Bibliotheca Sacra 143 (Oct. 1986) 291-301.

          Copyright © 1986 by Dallas Theological Seminary.  Cited with permission.

 

 

 

                Thinking like a Christian

                               Part 4:

 

                In but Not of the World

 

 

                                       D. Bruce Lockerbie

 

An emphasis on thinking, on loving the Lord with all one's

mind, shows rising concern among some evangelicals. Such a

resurgence may be dated from the publication of Frank E.

Gaebelein's Pattern of God's Truth, in print since 1954; more

recently, Harry Blamires's The Christian Mind and John Stott's

Your Mind Matters may still be found in Christian bookstores.1

Other indicators of the flowering of evangelical scholarship are the

steady growth of periodicals such as Christian Scholar's Review

and Dallas Seminary's Bibliotheca Sacra. A recent issue of Pub-

lishers Weekly devotes four pages to a survey by Leslie R. Keylock of

Moody Bible Institute and Christianity Today, naming the "out-

standing evangelical Christian scholars" in fields such as Old Tes-

tament, New Testament, theology, church history, philosophy, and

others. His roster, based on a nominating list of 539 names, is

impressive, headed by F F Bruce.2 Also encouraging is the con-

tinuing stream of books by Arthur F Holmes, Nicholas Wolterstorff,

Alvin Plantinga, Ronald H. Nash, and others whose topic is a

reasonable faith.3 Beyond these books, evangelical publishing

houses are to be commended for risking financial loss in producing

purely academic books.

 

                                    Spiritual Immaturity

 

Yet in spite of these notable causes for hope, the fact is that

evangelical Christianity remains possessed by pietistic fervor at

 

                                                291

 

 



292                 Bibliotheca Sacra - October-December 1986

 

the expense of intellectual rigor. This is known to be true of many

congregations; others would argue that it is also true of most

Christian schools, colleges, and seminaries. For example the influ-

ence of so-called "contemporary Christian music" is evident in the

evangelical subculture. Without arguing its legitimacy as music,

its efficacy for evangelism, or its limitations on the nourishment of

growing Christians, one may merely state that spiritual imma-

turity prefers the familiar over the unfamiliar, the popular over the

serious. Spiritual immaturity gravitates toward ease rather than

rigor. Spiritual immaturity has money to spend on entertainment

but precious little in its coffers for challenge or conviction. Chris-

tians put their treasure where their emotions reside, as Jesus said;

thus when the Thomas F. Staley Foundation's "Distinguished

Christian Scholar" appears on a Christian college campus for

several days of dawn-to-midnight pouring out—in lectures, class-

room lessons, private interviews, faculty meetings, administrative

councils, mealtime conversations, dormitory lounge discussions—

he gives from his own learning and experience as a Christian

husband, father, teacher, coach, writer, speaker, scholar. He is

grateful for the honorarium paid, unless he bothers to think about

the fact that the following night in the same auditorium where he

called for thinking Christians, a group of surly looking smart

alecks or scruffy clowns called "Noah and the Animals" or "Pub-

licans and Sinners" will be wailing into their microphones and

inundating their lyrics with cacaphonous din. And the fee charged

to the college for this one-night stand would support true Christian

scholarship ten times over.

Why is this so? Because, as one of these joyful noisemakers

told this writer succinctly, "We give the people what they want."

What too many young people from evangelical homes and churches

enrolled in evangelical schools and colleges seem to want is froth

and syrup and cotton candy served up by musical lightweights

ignorant themselves of the relationship between worship and the

beauty of holiness. As a consequence, the hymnody of the

church—the legacy of Bernard of Clairvaux and Martin Luther, of

Isaac Watts and Charles Wesley, Fanny Crosby and Reginald

Heber—not to mention Bach, Handel, Mendelssohn, Bruckner,

and others—is in danger of disappearing altogether, to be replaced

by often insipid songs.

Furthermore in too many instances the Christian college is

little more than a holding pen where young adults can "find them-

selves." What is shown in the advertisements for Christian colleges



                        In but Not of the World                                293

 

in evangelical periodicals? Students playing frisbee, students

hang-gliding, or relaxing on a campus lawn. Where are the pho-

tographs of students in a physics laboratory or library? Why must

admissions officers and public relations personnel appeal to poten-

tial applicants as though their institution were a nine-month

youth retreat where everyone sits around singing mellow songs

about Jesus?

 

                        The Paradox of the Christian Vocation

 

No wonder Charles Malik so sternly judges evangelical colleges

for not having "yet attained the stature of the fifty or one hundred

top universities of the world, which set the pace and provide the

model for all other higher institutions of learning."4 Malik also

asks why

 

they cannot provide a single Nobel Prize winner in medicine or

physics or chemistry or biology or any of the sciences, who is at the

same time a firm and outspoken believer in the crucified and resur-

rected Jesus whose glory is that he is now and forever at the very

right hand of God, and who therefore is Lord of lords and King of

kings .... I mean a man who is recognized and quoted by the scien-

tific community all over the world ... just as, for instance, the contri-

butions of Maxwell or Einstein or Planck or Fermi are

recognized ... and will at the same time stand up in public and recite

the Nicene Creed and declare that he believes every word of it.5

 

Can Malik be right to indict Christians for their smugness,

their complacency, and their disinterest with the result that, after

Billy Graham, scarcely another household name familiar in Chris-

tianity's subculture would register the slightest flicker of recogni-

tion in a Dallas restaurant? This self-containment is the point

recently made by Nathan 0. Hatch. Describing the incongruity

between "the sway of secularism" in the world-at-large and "a heady

confidence" one is likely to find on the campuses of evangelical

colleges, Hatch writes that "the jarring disparity between these two

worlds testifies to how rarely the evangelical college serves as a

bridge to issues and audiences beyond the safe confines of the

evangelical world."6

Christian education, as represented by schools, colleges, and

seminaries, remains in a puzzling posture, afraid to be sufficiently

committed to living out the paradox of the believer's vocation: living

in yet not of the world. Too often these institutions swing toward

one extreme or the other. The first extreme may be characterized as

Of but not in the world. Claiming to offer a college-preparatory or



294                 Bibliotheca Sacra - October-December 1986

 

liberal arts education, the school or college isolates itself by scru-

pulous admissions requirements screening out unbelieving appli-

cants; statements of faith from applicants or from parents on

behalf of their children; pledges to forbid indulgence in sinful

pleasures (always the same list of notorious iniquities, but never

mentioning gossip, cynicism, or rudeness in chapel). The opposite

extreme is the institution that is both in and of the world, so open

to all comers—faculty as well as students—and so timid in assert-

ing the evangelical distinctives of its biblical world view that the

school or college has lost its Christian moorings. Generally this

latter condition arises when the sine qua non of Christian school-

ing evaporates. Gaebelein wrote, "The principle, ‘No Christian edu-

cation without Christian teachers,' is not an oversimplification,

but rather the essential for effective work in this field."7

In place of either extreme is needed a balanced Christian

pedagogy, a balanced Christian curriculum, a balanced under-

standing of the interdependence necessary to loving God with one's

heart, soul, strength, and mind; a balanced appreciation for the

multiple gifts of each member of the body of Christ; a balance

between acknowledgment of one's own gifts and humility in know-

ing how to use them. Perhaps in making a start toward achieving

such a balance, the thrust of this article series needs to be reex-

amined. Thinking like a Christian is important; thinking has been

so disparaged and neglected by many in the church that one

cannot speak of thinking like a Christian and simply leave it there.

Thinking must never become an abstraction, an idle pastime. For

the Christian there must also be action. Thinking like a Christian

means speaking and acting like Jesus Christ.

 

                        Words, Words, Words

 

One of the marks of maturity is thoughtful speech, the careful

choice of words. Mark Twain said somewhere that the difference

between the right word and the nearly right word is the difference

between lightning and the lightning bug. What a person says

matters because what he says is a direct reflection of who he is—or

who he may pretend to be! Jesus Himself put it plainly: "For the

mouth speaks out of that which fills the heart" (Matt. 12:34). From

the deepest recesses of one's being comes the dead giveaway: the

words he says.

That is why language is so important for Christians who wish

to think and act like Christ. Thought, speech, and action are



                        In but Not of the World                                295

 

inextricable. But if believers are to think, speak, and act like

Christians, they must become conscious that words are signs and

labels, that they identify the speaker's world view They tell more

about the speaker than many realize.

A dozen years ago this writer was invited to speak at a college

near Providence, Rhode Island. A few weeks earlier, blood vessels in

his left eye hemorrhaged, leaving him totally blind in that eye. To

anyone who asked about his eye he replied, "I've had an accident

with my eye." Many kind people offered to pray for the eye but no

one corrected the writer's use of language, and so he went on

speaking about his accidental loss of vision. The night before he

was to speak, he flew from New York to Providence. The weather

was rainy and foggy. When the plane landed, he sat looking out at

the mist rolling in off Narragansett Bay. Through that murk he saw

the illuminated sign identifying the airport. One word seemed to

pulsate through the fog: "Providence." For the first time this writer

thought seriously about that word and his condition.

He realized that he had been guilty of far worse than the

casual, unthinking misuse of language. He had carelessly

demeaned the Lord of the universe, Yahweh-jireh, the God-who-

provides. By telling friends of his "accident," he had been saying, in

effect, "I live by chance in a world that is no more than a vast cosmic

casino; I live by the random rules of a world governed by happen-

stance and chaos. " For to trust God means delivering over to Him

responsibility for all that is beyond one's power to control. Provi-

dence does not mean that Christians never have an automobile

collision; it means that Christians never have an accident. Provi-

dence means that when Christians encounter an incident of disap-

pointment or even death, the God they serve provides the fortitude

they need to see them through their difficulties. For such a God, the

word "accident" cannot be found in His vocabulary. As someone

speaking on KBRT-Los Angeles said recently, "Our God never has

to say ‘Oops!’” So thinking Christians cannot speak of luck, for-

tune, chance, or coincidence because they have been called to

speak as God's envoys.

 

                        Worthy, not Worthless, Words

 

Since man's Fall in Eden, God has chosen to speak to the

mass of humanity through His chosen messengers, as the author

of the Epistle to the Hebrews declares: "God... spoke long ago to

the fathers in the prophets in many portions and in many ways"





296                 Bibliotheca Sacra - October-December 1986

 

(Heb. 1:1). Then God provided another voice—the Message and

Messenger in One, the divine Logos, the eternal Word incarnate in

Jesus Christ. This voice continues to speak, His message echoed

and reechoed by those who have accepted His commission to be

spokesmen for the Father. The Prophet Jeremiah records that

commission as he heard it: "If you repent, I will restore you that you

may serve me. If you utter worthy, not worthless, words, you will be

my spokesman" (Jer. 15:19, niv).

If God chooses, He can speak from a burning bush or even

through the braying of a donkey. God is perfectly capable of speak-

ing directly, unmistakably, and terrifyingly, as on the walls of

Belshazzar's palace. Furthermore God will speak again with the

voice of a trumpet on the day of history's consummation. He will

say to the dead, "Rise up!" and to the living, "Come, for all things

are now ready." But for now God chooses to speak through believ-

ers, His human messengers, because God is personal, not a cosmic

cipher; God is historical, not mythic; He is verbal, not

incomprehensible. God's attributes include mind, intellect, rea-

son; with these God imagines and thinks. God creates in His mind,

then speaks and acts through human agents. He whispers His will

in the ear of the one who listens and obeys. He calls by name,

"Samuel, Samuel," to which the only appropriate reply is, "Speak,

for Thy servant is listening" (1 Sam. 3:10). He asks for volunteers:

"Whom shall I send, and who will go for us?" To this challenge the

only appropriate response is, "Here am I. Send me!" (Isa. 6:8). Of

course God has angels to do His bidding. But because it is God's

pleasure to share responsibility for this planet and this race's well-

being with mankind, the creatures made in His own image, God

commissions willing ambassadors to speak the message of truth,

the word of warning, the word of comfort, the word of joy.

But God's commission carries with it a set of conditions,

qualifications to be met before one can become His messenger. God

imposes careful standards on those who would be His spokesmen.

If Christians meet God's criterion, then their work will be effective;

if they fail to measure up, their work will be useless. Some seem to

possess an exalted notion of their own importance to the work of

God. They act as though Almighty God were so weak and depen-

dent on them that the kingdom would collapse without them to

hold it up. They are indispensable, or so they think, and the need

God has is so critical—the emergency so acute—that God will

accept any service they offer on their own terms. In arrogance they

present themselves, like impure vessels, not realizing that God



                        In but Not of the World                                297

 

abhors their sin; they present themselves as leaky vases, presum-

ing to contain the splendor of God's grace; they present themselves

as damaged goods, remnants from a fire sale, and expect to model

the righteousness of God.

But what conditions does God impose? God evaluates the

content of the message: "If you utter worthy, not worthless, words,

you will be My spokesman." What are "worthless words"? In keep-

ing with the emphasis on thinking like a Christian, it seems fitting

to assert that style and content, form and message, are indivisible.

Careless, imprecise, sloppy speech as a vehicle for communicating

the good news is unacceptable. As Trueblood wrote, "We must, as

Christians, stress excellence."8 Why does it matter how a person

speaks or what he says? What difference does it make if he says

"infer" when he means "imply," or "uninterested" when he means

"disinterested"? Or so what if he speaks only the gibberish of the

evangelical clubhouse? The fact is that much of God-talk, if not

ungrammatical and malaprop, is often threadbare from casual,

automatic, tongue-twitching overwork.

Nor can Christians excuse themselves by exclaiming, "What

difference does it make, just so the general idea about the gospel

gets through?" Scripture does not suggest that "in the beginning

was the general idea," or that at the Incarnation, "the Vague Notion

became flesh and dwelt among us. " Jesus of Nazareth is the defini-

tive Logos, divine Logic, sublime Reason, the Alpha and Omega,

the eternal Word. The best attempts at articulating this mystery

will always fall short of full expression, but that gives Christians

no right to absolve themselves for selling out to the cheap phrase,

the easy cliché.

 

                        Actions Speak Louder than Words

 

This writer's father, the Reverend E. A. Lockerbie, used to

challenge his congregation with this anonymous quatrain:

 

We are writing a gospel, a chapter a day,

By the deeds that we do and the words that we say.

Men read what we write, whether faithful and true:

Tell me, what is the gospel according to you?

 

Christians should utter worthy words and then have the grace

to act in ways that befit their speech. Two particular areas of

behavior call for repentance, restoration, and renewed dedication:

first, Christians' often oblivious absorption in popular culture; and

second, their scandalous undermining of the family.





298                 Bibliotheca Sacra - October-December 1986

 

Muggeridge's vivid analogy of the boiling frogs portrays the

uncritical immersion of many in today's popular culture. "The

frogs are us," says Muggeridge, "the water is our habitat, and the

Media, by accustoming us to the gradual deterioration of our

values and our circumstances, ensure that the boiling point comes

upon us unawares. "9

The most lethal aspect of popular culture, the most overtly

satanic, is the music of death played and sung by louts and per-

verts, by screeching men and leering women whose caterwauling

now moves from recording disc and concert hall to the family room

by way of television. By watching their music videos and leafing

through the "heavy metal" fan magazines, a person knows the

message of Def Leppard, Twisted Sister, Judas Priest, Iron Maiden,

Black Sabbath—or does he? No adult Christian—certainly no

Christian educator in any field—can afford to ignore the blatant

summons to nihilism and even suicide explicit in this poisonous

sound.

Still many Christians not only ignore its dangers but seem to

revel in its blasphemy. When this writer visits Christian colleges,

his accommodations are often in a dormitory guest apartment.

Each afternoon, as he returns to his room, he literally has to step

over the bodies of potential Christian leaders sprawled beyond the

confines of the television lounge, temporarily transfixed by the

diabolism of MTV Later that night, he may well have to resort to

earplugs to lessen the throbbing din of Duran Duran, Motley Crue,

and Van Halen, blasting from rooms where students, presumably

being taught to think like Christians, are doing their homework.

These campuses need to be invaded by Christians who will pro-

claim the lordship of Jesus Christ—not David Lee Roth!—and

drive out the corrupting power of Satan.

At an evangelical college in the Midwest the writer was sitting

in the student union with an older freshman, a man of 25 but

looking 50—scant of hair and teeth, his face marred, his arms

gouged by years of drug addiction. It was November. The previous

summer on a street corner in Los Angeles he had been handed a

flyer announcing an evangelistic, meeting nearby. There he had

heard the gospel for the first time. The next day, momentarily clear

of his drugged state, he had returned to the church and confessed

Christ. The pastor saw something in this man and prevailed on his

own college to take the new convert into summer school—even

though the man had dropped out of junior high school, already an

addict at 14. The college took him; he had survived summer school



                        In but Not of the World                                299

 

and had been admitted to freshman standing. Struggling with

both the demands of college and his newly redeemed life, what

puzzled him most was the inconsistency of professing Christians.

In the conversation in the lounge he paused for a moment to

hear the music being piped from the main desk of the student

union, one of the current Top 40. This young Christian, with his

battered face and rotten teeth—yet radiating joy in Christ— said,

"They shouldn't oughta play that music here. These people here,

they don't know what it means. They've never been on the other

side of the door. But me, I've been on the other side of the door, and,

Mister, it means death!"

Christian education must be committed to life, not death.

One's course of study and his manner of living, must transcend the

best that the secular cosmos has to offer with the best that the Lord

of heaven and earth has to give: abundant life, life with a purpose

fulfilling itself day by day. A sure indication that a person has begun

to experience that abundant life will be an aroused sensitivity

toward the needs of others. Loving God with heart, soul, strength,

and mind goes hand in hand with loving one's neighbor. If a

professing Christian's heart is dull to the needs of others, if his

jokes are frequently at the expense of ethnic minorities, if his

respect for the opposite sex is minimal, if his compassion for the

less gifted or less privileged seems stillborn, then his religion suf-

fers from arrested development and stunted growth.

Furthermore loving God by loving others begins at home, with

love and gratitude, respect and honor for one's parents; love and

graciousness, respect and fidelity for one's wife or husband; love

and patience, respect and responsibility for one's children. The

single most distressing characteristic in evangelical Christianity—

unthinkable only a generation ago—is the sinful neglect of biblical

standards for loving and cherishing each other. Laxity has been

permitted to creep into today's understanding of family obliga-

tions, resulting in a shoulder-shrugging neutrality toward mar-

riage vows and abdication of authority with regard to the bringing

up of children. The world fosters the self-centered ideal, favors the

institutionalizing of the elderly, promotes live-in fornication rather

than lifelong marriage, tosses off the blame for unruly children on

the rest of society. All this is in place of accepting God-ordained

roles as members of a Christian family.

For all this the writer's generation is at fault for not having had

the courage to oppose the incursion of decadence into the home

and church, the school and seminary. On the younger generation,



300                 Bibliotheca Sacra - October-December 1986

 

then, falls the burden to help redeem from folly an evangelical

Christian subculture not far removed from having the word "Ich-

abod" inscribed as its motto: "The glory of the Lord has departed."

Now, as never before, is needed the youthful enthusiasm of today's

Christian generation, along with their flaming sense of mission,

the passion of their first love for God, to lead believers back in

repentance, restoration, and renewal to the wisdom that is

Jesus Christ.

In the summer of 1918 a Presbyterian minister named William

Hiram Foulkes stood on the railway platform opposite the Stony

Brook Assembly conference grounds, now the campus of The

Stony Brook School. Waiting for his train to New York City, Foulkes

met another Presbyterian, Calvin Laufer, who told Foulkes that a

melody had been running through his mind for several days.

Laufer hummed his original tune, and on the train to the city

William Hiram Foulkes wrote his hymn, called "Stony Brook." The

next evening, the congregation at the Assembly sang it for the first

time.10 May this first stanza be like a closing prayer:

 

Take Thou our minds, dear Lord, we humbly pray;

Give us the mind of Christ each passing day;

Teach us to know the truth that sets us free;

Grant us in all our thoughts to honor Thee.

May Christians today go forth in the name of Christ. Thanks

be to God! 12

 

                        Editor's Note

 

This is the fourth in a series of four articles delivered by the author as the W H.

Griffith Thomas Lectures at Dallas Theological Seminary, November 5-8, 1985.

 

                                             Notes

 

1   Frank E. Gaebelein, The Pattern of God's Truth: Problems of Integration in

Christian Education (New York: Oxford University Press, 1954); Harry Blamires,

The Christian Mind (London: SPCK, 1966); John R. W. Stott, Your Mind Matters

(Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1973).

2   Leslie R. Keylock, "The Renaissance of Evangelical Protestantism," Publishers

Weekly, Sept. 27, 1985, pp. 44-47.

3   Arthur E Holmes, All Truth Is God's Truth (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity

Press, 1983); Arthur E Holmes, ed., The Making of a Christian Mind (Downers

Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1985); Nicholas Wolterstorff, Educatingfor Responsi-

ble Action (Grand Rapids: CSI Publications and Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.,

1980); Alvin Plantinga and Nicholas Wolterstorff, eds., Faith and Rationality:

Reason and Belief in God (Notre Dame, IN: Notre Dame University Press, 1983);

Ronald H. Nash, Christian Faith and Historical Understanding (Grand Rapids:

Zondervan Publishing House, 1984). Also the four articles in this series in



                        In but Not of the World                                301

 

expanded form are to be published by Multnomah Press under the title Thinking

like a Christian.

4   Charles Malik, A Christian Critique of the University (Downers Grove, IL:

InterVarsity Press), p. 29.

5   Ibid., pp. 51-52.

6   Nathan O. Hatch, "Evangelical Colleges and the Challenge of Christian Think-

ing," The Reformed Journal 35 (September 1985):12.

7   Frank E. Gaebelein, Christian Education in a Democracy (New York: Oxford

University Press, 1951), p. 47.

8   D. Elton Trueblood, Toward a Christian Philosophy of Higher Education, ed.

John Paul von Grueningen (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1957), p. 167.

9   "Living through an Apocalypse," Christianity Today, August 16, 1974, p. 4.

10   William Hiram Foulkes, "Take Thou Our Minds, Dear Lord," Present Day

Hymns and Why They Were Written, comp. John Barnes Pratt (New York: A. S.

Barnes, 1940), pp. 42-43.

11   "Take Thou Our Minds, Dear Lord," The Hymnal (Philadelphia: Presbyterian

Board of Christian Education, 1933).

12   The writer wishes to express gratitude to his colleague, John M. Kenney,

chairman of the Bible department at The Stony Brook School, who was an encour-

agement in the preparation of these articles by his thoughtful criticism.

 

 

This material is cited with gracious permission from:

            Dr. Roy Zuck

Dallas Theological Seminary

            3909 Swiss Ave.

            Dallas, TX   75204

 Please report any errors to Ted Hildebrandt at:  thildebrandt@gordon.edu