Christian Living Today

Having stated, clearly and substantially from Scripture, what Christ’s redemption accomplished, Murray moves into the second section of his book: Redemption Applied. He will spend the remainder of this work breaking down the various aspects of Christ’s work and defining these aspects.

Why, you may ask, do I need to understand all of this? I accept Christ died for my sins. I’m glad He did. However, I see no need to spend all this time wrangling over ‘who’ He died for and exactly ‘what’ He did. Does it really matter?

To borrow the words from the back of Eerdmans Publishing Company’s printing of this book, “The atonement is the very center of the Christian faith.” What could be more important than our foundation? Understanding that upon which our faith rests will empower our walk. If for no other reason (and there are more), Christians should not feel content to just acknowledge, ‘Jesus died for me.’ While all the terms Murray will discuss are familiar to me, while I might be able to give a scant definition for each, it is for this reason I look forward to continuing the quest with Murray as my guide.

Murray begins chapter six with these words, “When we think of the application of redemption, we must not think of it as one simple and indivisible act. It compromises a series of acts and processes. . .calling, regeneration, justification, adoption, sanctification, glorification [to name a few]. These are all distinct [in]. . .meaning, function, and purpose. . .”

With that in mind, Murray sets forth in this chapter to show us:

- each aspect of our redemption takes place in a certain order

- the order of application is established by God

- Scripture clearly implies the order

Murray turns to several Scriptures to show not only the components of redemption but their order of application. First, in Jn 3:3-5 we find regeneration preceding entrance into God’s kingdom. Next, in 1 Jn 3:9 we find one must be born of God before he/she is delivered from sin’s dominion. Next, in Jn 1:12 we find faith preceding adoption. Further, in Eph 1:13 we see hearing and believing precede our being sealed of the Spirit. Finally, in Rom 8:30 we find calling comes before justification which comes before glorification.

Because this section of Romans 8 lays out such a distinctly ordered list, Murray tackles the question: Is this order Divinely arranged or laid out at Paul’s convenience? Murray then sets forth, from the context, to show the order is no accident. Let’s look, with him, at Rom 8:28-30.

“(28) And we know that all things work together for good to those who love God, to those who are the called according to His purpose. (29) For whom He foreknew, He also predestined to be conformed to the image of His Son, that He might be the firstborn among many brethren. (30) Moreover whom He predestined, these He also called; whom He called, these He also justified; and whom He justified, these He also glorified.”

First note in verse 28 Paul’s words, “called according to His purpose”. These words show purpose and thus imply a plan or pattern. Next, in verse 29 we see the continuing progression of thought and the further indication of order. Further, if we look at specific terms we see their order is not accident.

Take, ‘foreknew’ in verse 29 and ‘glorified’ in verse 30. Obviously these two terms cannot be reversed. Not only that, but it is clear foreknowledge (vs 29) and predestination (vs 30) precede calling, justification and glorification (vs 30). It is just as apparent glorification (vs 30) must follow calling and justification (vs 30). Thus the only question remaining is: Does calling or justification come first? Murray purports that since the others are all in their proper positions, there is no reason to believe Paul reversed the order on these two.

Next the author lays out the relationship between faith and justification (he is speaking of an actual justification). Scriptural language, he says, clearly shows faith precedes justification (Rom 1:17; 3:22, 25-28, 30; 5:1; Gal 2:15, 3:24; Phil 3:9). We see the order in Rom 3:22-24.

“Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference: For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God; Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus:”

Thus Murray concludes, “. . .faith is God’s appointed instrument through which He dispenses [the grace of justification].” Further, he says, faith is connected with calling and calling clearly precedes justification since we are ‘justified by faith.’ (Rom 3:28, 5:1; Gal 2:16, 3:24)

Next he tackles regeneration. Where does this fall in the order of our redemption? Murray concludes it comes prior to faith. He says, “Faith is a whole-souled act of loving trust and self-commitment. Of that we are incapable until renewed by the Holy Spirit.” (Jn 6:44, 65).

Going on he shows regeneration follows calling. Scripture teaches “. . .that salvation in actual possession takes its start from an efficacious summons on the part of God and that summons. . .carries in its bosom all of the operative efficacy by which it is made effective.”

Murray concludes this introductory chapter by laying out the Scriptural order of events which flow from Christ’s redemptive act being applied to us. The rest of the chapter will deal individually with each aspect, in order. The order laid out in Scripture is this:

calling, regeneration, faith and repentance, justification, adoption, sanctification, perseverance, and glorification

If you have ever heard these terms and wondered exactly what they mean, stay tuned. Or, better yet, get a copy and read it. While I seek to provide more than just a ‘flavor’ in my reviews, I must omit much which is greatly beneficial. I encourage you, whether you agree with Murray’s point, or not, take up the book and read!

Lest you wonder why the order of application matters, Murray closes this chapter thus, “Salvation is of the Lord in its application as well as in its conception and accomplishment.” The order is no accident!

The Vanishing Conscience - Preface

Recently I picked up a book by John MacArthur. One of the subjects I have been pursuing, of late, is the value and proper use of my mind. Thus the title intrigued me. MacArthur published “The Vanishing Conscience” in 1994. While many books are quickly dated, the problems addressed on these pages is as old as Adam. Thus I have found it interesting, enlightening, and at times inspiring.

Years ago I picked up the habit of reading a book’s preface. Since then I have come to realize how ‘telling’ it can be. Like the introductory paragraph on a thesis paper, the preface quickly tells me whether the author knows his/her stuff. While most are not extensive enough to reveal upcoming doctrinal error, a good preface will demonstrate whether the book is worth my time.

While I have listened to enough of Pastor MacArthur’s sermons to know I would benefit from his work, I found the preface to be not only a great introduction, but a valuable one. Because the book’s chapters are long, and because the preface is meaty, I decided to write a separate review before I tackle the rest of the book.

In part one of The Vanishing Conscience, MacArthur addresses ‘A Sinful Society’. Thus he begins his preface with a look at our current mental attitudes toward sin and self-worth. Today, he says:

- Pride is a status symbol
- Moral responsibility for our own actions has been replaced by victimization
- The Church willingly embraces these cultural ideas.
- As a result, the Christian response to sin has been dramatically impacted.
- Our concern over sin has declined.
- Our concern for self esteem has increased.
- Christians often deny sin’s effects
- Christians tend to explain sin using culturally acceptable (and thus unbiblical) terms

Because John MacArthur lives in the cesspool of the west, I suspect these sins were ‘in his face’ so to speak long before the rest of us frogs began to feel the water’s heat. However, 15 years after the book’s publication, I doubt any thinking Christian, anywhere, in North America, would challenge these statements.

