John R.W. Stott on Being Salt and Light

The world is evidently a dark place, with little or no light of its own, since an external source of light is needed to illumine it. True, it is "always talking about its enlightenment," but much of its boasted light is in reality darkness. The world also manifests a constantly tendency to deteriorate. The notion is not that the world is tasteless and that Christians can make it less insipid ("The thought of making the world palatable to God is quite impossible"), but that it is putrefying. It cannot stop itself from going bad. Only salt introduced from outside can do this. The church, on the other hand, is set in the world with a double role, as salt to arrest--or at least to hinder--the process of social decay, and as light to dispel the darkness.

What message do we have, then, for such people who feel themselves strangled by 'the system', crushed by the machine of modern technocracy, overwhelmed by political, social and economic forces which control them and over which they have no control? They feel themselves victims of a situation they are powerless to change. What can they do? It is in the soil of this frustration that revolutionaries are being bred, dedicated to the violent overthrow of the system. It is from the very same soil that revolutionaries of Jesus can arise, equally dedicated activists--even more so--but committed rather to spread his revolution of love, joy and peace. And this peaceful revolution is more radical than any programme of violence, both because its standards are incorruptible and because it changes people as well as structures. Have we lost our confidence? Then listen to Luther: "With his single word I can be more defiant and more boastful than they with all their power, swords and guns."

John R.W. Stott, Christian Counter-Culture: The Message of the Sermon on the Mount (InterVarsity Press, 1978), pgs. 58-59, 64.

John Murray on the Cultural Mandate

There is an indication in Genesis 1 and 2 of the variety which would have characterized his labours in a state of confirmed integrity. The other mandates—the replenishing of the earth and subduing it—involved labour also. Even in the genial conditions which would have obtained in an uncursed earth it is not difficult to imagine the labour entailed in geographical expansion and the necessity of making adequate provision for sustenance and comfort in this process of expansion. But more significant in respect of labour is the mandate to subdue the earth. This means nothing if it does not mean the harnessing and utilizing of the earth’s resources and forces. We are not to suppose that the earth is represented as offering resistance to man’s dominion and that the subduing was to be that of conquering alien and recalcitrant powers. But the subduing of the earth must imply the expenditure of thought and skill and energy in bringing the earth and its resources under such control that they would be channeled to the promotion of certain ends which they were suited and designed to fulfil but which would not be fulfilled part from the exercise of man’s design and labour. In the sense in which Jesus spoke of the Sabbath as made for man and not man for the Sabbath, so we may not say that the earth and its resources were made for man and not man for them; he was to exercise dominion over them, they were not to rule over him The earth and its resources were to be brought into the service of his well-being, enjoyment and pleasure.

John Murray, Principles of Conduct: Aspects of Biblical Ethics (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1957), 36-37.

Book Recommendation: “Redemption Accomplished and Applied” by John Murray

NOTE: For a few years now, I have been writing book recommendations for my church's monthly newsletter. I have decided that I would begin reposting some of them here on my blog. Note that these are not full-length reviews, but short blurbs on what I found helpful about the books and why I recommend others to read them. I hope this encourages you to check out the same books.

From the back of the book:

The atonement lies at the very center of the Christian faith. The free and sovereign love of God is the source of the accomplishment of redemption, as the Bible’s most familiar text (John 3:16) makes clear. 

For thoughtful Christians since the time of the Apostle Paul, this text has started, not ended, the discussion of redemption. Yet few recent interpreters have explored in depth the biblical passages dealing with the atonement as penetratingly or precisely as John Murray, who, until his death in 1975, was regarded by many as the foremost conservative theologian in the English-speaking world. 

In this enduring study of the atonement, Murray systematically explains the two sides of redemption: its accomplishment by Christ and its application to the life of the redeemed. In Part 1 Murray considers the necessity, nature, perfection, and extent of the atonement. In Part 2 Murray offers careful expositions of the scriptural teaching about calling, regeneration, faith and repentance, justification, adoption, sanctification perseverance, union with Christ and glorification.

I read this book while taking Systematic Theology classes under Prof. Kirk Wellum in Toronto Baptist Seminary, and this was my favourite among all my seminary textbooks. And it’s not because of its short length! Although small and only 192 pages long, it is densely packed with great information on the doctrine of salvation. This work is a classic treatment of the salvific work of God (especially as it relates to Jesus’ work on the cross) from a Reformed perspective. It is concise enough that readers are not drowned in lengthy theological arguments, yet comprehensive enough that the breadth of the biblical teaching on redemption is adequately covered. Murray’s contributions to the theology of redemption are helpful both to those who are still young in the faith and need to be grounded in the scriptural understanding of salvation, as well as more experienced Christians who wish to further their understanding of how God has accomplished His salvific work and has applied it to believers.

In keeping with the title, Murray has divided the book into two sections: Redemption Accomplished (which is 5 chapters long) and Redemption Applied (which is 10 chapters long). As noted in the preface, the second section of this book was originally a set of twenty two articles that the author wrote for The Presbyterian Guardian from 1952 to 1954.  It was later collected together and added to the first section to produce the current edition of the book, which has remained in more or less the same form since it first came out back in 1955.

For those looking for a biblical and logical exposition of Reformed theology that explains the key concepts underlying our belief concerning the doctrine of salvation, this is the best one-volume treatment of the issues. It is both highly informative and edifying, and belongs in every believer’s library.

On Being Salt and Light

Some Christians think that either you're involved in heavenly things or involved in earthly things. That is a false dichotomy, because the Bible commands us to be involved in both: "But seek the welfare of the city where I have sent you into exile, and pray to the Lord on its behalf, for in its welfare you will find your welfare" (Jeremiah 29:7).

Christians should be fully involved in the public square, and they should be involved in such a way that the surrounding world can see what the effect of a Christian worldview and lifestyle have on such public involvement. Statements such as "None of these things matter , because it's all about Jesus!" sound high-minded and pious, but it's not what the Lord commanded, and in fact goes contrary to His command for us to be salt and light to the world around us.

Two Principles in Debating

Two truths that ought to be obvious to everybody regardless of their religious or political beliefs:

1. Sincerity does not equal truthfulness. One may sincerely hold to his beliefs, but he may be sincerely wrong about his beliefs.
2. A sincerely wrong person is not a lying or deceptive person. Unless one has good reason to think otherwise, it is always best to assume that if one is making a claim, they really do believe the claim they're making (even if you know that claim to be false).

On the Harmony Between Different Disciplines

The human mind has a wonderful faculty for the condensation of perfectly valid arguments, and what seems like an instinctive belief may turn out to be the result of many logical steps. Or, rather it may be that the belief in a personal God is the result of a primitive revelation, and that the theistic proofs are only the logical confirmation of what was originally arrived at by a different means. At any rate, the logical confirmation of the belief in God is a vital concern to the Christian; at this point as at many others religion and philosophy are connected in the most intimate possible way. True religion can make no peace with a false philosophy, any more than with a science that is falsely-so-called; a thing cannot possibly be true in religion and false in philosophy or in science. All methods of arriving at truth, if they be valid methods, will arrive at a harmonious result.

Machen, John Gresham. Christianity and Liberalism. ReformedAudio.org, 1923. p. 51.

Reflections on the Israel-Gaza Conflict

Israel and Palestine supporters butt heads in downtown Toronto

People who know me would tell you that I'm a very opinionated person. I have strong views on a lot of religious/political/social issues (it comes with being INFJ, methinks). So when it comes to the conflict between Israel and Palestine, one would think that I have some really firm opinions on the matter. However, the fact is that I don't. And it's not because I'm not well-studied on the issue. I've done plenty of reading on the conflict, and my Facebook newsfeed is regularly inundated by posts both by ardent pro-Israel and pro-Palestine people. So in articulating my views, I will tend to be much more nuanced and tentative. My personal views perhaps comes closest to those presented by Nicholas Kristoff, who finds plenty of blame to go around for both Israel and Palestine. I'm certainly not going to please any of the hardliners, whether they are on the side of Israel or on the side of Palestine. I have to call it as it is, and I'm prepared to take whatever criticism anyone on either side of the issue wants to hurl at me.

Let me begin by saying that in principle, I believe that everyone--Jewish or Arab--should have the right to a safe home without fear of genocide or racial discrimination. That would lead me to some kind of binational solution in the long term, though there are way too many complications at the present moment for that to be a feasible solution in the short term. My heart goes out to all of the people on both sides who are living daily in fear and trepidation because of the constant rain of bombs and missiles upon them. Nobody should have to live in that kind of situation, and the death of a Palestinian youth due to rocket fire should be considered no less tragic than the death of any Israeli who gets killed under similar circumstances. I've seen the pictures of mangled bodies, and it's horrible to have to look at. It just brings out the reality that war is hell, and no nation should ever treat war as a trivial thing--something that gets lost in this world of warhawks and militarist demagogues. If anyone here has my disdain and contempt, it is those who are at work to perpetuate the war, whichever side they may be on.

Now, there is plenty of blame to go around. The spreading of media misinformation is particularly deplorable. I for one do not believe every graphic image or video that appears on my newsfeed, because I am aware that there is a whole industry dedicated to fabricating such videos. There are real atrocities that take place down there, to be sure, but it serves nobody (least of all the cause of peace), when these kinds of fabrications are made. It's also disheartening how facts are omitted when they don't serve someone's narrative. Those on the Palestinian side will speak, for example, about how the IDF kills children in Gaza, but are strangely silent when it comes to Hamas doing the same thing. 

Also, much is made about the fact that 80 percent of casualties are unarmed non-combatants. While that is undoubtedly tragic, it is actually unremarkable in the history of warfare. Historically, 80 to 90 percent of war casualties are civilians. Sometimes the military deliberately targets civilians (the Nanking Massacre comes to mind), and other times it is simply collateral damage. Which one is it, in this case? I have to say that it's a bit of both. There have been cases of IDF soldiers deliberately targeting civilians (for example, see this). If there is any integrity among IDF's high command, I would hope that those who commit these kinds of attacks are duly court martialed, and that other soldiers are restrained from similar acts. I would also hope that these kinds of incidents are the outliers and not the norm (whether or not that is the case, I cannot determine). In any case, it is precisely these kinds of incidents that reveal the horrors of war--the deliberate targeting of civilians, not just combatants.

Just as horrifying is the kind of racism and xenophobia that is bred among both sides, and is then passed on to the children. Who hasn't seen the videos of children's shows used to brainwash Palestinian kids with Hamas ideology? Unfortunately, something similar seems to be taking place among Israeli youth, as evidenced by the large number of tweets calling for death to Arabs. With this kind of xenophobia being passed on to the next generations, it seems that the prospects for a lasting peace seem rather bleak indeed.

Finally, I want to speak briefly on the Christian dimension to the conflict. It should be known to everyone that there are Christians on both sides of the conflict--Messianic Jews and Palestinian Christians. Ministries such as Musalaha are aimed at bringing these believers together in order to promote peace and reconciliation between them. This would seem to me to be the most biblical approach to the conflict As the apostle Paul said, "strive to be at peace with all people"  (Romans 12:18).

This seems to be lost among those Dispensational Premillennialist Evangelicals who see the modern state of Israel as being a fundamental component of God's plan to bring about the second coming of Christ. As a Reformed Christian who is Postmillennial in eschatology, I have grave disagreements with this theology, which I will hopefully speak more on in the near future, Lord willing. In the meantime, I would like to kindly refer to reader to this article by R.C. Sproul Jr., which sums up my thoughts on this theology. Suffice to say, this theology has caused many western Evangelicals to uncritically accept whatever Israel does (as if God had granted infallibility to their political leaders!).

Worse yet, they seem to have no qualms about completely writing off all the Arabs, even throwing the Christians among them under the bus. They seem to think that their very existence is some sort of mistake. However, as Palestinian Christian theologian Derek Rishmawy has pointed out, "as a Palestinian Christian, I am not Abraham’s mistake: I am God’s choice in Christ." See also this Arab Christian girl's appeal to western Christians not to look at modern national Israel as some sort of immaculate entity that could do no wrong. God forbid that we forget these brothers and sisters for the sake of some Dispensational dream of rapture and tribulation. Christians should remember that before we can do good for the world around us, we must first take care of the household of faith (Galatians 6:10).

That's pretty much my take on the Israel/Palestine debate. I'm sure that by now, I've stepped on a sufficient number of toes. Maybe I'll change my mind and take a firmer stand on one side or the other. Who knows? What I do know is that this is not a simple matter, and I encourage people not to oversimplify the politics of the region.