Collected Writings of John Murray, Vol. II. Banner of Truth Trust. 417 pp. Price £4.50.
This second volume of Professor John Murray’s collected writings does not contain his class lectures but rather select lectures is Systematic Theology. As Systematic Theology was the subject which Professor Murray taught at Westminster Theological Seminary we may be sure that we have in these lectures the fruit of many years of study in this important branch of the theological disciplines. The book is divided up into seven parts: I Man; II Common Grace; III Salvation; IV Faith; V Sanctification; VI The Church; VII The Last Things.
In the opening chapter Prof. Murray deals with the Origins of Man. In concluding the chapter he poses the question, “Is an evolutionary view of man’s origin compatible with the biblical representation?” and answers it with an emphatic “No.” And this, he says, is so, no matter what form of evolutionary theory is in view. On page 49, in dealing with the Adamic Administration, he questions the felicitousness of the term ‘Covenant of Works.’ In the same chapter he also states: “The view that in the Mosaic Covenant there was a repetition of the so-called Covenant of Works, current among covenant theologians, is a grave misconception and involves an erroneous construction of the Mosaic Covenant” (p. 50). In writing on the Fall of Man he does not try to solve the many difficult problems involved but is ready to acknowledge that they are insoluble. “It is not ours,” he says, “to scan the reasons of God’s unrevealed counsel.” In the article on Inability he argues cogently against the objections commonly levelled against the doctrine of man’s inability. Rather than hindering evangelism, “it is only on the presupposition of total depravity and complete human impotence that the full glory and power of the gospel can be declared” (p. 58). “It is not the conviction of helplessness that keeps men away from Christ; it is the opposite.” In dealing with the Atonement, his defence of the Atonement as the provision of the Father’s love is particularly impressive. This is true also of his article on the Obedience of Christ.
When he comes to Effectual Calling, Prof. Murray takes issue with the Westminster Divines in their called effectual calling a work (p. 165). He maintains it should be an act no less than justification and adoption. He says also that the Catechism construes calling as specifically the action of the Holy Spirit, when the Scripture refers it specifically to God the Father. Most, we feel, would differ from the Professor in his view on Effectual Calling and would regard the Westminster Divines statement as an adequate definition of the Scriptural doctrine.
Professor Murray’s view of the Church comes through when he questions whether it is right to define the Church, viewed from its visible aspect, in such a way as to include those who are not really members of Christ’s body (pp. 376-7). On the question of the unity of the Church he says, “It is a monstrous travesty to make this prayer of Jesus (“that they may be one, as we are one”), the plea and the warrant for the kind of affiliation represented by the World Council of Churches.” “To dissociate the unity for which Jesus prayed from all that is involved in believing on Him is to render asunder what our Lord joined together.” The Professor then goes on to make a plea for unity among evangelical churches, alleging that “the lack of unity among churches of Christ which profess the faith in its purity is a patent violation of the unity of the body of Christ, and of that unity which the prayer of our Lord requires us to promote.”
In the final lecture on The Last Things, Professor Murray distinguishes between the Man of Sin of 2 Thessalonians and the Antichrist to which John refers, and he regards the Man of Sin as a distinct personage who will appear on the scene of this world, just prior to the advent of Christ.
We have only referred to a selection of the thought-provoking material contained in this second volume. Students of theology will need to read it for themselves because of the variety of the material contained in it. We think that, like other of Professor John Murray’s writings, it will be read mainly by those who are of a distinctly theological bent.
D.B.M.