This cultural downgrade has so permeated the church as to create some frightening results. Think about it. If there is no such thing as sin, there can be no such thing as repentance! If there is no such thing as depravity, there is no need for redemption! If there is no such thing as personal guilt, there is no need for a personal Savior! In other words, when a society has lost its moral conscience, they become an amoral people who see no need for repentance, redemption, or a Redeemer.

In fact, for a current review of our culture - and the direction it is headed - read Romans 1:18-32! Parts read almost like a current newspaper headline!

MacArthur, however, is not calling Christians to attempt social reform. He is not saying Christians need to start a picket line or join social reformation committees or seek governmental control. He says, “The weakness of the church is not that we’re to uninvolved in the politics or administration of our society, but that we too easily absorb the false values of an unbelieving world. . .God’s purpose in the world. . .is the proclamation of the message of sin and salvation to individuals, whom God sovereignly redeems and calls out of the world.”

With these words in mind, consider Titus 2:11-14:

“For the grace of God that brings salvation has appeared to all men, teaching us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly in the present age, looking for the blessed hope and glorious appearing of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ, who gave Himself for us, that He might redeem us from every lawless deed and purify for Himself His own special people, zealous for good works.”

Christians are called to be different - that is MacArthur’s point. We are to be salt and light in a dull and dark world. Yet, in our era, at least in North America, the church has not been an influence, they have been influenced.

There are numerous folks who might disagree with the non-political tone of John MacArthur’s writing. However, MacArthur’s focus is the church. The church, thus Christians, MUST return to their focus before they can have a godly impact upon the world. MacArthur says, “Only as the church becomes holy can it begin to have a true, powerful effect, on the outside world — and it won’t be an external effect, but a changing of hearts. That is the focus of this book.”

While the author’s Dispensational eschatology clearly effects his thinking about how much impact Christians can and will have in society in the future, it is important to note our Lord’s focus while on earth. The Jews sought a King - an earthy king who would set up an earthly throne and impact society from a political standpoint. However, this is not what Jesus came to do. This is not what He told His disciples to do. His focus was clearly spiritual. His command to His disciples was clearly spiritual.

This does not forego Christians in politics. This does not silence Christians before kings and governors. It just sets our primary focus. This book’s goal, then, is to point us to our real duties. These, the author says include:

- Working out our own sanctification
- Focusing on the sin in our own lives
- Committing to biblical thinking
- Looking at ourselves like God sees us

I invite you to join in following Pastor MacArthur’s line of reasoning. First we will look at our sinful society, then he will addresses the nature of sin, and, in closing, provide some valuable insight into handling our sin. I suspect, however, my review will not end there. For, in true MacArthur form, there is always more. Thus the book actually closes with three valuable appendixes - two which are sermons by ‘dead guys’. I suspect I will find them to be more than review worthy!

From a great distance you stare out over the sea, your eyes drawn to a dark spot bobbing several hundred yards from shore. As recognition dawns, you hear the faint cry, “Help!” Knowing you are too far away to assist, your eyes scour the shoreline, looking for someone to help. You note two men on shore, both alerted by the victim’s cry. Your eyes rush back to the dark spot. It dips briefly, before thrashing to the surface. “Hurry!” you yell.

Both men grab flotation devices. In horror, however, you watch the one man approach the water’s edge, flotation device extended. “Here!” he yells, “Grab hold and I’ll drag you in!”

“Fool!” you cry. “He is drowning! You must go and save him!”

In desperation your eyes turn to the other man. At first it seems he has disappeared. Then, with relief you find him, already nearly to the drowning man. As the drama, he reaches the dark blob, just in time. With great efficiency he secures the flotation device and drags the sea’s victim from its grasp.

Who, I wonder, saved that drowning person? The man who offered ‘a way,’ or the man who drug the sea’s victim from its grip? It is this question Murray addresses in this final section of part one - redemption accomplished. So none can misunderstand his focus, Murray clarifies his point. The question he will answer in chapter four is: “Who did Jesus die to save?”

While universalists run to verses which contain the words, ‘world,’ ‘all,’ and ‘every one,’ Murray says these words do not always “mean every member of the human race.” Consider 1 Cor 6:12 as an example. Here Paul says, “All things are lawful for me, but all things are not helpful. All things are lawful for me, but I will not be brought under the power of any.”

Murray queries, is the Apostle Paul really saying, in this verse, he can do anything, that nothing he does or would ever want to do is against the law? Obviously not. In fact, taken in context, a Christian would never consider Paul is using the word all as completely encompassing.

Thus, Murray reminds us context in key. Context rules in interpretation - first the immediate context, then the broader context, and then the overall teaching of Scripture.

Murray further clarifies his point. He is not saying Christ’s death does not, in a general way, benefit every man. He is saying, however, it does not benefit every man, in a saving way. Thus he explains, “The question is not whether many benefits short of justification and salvation accrue to men from the death of Christ. . .Christ is head over all things and is given all authority in heaven and in earth.” (Phil 2:8-9) “. . .the enjoyment of certain benefits, even by the non-elect and reprobate, falls within the design of the death of Christ. . .the real question is: on whose behalf did Christ offer Himself a sacrifice? On whose behalf did He propitiate the wrath of God?. . .whom did He redeem from the curse of the law, from the guilt and power of sin, from the controlling power and bondage of Satan?” Specifically then, who is the ‘us’ Paul refers to in 1 Thess 5:10? Whose sins is Paul saying Christ died for in 1 Cor 15:3?

The answer to these questions is bound up in the meaning of ‘redemption.’ Scripture sets some strict guidelines for our definition of the term. Murray clarifies, “What does redemption mean? It does not mean ‘redeemability,’ that we were placed in a redeemable position. It means that Christ purchased and procured redemption.”

In Scripture Christ’s redemption rings with a triumphant note (Rev 5:9, Heb 9:12, Titus 2;14, Heb 1:3, Jn 6:38-39). His work is not semi-complete. It is not partial. As He said, on the cross, “It is finished.”

For the believer this is the best news because our “security inheres in Christ’s redemptive accomplishment. . .If some of those for whom atonement was made and redemption was wrought perish eternally, then the atonement is not. . .efficacious.” I’m not sure there could be a more scary thought for an honest believer who acknowledges the strength of his remaining sin!

Nonetheless, there are many who would object. Thus Murray uses the rest of the chapter to address the more common objections and the verses typically turned to by universalists.

The first objection he addresses is: Your position is inconsistent with a full and free offer of the gospel. To this Murray replies, “What is offered to man in the gospel?. . .the probability of salvation. . .the opportunity?” No, he responds, the gospel offers salvation! “He could not be offered as Savior and as the One who embodies in Himself salvation full and free if He simply made the salvation of all men possible or merely had made provision for the salvation of all. . .It is because Christ procured and secured redemption that He is an all-sufficient and suitable Savior.”

Murray proves his point from Rom 8:31-39. Here we read:

“(31) What then shall we say to these things? If God is for us, who can be against us? (32) He who did not spare His own Son, but delivered Him up for us all, how shall He not with Him also freely give us all things? (33) Who shall bring a charge against God’s elect? It is God who justifies. (34) Who is he who condemns? It is Christ who died, and furthermore is also risen, who is even at the right hand of God, who also makes intercession for us. (35) Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? Shall tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or sword? (36) As it is written: “For Your sake we are killed all day long; We are accounted as sheep for the slaughter.” (37) Yet in all these things we are more than conquerors through Him who loved us. (38) For I am persuaded that neither death nor life, nor angels nor principalities nor powers, nor things present nor things to come, (39) nor height nor depth, nor any other created thing, shall be able to separate us from the love of God which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.”

Let us put forth the mental effort to follow Murray’s argument. Who is addressed in verse 31? Obviously those spoken of in verses 28-30 (those who love God, those who are called, those who are predestined, called, justified, and glorified). What then is the scope of ‘for us all’? ‘All’ cannot be broader than ‘us’ because Paul is essentially saying, ‘for all of us’. Thus the ‘us’ in verse 32 is the same as the ‘us’ in verse 31.

Furthermore, everyone who benefits from Christ’s death becomes a beneficiary of all the other gifts of grace (vs 32). Verse 33 is even more restrictive as both election and justification are mentioned. In fact, this verse points back to the predestination and justification mentioned in verses 28 to 30.

Finally, we see Paul, in verse 34, tying Christ’s death together with God’s justification and the vindication of the elect. Here again we must interpret the terms, ‘for us’ in light of verse 31. Further, death, resurrection, and intercession are all tied together in these verses. Thus we cannot make one more universal than the others. To leave us with no doubt, Paul concludes this section with strongly emphatic words which make it clear “the security of those to whom he is speaking.”

Murray’s second argument is based on Scripture’s teaching that “all for whom Christ died also died in Christ.” (Rom 6:3-11; 2 Cor 5:14, 15; Eph 2:4-7; Col 3:3). In Romans 5:8-9 we find Paul teaching “all who died in Christ rose again with Him.” Rose to what? Newness of life (Rom 6:4-5; 2 Cor 5:14-15; Col 3:3).

Thus, Murray points out:

- all for whom Christ died, died in Christ.

- all who died in Christ, rose in Christ to newness of life

- to die with Christ is to die to sin

- to rise with Christ is to live a life of obedience

- Therefore - Christ died only for those who die to sin and live to righteousness

His point made, Murray then directly addresses several passages commonly used to support universal atonement. He specifically looks at 2 Cor 5:14-15 and 1 Jn 2:2. In both cases he shows the misinterpretation errors of those who use these to say Jesus died for everyone. If you hold to universal atonement, I encourage you to read his clear exegesis. He closes this section with these words:

“It is easy for the proponents of universal atonement to make offhand appeals to a few texts. But this method is not worthy of the serious student of Scripture. . .when we examine Scripture we find that the glory of the cross of Christ is bound up in the effectiveness of its accomplishment.”

Words are cheap. Too often we turn to our own understanding, our own logic, our own experience to support our case. In so doing we forget: the Bible is our only source for a proper understanding of the atonement. Further, it is the only norm by which to test our understanding. Murray says, “No temptation is more subtle and plausible than the tendency to construe the atonement in terms of our human experience and thus to make our experience the norm.”

Murray closes with this warning, “[When] We drag down the meaning of Christ’s atoning work, . . .we evacuate it of its unique and distinctive glory. . .[This] is trifling with the most solemn spectacle in all history, a spectacle unparalleled, unique, unrepeated, and unrepeatable. To approximate this spectacle to the analogy of our human experience is to disclose a state of mind and feeling insensitive to the alphabet of Christianity.”

Regardless of your position, may we both tread with care as we articulate our beliefs - making sure, at every step, we are not misinterpreting God’s word and presenting a false gospel, thus making ourselves false teachers!

In my review of Your Mind Matters, by John Stott, I inadvertently left off two points from chapter three’s review. Because this chapter was long and chapter four much shorter, I will begin my review of chapter four with the final two points from chapter three.

Why did God make us thinking creatures? Why did He give us the ability to reason? Why of all the creatures He created, did He make man accountable? Most important, perhaps, why, when we know we will be held accountable for our thoughts and actions, do we take our mental gifts and responsibilities so lightly?

In Chapter three, John Stott addresses the question, “Why use our minds?”. He delineates six distinct reasons, four of which we covered last time.

His fifth reason is: the mind is key in presenting the gospel. Romans 10:13, 14, 17 tell us faith comes by hearing the Word of God. One could preach all day to a wolf on the evil of killing a sheep, but, at days end, the result would be a bored wolf and a hoarse speaker. However, God did not make man thus.

In 2 Cor 5:11 Paul speaks of “persuading men” to believe the gospel. His use of the word ‘persuading’ revels the gospel presentation is “an intellectual exercise”. Persuade means to marshal our arguments in an effort to convince someone to change their mind (Acts 19:8-10). It also refers to explaining, proving, and proclaiming - all appeals to the mind.

New Testament preaching always included a clear presentation of “a body of doctrine about Christ.” Thus Stott says, “. . .the kind of evangelism for which I am pleading. . .is not academic. . .but rational. . .all human beings think, because God made a human being a thinking creature.” Lest one should doubt this statement, we have only to look at Christ’s teaching and those to whom He spoke.

Stott goes on to quote Gresham Machen from his book “The Christian Faith in the Modern World.” He said, “There must be the mysterious work of the Spirit of God in the new birth. Without that, all our arguments are quiet useless. But because argument is insufficient, it does not follow that it is unnecessary. What the Holy Spirit does in the new birth is not to make a man a Christian regardless of the evidence, but on the contrary to clear away the mists from his eyes and enable him to attend to the evidence.”

The author closes this point thus: “So then in our evangelical proclamation we must address the whole person (mind, heart, and will) with the whole gospel (Christ incarnate, crucified, risen, reigning, coming again and much else besides.)”

John Stott’s final exhortation for using our minds is based on the ministry and its gifts. “The gifts most to be coveted and prized. . .are the teaching gifts, since it is by these that the church is most ‘edified’ or built up.” He reminds pastors they are called, first and foremost, to feed their flock (Acts 20:28, 1 Peter 5:2, Col 1:28, 1 Tim 3:2). Furthermore, those who would commend themselves to God must do so, in part, by their knowledge (2 Cor 6:6).

Stott closes this chapter the striking words of Dr. Donald Barnhouse. “If I only had three years to serve the Lord, I would spend two of them studying and preparing.” How many of us would have placed our priorities thus?

In chapter four, the author sets forth four ways in which we should act upon our knowledge. He says, “God never intends knowledge to be an end in itself but always to be a means to some other end. . .Knowledge carries with it the solemn responsibility to act on the knowledge we have, to translate our knowledge into appropriate behavior.”

First, Stott says, knowledge should lead to worship. This is a clear tie back to his first point in chapter three. “True knowledge of God,” he says, “will result not in our being puffed up with conceit. . .but in our falling on our faces before God in sheer wonder. (Rom 11:33). . .Whenever our knowledge becomes dry or leaves us cold, something has gone wrong. (Luke 24:32)” Is your heart overflowing in praise and adoration to your King? Does the love of God so consume you, you can scarce hold it in? Or, does this world hold your heart and mind?

Second, Stott says our knowledge should lead us to faith. Many would say the Christian faith is a ‘blind’ faith. Through the centuries those on the outside have assumed our faith is merely a trumped up hope in something unreal. However, Stott claims, “It is our knowledge of God’s nature and character which elicits our faith.” Real faith is based on real knowledge of a real God!

Third, the author says our knowledge should lead us to holiness. He says, “. . .the more our knowledge grows, the greater our responsibility to put it into practice (Ps 119:34, Jn 13:7, Phil 4:9).” As Thomas Manton once said, “We should neither be all ear, nor all head, nor all tongue, but the feet must be exercised.” Today I fear we are neither all ear, nor all head but far too free in our use of our tongues and the improper use of our feet!

Finally Stott says our knowledge should lead us to love. Pure knowledge can lead to legalism. Without the tempering of humility and love for our Lord, all our knowledge will create is a pietistic, proud person who thinks far too highly of themselves. We must seek to use our knowledge to fan the flames of our love. For as Paul warned in 1 Cor 13:2, “And though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries and all knowledge, and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, but have not love, I am nothing.”

Stott closes with these exhortations:

“What we need is not less knowledge, but more knowledge, so long as we act upon it. . .knowledge is attained [thus]. . .we must pray and we must study.” Daniel 10:12 says, “Then he said to me, “Do not fear, Daniel, for from the first day that you set your heart to understand, and to humble yourself before your God, your words were heard; and I have come because of your words.”

God has promised to reward us if we earnestly seek to know Him. We do well to remember Proverbs 2:1-6. “My son, if you receive my words, And treasure my commands within you, So that you incline your ear to wisdom, And apply your heart to understanding; Yes, if you cry out for discernment, And lift up your voice for understanding, If you seek her as silver, And search for her as for hidden treasures; Then you will understand the fear of the LORD, And find the knowledge of God. For the LORD gives wisdom; From His mouth come knowledge and understanding;”

As we close our review of this powerful little book, I cannot help but think of our Lord’s exhortation to the “Loveless Church” in Revelation 2:2-5. “I know your works, your labor, your patience, and that you cannot bear those who are evil. And you have tested those who say they are apostles and are not, and have found them liars; and you have persevered and have patience, and have labored for My name’s sake and have not become weary. Nevertheless I have this against you, that you have left your first love. Remember therefore from where you have fallen; repent and do the first works, or else I will come to you quickly and remove your lampstand from its place––unless you repent.” (emphasis mine)

Here is a church who ‘tested’ those who said they were apostles. How did they test them? Obviously by determining how closely these ‘apostles’ held to the doctrines revealed in Scripture. How would they know doctrine? Obviously by applying themselves diligently to the study of Scripture - in other words, by taking seriously their need to gain knowledge. Yet, their knowledge left them worse than useless because they did not use it to drive their hearts to a deeper love of and worship of their God and King. Thus they stood in real danger of losing their faith!

God forbid we either be lazy, never taking the time and effort to seek knowledge, or always coming to but never attaining true, heart changing knowledge.

As I continue reading through Redemption Accomplished and Applied, I am amazed at the depth of understanding John Murray exhibits. Christians are thankful for their salvation. They are looking forward to heaven. They understand their sins have been covered by Jesus’ blood. However, I wonder how well most of us comprehend the work Jesus accomplished on our behalf on Calvary?

I thought I understood. I thought I had a grasp on the redemption. However, the more I read the more I realize how little I really apprehended. Thus I am finding this book very valuable reading.

In chapter three, John Murray sets for the perfection of the atonement. He begins with his thesis statement, “. . .the satisfaction of Christ is the only satisfaction for sin and is so perfect and final that it leaves no penal liability for any sin of the believer.”

His point: to suggest human ability must be added to Christ’s work in order to satisfy God perverts Scripture’s teaching (Rom 8:1) and robs Jesus of the glory He earned by His work on the cross (Heb 1:3). Murray, anticipating objections which will be raised against such a statement, addresses the four major supports for his thesis in this chapter.

First he addresses the redemption’s historic setting. Scripture teaches Jesus’ work was accomplished once for all without our participation or cooperation. Jesus performed a real act in real time and space. Murray points to Gal 4:4-5 where we read, “But when the fullness of the time had come, God sent forth His Son, born of a woman, born under the law, to redeem those who were under the law, that we might receive the adoption as sons.” Murray points out Both the incarnation and redemption “. . .are historically located and neither is suprahistorical or contemporary.”

Second he addresses the finality of our Lord’s work. He calls our redemption , “. . .a completed work, never repeated and unrepeatable.” Christ continues as our high priest, but the atonement is not an ongoing event. Murray goes on to say, “. . .the atonement of which Scripture speaks is the vicarious obedience, expiation, propitiation, reconciliation and redemption performed by the Lord of glory when, once for all, He purged our sins and sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high.” (Heb 10:12)

Third Murray speaks of the uniqueness of Jesus’ work. “It is indefensible and perverse to. . .reduce the vicarious sacrifice of Christ to a denomination that will rob it of the unique and distinctive character which the Scripture applies to it.” In support of this point the author quotes from Hugh Martin who said, “Vicarious sacrifice. . .is one solitary, matchless, Divine transaction - never to be repeated, never to be equaled, never to be approached.”

John Murray’s final defense of his thesis is the intrinsic efficacy of Christ’s work. Scripture says Jesus’ work fully satisfied God’s justice. God didn’t just graciously accept something less than full satisfaction. Murray put it this way, “Christ. . .did not make a token payment which God accepts in place of the whole. Our debts are not canceled; they are liquidated.” Thus we read in Hebrews 10:14, “For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified.” Also in Hebrews 5:9 we are told, “And having been perfected, He became the author of eternal salvation to all who obey Him,”

Next time we will delve into the extent of the atonement. The upcoming chapter will take more time to cover and more work to comprehend. I leave you with this verse from Psalms 103:12: “As far as the east is from the west, So far has He removed our transgressions from us.” Thank God He did!!!

Some subjects are impossible to exhaust. If one were to attempt to record everything Jesus said and did, just while on earth, as John said in closing his epistle, “And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written.” (Jn 21:25)

Thus when an author seeks to address a subject, knowing they cannot do justice to everything they attempt to discover the most relevant information related to their area of focus. Then they strive to speak succinctly and clearly so their readers will get the point. This is exactly what John Stott has achieved in his book, “Your Mind Matters.”

One could study and write and talk for years about the importance of our minds to our Christian walk. Any Christian who doubts this truth has failed to read Proverbs. However, John Stott has focused on the prevalence today of ‘Mindless Christianity.’

We have looked at his introduction in our review of chapter one. We have looked at the question: ‘Why Use Our Minds?’ and his response in chapter two. Today we will look at ‘The Mind in the Christian Life’ covered in chapter three. Soon, hereafter, we will look at the final chapter in this extremely practical book entitled, ‘Acting Upon Our Knowledge.’

Today many Christians are confused. One area of confusion is worship. What is God-honoring worship? An emotional response? Songs from the heart? Losing ourselves in adoration? Stott defines true worship. He says, “. . .the only worship acceptable to God is intelligent worship, worship ‘in truth, the worship offered by those who know Whom they are worshiping and who love Him with all their mind.” (Jn 4:24, Luke 10:27)

His response may not be the first which came to mind, but it is certainly biblical. Scripture says true worship is ascribing to God the glory due His name (Ps 148:5, 13; 96:8; 115:1). God’s name consists of the sum total of all His attributes and acts, particularly as the Creator and our Redeemer (Ps 104-107, 136).

Stott says, “Only as we hear again what God has done are we ready to respond in praise and worship. This, too, is why Bible reading and meditation are. . .essential. All Christian worship. . .should be an intellectual response to God’s self-revelation in His words and works recorded in Scripture.” Thus true, God-honoring worship requires us to learn and study and meditate upon the One who we seek to praise.

The charge has been made: Christianity is a ‘mindless’ belief. Some consider the Christian faith an illogical belief in the improbable. However, true faith is not credulity. Christians are not called to be gullible or uncritical or undiscerning or unreasonable in their beliefs.

Furthermore, faith is not optimism. Stott says, “Faith is a reasoning trust, a trust which reckons thoughtfully and confidently upon the trustworthiness of God. . .faith and thought belong together, and believing is impossible without thinking.”

True faith is the opposite of blind chance. In fact, there is nothing ‘blind’ about real faith. D. Martin Lloyd Jones argued, “Faith according to our Lord’s teaching [Mt 6:30]. . .is primarily thinking; and the whole trouble with a man of little faith is that he does not think. He allows circumstances to bludgeon him. . .We must spend more time in studying our Lord’s lessons in logic and deduction. The Bible is full of logic, and we must never think of faith as something purely mystical. . .Christian faith is essentially thinking. . .The trouble with the person of little faith is that instead of controlling his own thoughts, his thought is being controlled by something else. . .That is the essence of worry. . .That is not thought; that is the absence of thought, a failure to think.” That ought to make us ‘worry-warts’ pause!

Not only must we think if we are to exercise our faith, we must use our minds if we are to pursue true holiness. Consider John 8:32. John Owen once said, “The good which the mind cannot discover, the will cannot choose, nor the affection cleave to.” Chew on that a few minutes.

We must have a clear understanding of God’s will if we are to live a righteous life. Knowledge, alone, is not enough. We must set our minds on our task. Stott says, “The battle is nearly always won in the mind.” (Rom 12:2; Phil 14:8; Rom 8:5-6). He goes on, “Self control is primarily mind-control. . .the kind of food our mind’s devour will determine the kind of person we become. .” Is what we read and look at and think about important? Yes! Eternally so!

Our mind also plays a key role in comprehending God’s will for our lives. While there are two elements of God’s will - His general will (relating to all people) and His specific will (relating to a particular people), the discovery of God’s specific will for me, personally, requires the use of my mind. Stott put it this way, “. . .although God promises to guide us, we must not expect Him to do so in the way in which we guide horses and mules. . .we have understanding. . .through the use of our own understanding enlightened by Scripture and prayer and. . .counsel. . .God will lead us into a knowledge of His particular will for us.” (Ps 32:8-9)

Our minds, or more specifically the of our minds, is incomparably important to our walk as Christians. I close with this convicting thought from Bernard Baruch. “Whatever failures I have known, whatever errors I have committed, whatever follies I have witnessed in private and public life have been the consequence of action without thought.”

Murray obviously believed a correct understanding of Christ’s atoning work is foundational to our faith and hope for eternity. He spent an entire book defining Christ’s redemption, breaking out what was accomplished, and then showing how this work is applied to believers. In chapter two Murray goes into great detail drawing us a clear word picture of the atonement. In my review I felt it would be an injustice to lightly cover such an important section. Thus I resorted to a two part post. For the sake of brevity, I will dive right in trusting you will read the prior post if you need to get up to speed.

Having looked at the sacrificial aspects in the atonement, Murray turns to the propitiation wrought in Christ’s atonement. It was interesting to note the word ‘propitiation’ (which means: to cover, placate, pacify, appease or conciliate) is most often translated atonement. This word is used in reference to sin. It refers to the cleansing and forgiveness which occurs before the Lord. Our sin makes this covering necessary.

Because of the propitiation aspects within Christ’s atonement, “. . .the sin, or perhaps the person who has sinned, is covered before the sight of the Lord. . .Vengeance is the reaction of the holiness of God to sin, and the covering is that which provides for the removal of the Divine displeasure which the sin evokes.” Thus “the doctrine of propitiation means that Christ propitiated the wrath of God and rendered God propitious [favorably inclined] to His people.”

A common error seen in relation to this doctrine is our misconception of an obedient Son appeasing an angry Father. This mental image produces the idea of a rift in the Godhead. Murray steps forward to correct this misunderstanding.

First we must understand propitiation does not cause or constrain God’s love. Secondly, propitiation does not make God loving. He was already loving. Remember 1 John 4:10? “In this is love, not that we loved God, but that He loved us and sent His Son to be the propitiation for our sins.” Instead we find propitiation to be the ground and channel for God’s love. Thus propitiation enhances our appreciation for God’s love rather than detracting from it.

To correctly understand propitiation, we must understand the atonement. Murray says, “To deny propitiation is to undermine the nature of the atonement as the vicarious endurance of the penalty of sin. . .to deny substitutionary atonement.”

Third Murray addresses the reconciliation aspect in Christ’s atonement. Reconciliation presupposes a rift between God and man. It “implies enmity and alienation. . .the cause [of which is]. . .our sin.” While many Christians believe the reconciliation wrought upon the cross addressed the alienation between man and God, Murray points out “the reconciliation [Christ accomplished] deals with the alienation of God from us on account of our sin. . .”

Consider Romans 5:8-11 in this light. “But God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us. Much more then, having now been justified by His blood, we shall be saved from wrath through Him. For if when we were enemies we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son, much more, having been reconciled, we shall be saved by His life. And not only that, but we also rejoice in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have now received the reconciliation.”

Murray shows how this verse reveals God making the first move toward sinners in Christ’s death. This act reveals God’s supreme love. Thus the Divine attitude is the starting point. Furthermore, the statement ‘reconciled to God through’ in verse ten is parallel to ‘justified by His blood’ in verse nine. Yet we know justification does not refer to any change in man’s disposition. So we see, as verse eleven clearly states, reconciliation is something we receive - reinstatement into God’s favor.

Murray would also have us consider 2 Cor 5:18-21 which reads, “Now all things are of God, who has reconciled us to Himself through Jesus Christ, and has given us the ministry of reconciliation, that is, that God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself, not imputing their trespasses to them, and has committed to us the word of reconciliation. Now then, we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God were pleading through us: we implore you on Christ’s behalf, be reconciled to God. For He made Him who knew no sin to be sin for us, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him.”

Verses eighteen and nineteen make it clear reconciliation is God’s work. The verb tenses in verses eighteen, nineteen and twenty-one further reveal reconciliation is a finished work. Verse twenty-one identifies Christ’s work as the origination of reconciliation. Verse nineteen goes on to declare reconciliation is an accomplished fact. And, the phrase in verse twenty ‘be ye reconciled’ means “be no longer in a state of alienation from God but rather enter into. . .favor and peace.”

The redemption accomplished in Christ’s atonement, then, “presupposes a relation of alienation, and it effects a relation of favor and peace.” This is achieved by the removal of our sin and guilt which Christ’s vicarious work brought about. He became sin for us. We received righteousness from Him.

Finally Murray looks at the redemption aspects in Christ’s atonement. He says, “The language of redemption is the language of purchase and more specifically of ransom.” Jesus came to accomplish a ransom. His life was the ransom price. The ransom was His substitutionary act.

Redemption implies some kind of bondage or captivity. We were bound to obey the law. Christ’s redemption does not redeem us from the law’s obligations, but it does redeem us from the law’s curse.

We were bound to obey God’s law as we see in Gal 3:10. “For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse; for it is written, “Cursed is everyone who does not continue in all things which are written in the book of the law, to do them.” We failed in every respect. Thus we read in Gal 3:13, “Christ has redeemed us from the law’s curse, by becoming a curse for us (for it is written, “Cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree”),” Murray says, “It is from this curse that Christ has purchase His people. . .”

Furthermore, we have been redeemed from bondage to the ceremonial law (Gal 4:4-5: “But when the fullness of the time had come, God sent forth His Son, born of a woman, born under the law to redeem those who were under the law, that we might receive the adoption as sons.”). “In Him the Mosaic law realized its purpose. . .He redeemed [us] from the relative and provisional bondage under which the Mosaic economy was the instrument.” (Gal 3:25-26: “But after faith has come, we are no longer under a tutor. For you are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus.”)

Finally we understand we are redeemed from having to keep the law to be justified and accepted by God. In Rom 5:19 we read, “For as by one man’s disobedience many were made sinners, so also by one Man’s obedience many will be made righteous.”

Not only did Christ’s atoning work redeem us from our obligations to the law, it redeemed us from the many aspects from which we can view sin. It covers every aspect (Heb 9:12). It refers to Christ’s work in relation to guilt and justification (Rom 3:24, Eph 1:7, Col 1:14, Heb 9;15). It refers to sin’s power and defilement (Tit 2:14, 1 Pet 1:18). Christ “interpreted the purpose of His coming into the world in terms of substitutionary ransom. . .this ransom was nothing less than the giving of His life.” He shed His blood to purchase the many for whom He paid the ransom.

Murray concludes, “. . .redemption from sin cannot be adequately conceived or formulated except as it comprehends the victory which Christ secured once for all over him who is the god of this world.”

I believe most Christians take their salvation lightly. We appreciate it. We trust it will keep us from hell. But, in the end it matters little, perhaps because we understand it little. I trust, as we continue to study this valuable book, you and I will grow in our understanding and be humbled thereby.

Having shown us, from Scripture, the necessity of Christ’s blood being shed for our sins, in chapter two John Murray looks more specifically at Christ’s work on the cross. What exactly did He do? What did He accomplish? Was He a victim or a participant in what occurred?

Scripture described Jesus as the suffering servant. In Phil 2:7-8 we read, “but made Himself of no reputation, taking the form of a bondservant, and coming in the likeness of men. And being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself and became obedient to the point of death, even the death of the cross.” Again in Hebrews 5:8 we read, “Though he were a Son, yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered;”

Are these verses teaching us Jesus was passive in all He experienced? Was He forced? Did He have no say, no choice, no escape? Once He committed to come to earth, was He set upon a path which, although He sought to avoid it, He was driven to follow? Is this what Scripture is teaching? In other words was Jesus acted upon, perhaps against His will?

John Murray answers these questions and more as he sets forth to clarify Jesus’ part in our redemption. First off, Jesus obedience was both active and passive. Scripture describes these two distinct aspects of Christ’s obedience. Consider John 10:17-18. “Therefore My Father loves Me, because I lay down My life that I may take it again. No one takes it from Me, but I lay it down of Myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This command I have received from My Father.”

When theologians use the phrase ‘passive obedience,’ we are not to understand this as Christ being an involuntary victim of something forced upon Him. Such an idea contradicts obedience. Murray explains it thus, “. . .our Lord was not the passive recipient to that of which He was subjected. . .death itself did not befall Him as it befalls other men.”

His life was not wrenched from Him. Instead we see His obedience was so complete He willingly yielded up His spirit, even to death. Therefore we must be careful never to assume the word ‘passive’ (in this context) means He was apathetic in any aspect of His life or death.

Furthermore, the terms ‘active’ and ‘passive’ as applied to Jesus’ life and work are not intended to delineate certain acts or phases or periods in His life. Murray warns, “. . .we must avoid the mistake of thinking that the active obedience applies to the obedience of His life and the passive to the obedience of His final sufferings and death. . .It is [the] twofold demand of the law of God which is taken into account when we speak of the active and passive obedience of Christ. . .[He] took care of the guilt of sin and perfectly fulfilled the demands of righteousness. He perfectly met both the penal and the preceptive requirements of God’s law. The passive obedience refers to the former and the active obedience to the later.”

Thus we understand Jesus’ death upon the cross was His supreme act of obedience. However, we must also recognize obedience is not merely the accomplishment of acts. True obedience is the disposition, will, and volition revealed by these acts. Thus we must ask: Where did Jesus get the disposition and will, in His human nature, to give up His life in such a manner? Murray says He acquired the necessary obedience through suffering. His perfect obedience came from having His heart, mind, and soul forged in the fire of temptation and suffering. Murray makes several valuable points:

“It was only as having learned obedience [in this manner]. . .that His heart and mind and will were framed to the point of being able freely and voluntarily to yield up His life in death upon the accursed tree.”

“. . .it was the obedience learned and rendered through the whole course of humiliation that made Him perfect as the captain of salvation. . .It was by obedience. . .He wrought the work that secured [our salvation]. Obedience, therefore, is not something that may be conceived of artificially or abstractedly.”

Having clarified the nature of Christ’s obedience in the atonement, John Murray progresses to clarifying the nature of the atonement, itself. In so doing he articulates four areas of the atonement:

- sacrifice

- propitiation

- reconciliation

- redemption

First he looks at the sacrifice. Our sin is a liability. In other words, our sin makes us debtors to someone- God. God is holy. When we sin, we act in a manner completely contrary to God’s holiness. Since that first sin it has always been thus.

In the Old Testament, God gave the Israelites the ceremonial law which included animal sacrifices. These blood sacrifices were symbolic but not efficacious. In other words, they did not really remove sin, but they pointed to an event which would remove sin. So, as Murray points out, “. . .what was constituted in the Levitical sacrifices must also have been constituted in the sacrifice of Christ.” Thus Jesus’ sacrifice was:

- expiatory (it made atonement) but it was finally and eternally so

- efficacious (it produced the desired effect - sin removal) but more completely so (Heb 9:14)

When making the correlation, we must remember its limitations. Christ’s offering was so far above what could be typified in animal sacrifice. Furthermore, while an animal was a victim, Jesus was not only the sacrifice but also the priest. Thus He offered up Himself. Murray explains, “. . .in the climactic event which registered and brought to completion His sacrificial act He was intensely active. . .in offering to God the oblation that expiated the full toll of Divine condemnation against a multitude whom no man can number. . .”

Next time we will look at the second, third, and fourth aspects of the atonement.

In an earlier post we looked at chapter one in John Stott’s book, Your Mind Matters. This short, four chapter book, explores the importance of our minds to our Christian walk. In Chapter one, Stott stated his thesis: Many modern day Christians are wasting their minds.

Having stated the problem, Stott delves into whether our minds really matter in chapter two. His opening statement cements his viewpoint. He claims, “This is a battle of ideas, God’s truth overpowering the lies of man. Do we believe in the power of truth?”

In the first chapter the author claimed our churches have been permeated with the modern idea that what really matters is what works for me, not what is true. Yet there is something ironic in that very statement. For me to say truth is relative to what works for me is to make a truth statement! How hypocritical is that?

The Christian, however, must operate under a different thesis. The Christian does NOT have the option to put his mind on cruise control or to dedicate it to worldly things. Stott says, “. . .the great doctrines of creation, revelation, redemption and judgment all imply that man has an inescapable duty both to think and to act upon what he thinks and knows.” He spends the rest of the chapter developing this thought.

First, he says, man is created to think. This point is easily supported. Only man possesses what the Bible calls understanding. Only man has the privilege of communicating directly with God (Genesis 2 and 3). Only man is held accountable for what he does with what he has been told. Only man is required to discriminate between what is morally right and what is morally wrong. Only man is given lordship over other creatures for their care and well-being. Only man is expected to ‘act’ in a certain manner as God has directed him (Ps 32:9).

In a society which makes decisions based on what ‘feels’ right, Stott makes an extremely important observation. “. . .sin has more dangerous effects on our faculty of feeling than on our faculty of thinking because our opinions are more easily checked and regulated by revealed truth than our experiences. . .when our behavior is more emotional than rational, we insist on rationalizing it. . .[which] indicates that man has been constituted such a rational being that if he has no reasons for his behavior he has to invent some in order to live with himself.”

Second, the author says man was created to think God’s thoughts. He writes, “. . .all God’s revelation is rational revelation, both His general revelation in nature and His special revelation in Scripture and in Christ.”

The Bible says the heaven’s declare God’s glory (Ps 19:1-4; Rom 1:19-21). Thus even creation proclaims God’s glory and majesty to mankind. Yet we are not left to interpret this message as we may. In Scripture God’s revelation is verbalized.

We have the very words of God, recorded in our language. These are words we can read and, with the Spirit’s help, understand. Furthermore, Christ - God himself - came to earth as a real man living among real people. In Him we have God’s character and His words verbalized and visualized. As Stott says, “. . .that God [chooses to reveal Himself] in words, shows that our minds are capable of understanding.”

He closes this point by quoting James Orr who said, “[Christianity] bases religion on knowledge, though a knowledge which is only attainable under moral conditions. . .religion, divorced from earnest and lofty thought has always. . . .tended to become weak, jejune, and unwholesome; while the intellect, deprived of its rights within religion, has sought its satisfaction without, and developed into godless rationalism.”

Third, Stott claims Christians possess a renewed mind. No longer should we live as though our minds are enslaved to the God of this world. We have been set free to understand and thus act on a totally different plane. He says, “. . .all God’s revelation is rational revelation, both His general revelation in nature and His special revelation in Scripture and in Christ.” (1 Cor 1:21)

Scripture is clear - when a person is regenerated, their mind is renewed. (Col 3:10, Eph 4:25, 1 Cor 2:15-16). Furthermore, Paul called upon his hearers to not only listen, but to use discernment in their listening (1 Cor 10:15).

Stott drives his point home by quoting from Harry Blamires’ book The Christian Mind. Harry said a Christian mind is “a mind trained, informed, equipped to handle data of secular controversy within a framework of reference which is constructed of Christian presuppositions. . .[A Christian thinker] challenges current prejudices. . . .disturbs the complacent. . . .obstructs the busy pragmatists. . .questions the very foundations of all about him and. . .is a nuisance.

“[Today] the Christian mind has succumbed to the secular drift. With a degree of weakness and nervelessness unmatched in Christian history. It is difficult to do justice in words to the complete loss of intellectual morale in the twentieth century church. . .There is no longer a Christian mind. There is still, of course, a Christian ethic, a Christian practice, and a Christian spirituality. . .But as a thinking being, the modern Christian has succumbed to secularization.”

Not only are these hard words - an accusation we wish to deny but in all honesty cannot - but they were written over 45 years ago! Not only does that tell us this is a long-seated problem, it judges our actions for the last 45 years. Can we say we have improved upon the situation? I fear not.

All of the author’s points should give us pause - should make us ponder - should make us ashamed. However, his final point should make us afraid. For, as he points out, we will be judged by our knowledge.

I suspect there are Christians out there who have made a conscious choice to NOT gain knowledge in an attempt to not be held accountable. They rationalize, I can’t be accountable for what I do not know. However, this reveals a scary fault in our reasoning because God has given us not only the ability to know but the textbook by which we may come to know. Thus, as Stott wrote, God “will judge us by our knowledge, by our response (or lack or response) to His revelation.” (Jn 12:48). In other words - the act of choosing not to know is just as damning as knowing and choosing not to act upon the truth.

Furthermore, all men are guilty because all possess the same knowledge. Remember, God has more clearly revealed Himself in Scripture, but He has also revealed Himself in nature. Not only that, but no man lives up to the knowledge he possesses. Yet “to denigrate the mind is to undermine foundational Christian principles.”

Worse yet, only fools hate knowledge (Prov 1:22, 3:13-15). Perhaps this is part of the reason the New Testament writers were so vocal in directing their listeners to seek Divine wisdom. (2 Pet 1:5; 1 Cor 2:6, 3:1-2; Eph 3:14-19; Phil 1:9-11; Col 1:9-10).

How we use our minds not only determines our fate and our reward or punishment, it also says a lot about us in the here and now. Are we showing ourselves to be wise? Or are we advertising to the world that we are fools?

I have spent a lot more time reading than writing of late. I suppose this is obvious to those who have read this blog. While my posts have been scanty, my reading has been varied. Someone once said, ‘So many books. So little time.’ I agree - to a point. There are so many books I would love to read. Since God has not chosen to remove me from my responsibilities, my time is limited. Thus I try to really ‘pick and chose’ what I read.

Unlike Jim Osman, a pastor from Kootenai, Idaho who has taught me much by his faithful exposition of Scripture, I have yet to develop an annual reading list (something I hope to attempt for this year). However, while my reading is not thoughtfully scheduled ahead of time, I do try to use discernment in choosing the books I read.

Thus I have developed a simple set of criteria (one I suspect will change and develop as I grow and develop as a Christian) by which I judge a book before I decide whether to delve into its pages. I ask myself (at least) these questions:

1 - Is the book written by an author I know to be theologically sound? If not, does this book come recommended by someone I trust to be discerning?

2 - Is the topic relevant to an issue I am studying?

3 - Is the author serious? In other words, does the author write fluff or something deeper?

While this often finds me reading books written by dead guys, there are some more ‘modern’ authors from whom I have benefitted. An author I have only recently come to appreciate - and appreciate him I do - is John Stott. Thus when I ran across some things he had written on the importance of our minds, I put another book on my reading list. Fortunately while it was not long, it was packed with wonderful insight and admonition.

John Stott’s book, Your Mind Matters, is short - a mere 4 chapters long. Thus it can be read in a long afternoon. However, the subject matter is of such importance it should be pondered long thereafter.

I like reading John Stott. He certainly doesn’t write ‘fluff’. However, his books are easier to follow (for this somewhat lazy-minded modern American Christian) than many of the ‘dead guys’ from whom I have benefitted greatly. So, I find him a happy medium. Challenging yet great for a rainy afternoon. Deep yet not too hard to comprehend. A relatively easy read yet one which will keep you thinking for a long time thereafter.

In chapter one, Stott accuses some Christians of having lazy minds. I certainly agree. In fact, I think lazy mindedness is a growing malice in the church today. In fact, I think even those who might ‘think’ they are avoiding this disease might be amazed (and ashamed) at how much it has permeated them to their core.

However, even if I did not agree with his premise, the author makes a compelling argument. He says, “What Paul wrote about unbelieving Jews in his day could be said, I fear, of some believing Christians in ours.”

Remember Paul’s words in Romans 10:2. To the Roman Christians he wrote, “For I bear them record that they have a zeal of God, but not according to knowledge.” Stott goes on to say, “Many have zeal without knowledge, enthusiasm without enlightenment. In more modern jargon, they are keen but clueless.”

Zeal isn’t enough. To say we ‘want’ to be a good Christian is not sufficient. To proclaim our fealty to God does not fulfill His demands. To read by rote (without fully engaging and exercising our minds in the process) is not what He requires of us. Stott quotes Dr. John Mackay, a past president of Princeton, who said, “Commitment without reflection is fanaticism in action. But reflection without commitment is the paralysis of all action.” Think about that one awhile!

Much of our modern mental paralysis comes from our view of life and godliness. Today we ask, “Does it work?” not “Is it true?”

Think about that. Doesn’t truth matter anymore? Not really. At least not to most people. After all, if one lives long enough as a contented resident in a culture which considers everything relative and nothing definitive, any other response would be unusual.

In fact, modern day American Christians have left off seeking the ‘truth’ for so long we have reached the point where doctrine is distasteful and no longer trustworthy. To have Someone say He is the ultimate authority, and we must obey Him is bitter to our taste buds. To have Someone require us to focus our entire life upon our learning of Him and serving Him sounds to us more like I despot than a God we would willingly dedicate our lives to pleasing.

Thus we have created a watered down Christianity based on a smorgasbord belief system which picks and chooses what makes us ‘feel’ good. I suppose that is why so many churches have ended up selling fire insurance to the unconverted who have no desire to be a ‘slave’ to Christ yet want a stamp of approval on their sinful lifestyle. Perhaps that is why many of our more conservative churches focus on ‘life improvement’ while avoiding the hard requirements God places on those who would wear His name. Maybe that is why we speak more about God’s love than we do His holiness. Maybe our mind really matters a WHOLE LOT more than we want to admit???