptures–Proverbs even says that a parent who doesn’t discipline a child hates that child. Wow. That’s not how our culture thinks, is it?

But what about actually excluding someone from a local church? Read Matthew 18:15-20. Jesus makes it clear that we should pursue a person who is sinning again and again, calling them to repent. But if in the final analysis, that person chooses his or her sin over repentance, Jesus says to treat the individual as someone outside the covenant community–that is, not a Christian. He or she has been given a choice between their sin and Jesus, and the person has said, “I choose my sin, thank you.”

Paul then goes on to explicitly say that we should exclude such a person exactly so that they may finally recognize what they’re doing, repent, and be saved (1 Cor. 5:5).

So you exclude that person’s for love’s sake:

  • Love for the individual, that he or she might be warned and brought to repentance.
  • Love for every member of the church, that they too might be warned about the deceit of sin.
  • Love for non-Christians in the community, so that they might see that Christians really are those who have been changed by the Spirit and fight against sin.
  • Love most of all for Christ and his reputation and his glory since he has identified himself with the church.

Trevin Wax: During my time in Romania, I knew a single mother who was a member of the village church I served. After several years in which she appeared to be living faithfully for Christ, she moved in with an unsaved man. The leaders and the members of our church begged her to repent over a period of several months, but when she did not, they excluded her. She was always welcome in church (she still attended occasionally), but she knew that there was a line between repentance and unrepentance. She, the church, and consequently the village knew the difference. (Perhaps that’s why we evangelicals were called “repenters” in Romania.) Why is it important to keep these clear lines of distinction between Christianity and the world? And how might we accomplish this effectively in a sprawling, urban culture in which our relationships tend to be much more shallow?

Jonathan Leeman: Oh, yes, situations like this are just heart-breaking. So tough. But I would agree with this church’s action. From the beginning of the Bible to the end, God always draws a light of distinction between his people and the world. The Garden of Eden had an inside and an outside, as did Noah’s Ark, the people of God in the wilderness, the nation of Israel, and finally the church. Read 2 Corinthians 6:14 to 7:1. Paul couldn’t be clearer about this line.

Why is it important to keep the line clear? God’s people in the Old Testament and New are to be a holy nation and royal priesthood. As we image the character of God in Christ, we show the world what God is like. That doesn’t mean God’s people are perfect, as we’ve already talked about, but it does mean they are fighting sin and being conformed to the image of Christ from one degree of glory to the next (2 Cor. 3:18).

I admit, this is a tough balance. It’s easy to veer toward legalistic Phariseeism. That is not the answer. It’s easy to veer toward cheap-grace easy believism. That is not the answer. Rather, we need to talk about grace and repentance, as you’ve been highlighting. Jesus is Savior and Lord. God’s people recognize both.

Last thought: people talk about blurring the lines between the inside of the church and outside (belonging before believing) because we’re in a post-Christian nation. I actually think that we need to do just the opposite in a culture where:

  1. there are many false Jesus-es;
  2. nominal Christianity is prevalent;
  3. society is complex (through transience, technology, globalization, etc);
  4. society is at least marginally favorable toward Christianity (unlike, say, a Muslim nation or the first century).

All of these factors make it harder to know who on earth represents Jesus, so the church must take greater care in making the line clear. In a Muslim nation, its very clear who belongs to Christ’s people and who does not. It’s harder to tell in the sprawling, Western urban culture.

Trevin Wax: Thanks, Jonathan, for pointing us back to Scripture and getting us thinking about the nature of God’s love and the church’s responsibility to magnify the King.





Trevin Wax|2:49 am CT

Worth a Look 8.25.10

The Kentucky Baptist Convention is leading the way in implementing the changes recommended by the Southern Baptist Great Commission Task Force. The Kentucky GC Task Force is recommending an even 50/50 split of Cooperative Program receipts. I pray that Kentucky Baptists will take on this leadership role in a way that encourages other states to move in this direction.

4 keys to the art of teaching Scripture (See Michael Kelley’s post for explanations of each of these):

  1. Look for the story.
  2. Find the thread.
  3. Elevate the audience.
  4. Point to Jesus.

Seth Godin is no longer going to publish books the traditional way. What remains to be seen is if this new direction is successful or if he will become the book industry’s equivalent of music’s Prince (or the Artist formerly known as). I expect that Godin will be successful.

The thing is–now I know who my readers are. Adding layers or faux scarcity doesn’t help me or you. As the medium changes, publishers are on the defensive….

Ben Witherington with some great pictures of roads: