thisnumberisdisconnected, it is plain that we are not going to agree on the subject of your opening post. To keep going back-and-forth over it is pointless. I stand behind my words and will let other readers pass judgment on their veracity.
I was heartened to see that you finally cited a source for your prior assertion in your opening post. I will address John Piper’s article in a separate post. I want to focus this post on your critique of John MacArthur’s book “Slave” of which I am intimately acquainted. You wrote:
thisnumberisdisconnected said:
John MacArthur's book "Slave" is a prime example of what I'm talking about, if you want specifics. Throughout the book, MacArthur describes Christian obedience as “pure delight” and “joy-filled.” On page 208, he describes our experience as slaves to Christ as “not partially sweet and partially sour, but totally sweet.” This, despite what the apostle John clearly experienced as recorded in Revelation. But regardless of the fact that there is nothing sweeter than being a slave of Christ, to suggest that our experience is never mixed with bitterness (taste, not attitude) is just plain nonsense. A believer who has lost an unbelieving relative or close friend would be an example. A job loss, a prolonged illness personally experienced in self or close family -- these things serve to progressively sanctify, but is MacArthur going to try to convince us that we must face them with joy and delight, with no negatively expressed emotion mixed in, or else we are in sin? Tell me that isn't what he said.
First, you are wrong when you claim, “Throughout the book, MacArthur describes Christian obedience as “pure delight” and “joy-filled”.” He does equate being a Christian (as a slave of Christ) as joyful in the last chapter of the book, but that is not the theme of the book. I challenge you to support your “Throughout the book” claim. If MacArthur used this language throughout the book, it should be clearly seen in each chapter. As it is, that is not the case.
“Slave” was written to undo what MacArthur labels as a “conspiracy”, whether intentional or unwittingly. The conspiracy is the failure of most English translations in regard to the Greek word doulos. The word means “a slave”. It has no other meaning. To translate it any other way is an unfaithful rendering of the Greek word. He then goes on to describe the Christian life in light of the slave-master relationship.
MacArthur does not ignore the difficulty of living the Christian life. He writes on page 93, “Because the Lord is our Master, we can trust Him to take care of us in every situation and stage of life.” That would include good and bad situations. On page 118 he draws attention to the fact that early Christians were often slaves by position, and sometimes treated harshly. “Early Christians would have been well aware of the abuses a slave could suffer at the hands of an unjust owner. Many first-century believers were slaves themselves, and some of them were subjected to harsh and unfair treatment.”
When you write, “A believer who has lost an unbelieving relative or close friend would be an example. A job loss, a prolonged illness personally experienced in self or close family -- these things serve to progressively sanctify, but
is MacArthur going to try to convince us that we must face them with joy and delight, with no negatively expressed emotion mixed in, or else we are in sin?” (emphasis mine) have you forgotten what scripture instructs us to do in light of suffering?
James 1:2 Consider it all joy, my brethren, when you encounter various trials,
Matthew 5:11 Blessed are you when people insult you and persecute you, and falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of Me.
While imprisoned for the cause of Christ, Paul wrote:
Philippians 4:2-7, "I urge Euodia and I urge Syntyche to live in harmony in the Lord. Indeed, true companion, I ask you also to help these women who have
shared my struggle in the cause of the gospel, together with Clement also and the rest of my fellow workers, whose names are in the book of life.
Rejoice in the Lord always; again I will say, rejoice! 5 Let your gentle spirit be known to all men. The Lord is near.
Be anxious for nothing, but in everything by prayer and supplication with thanksgiving let your requests be made known to God. And the peace of God, which surpasses all comprehension, will guard your hearts and your minds in Christ Jesus (emphasis mine)."
Imprisoned and facing death, Paul was able to write, “Rejoice in the Lord always; again I will, rejoice!” He then went on to write be anxious for nothing. Was that a callous remark by the Apostle? Indeed, Paul puts his suffering in context in
Philippians 1:29 “For to you it has been granted for Christ’s sake, not only to believe in Him, but also to suffer for His sake”. Whereas no Christian would dare label the Apostle Paul as callous and unfeeling over his command to “rejoice” and “be anxious for nothing” in the midst of suffering, apparently you must think that of John MacArthur because he does not qualify his words.
Back to page 207 of “Slave”. In context, MacArthur writes: “Slavery to Christ is much more than mere duty; it is motivated by a heart filled with loving devotion and pure delight. Because God first loved us and sent His Son to redeem us from sin, we now love Him – longing from the heart to worship, honor, and obey Him in everything. Our slavery to Him is not drudgery but a joy-filled privilege made possible by His saving grace and the Spirit’s continued working in our lives. As loyal citizens and grateful children, we now serve our King and our Father out of hearts brimming with thankfulness. To be Christ’s slave is a wonderful and blessed reality; to be His “doulos is not partially sweet and partially sour, but totally sweet.””
The above quote from “Slave” is axiomatic. It does not ignore individual suffering, but views all things in the Christian life through the lens of being a slave to Christ. Indeed in the next paragraph MacArthur compares bondage with freedom. He describes the yoke and burden of the Christian life as light. So, he does understand the sufferings Christians endure, but he views them through the lens of Christ.
If MacArthur’s intent was to write a book on Christians and suffering, and he only gave lip service to the hardships of suffering, then your criticism would be valid. But that is not the intent of his book; ergo your criticism is invalid. Actually I am quite surprised that a person who writes so well cannot understand the theme of the book and what the author is trying to convey.
