The World's Foolish Wisdom

I've seen some pretty foolish advertisement's before, but traveling over the Christmas season I think I saw the most egregious of them all.

The billboard had the title "Monogamy 101" and then a picture of a man snuggled up with his significant other. Off to the right of all that was a picture advertising a very expensive diamond ring.

At first I didn't get it. It took me a minute as I drove past the billboard still thinking about the advertisement. You'll have to forgive me for not making the connection that an expensive diamond ring is supposed to buy marital faithfulness that our culture much lacks and desires.

Since I'm single and can't appreciate it as much, I'll ask you married folks to thank God for the glory of Christ in giving a real purpose for marriage and a real motivation to faithfulness.

- - -

In case you're wondering the second place winner was an ad I saw at a restaurant in Dallas. It had a picture of an ice cream/moose type slice of pie and said "Kahlua Ice Cream Pie: cheaper than therapy."

The Reading Plan

Part 1
Part 2

19 people have indicated interest in going through Robert Murray McCheyne's bible reading plan together in 2008. Since 2008 is approaching, I will ask you to indicate your desire in the comment section below. For those of you who need more details, you may also leave your questions below.

If you would like some help through accountability, feel free to email me with your email address or phone number. I will be glad to write or call around once a week to encourage you. Remember - this type of plan is about joyful communion with Christ, not bondage. I want to do everything in my power to ensure the latter doesn't come to pass.

So drop us a line below, indicating your interest. And if you don't mind, we would love to hear a little about you.

Concerned for the Sheep

John 10:13 "He flees because he is a hired hand and is not concerned about the sheep."

A true shepherd cares for his sheep. Cares enough that when they are in trouble he lays down his life for them. Perhaps not physically in most cases (after all it is just an analogy), but as a good friend of mine is fond to say, "You can lay your life down in prayer," intercessory prayer.

How is that for a qualification for an elder? What do you say Pastors?

• above reproach
• the husband of one wife
• temperate
• prudent
• respectable
• hospitable
• able to teach
• not addicted to wine or pugnacious
• but gentle
• peaceable
• free from the love of money
• manages his own household well, keeping his children under control with all dignity
• not a new convert
• ...
• and
• ...
• Concerned for the sheep
  

Parables that Encourage

Although Jesus taught in parables, so as to keep things hidden from the masses (Matt. 13:11), he nevertheless taught some really applicable and good truths.

Matthew 13

I've only gone through four of the parables so far, but there is already too much to share! So I thought I'd give some brief thoughts.


To me it seems these parables give some encouraging truth to believers in understanding what Jesus' kingdom will be like. Jesus is a king, but his kingdom is unique, and for fear that we misunderstand him or "miss" the kingdom somehow, he teaches us through these parables.

1. The Parable of the Sower
1. Here we see why not everyone responds appropriately to the Kingdom so as to be saved. There are many dangers and pitfalls along the way.
   
1. Why would someone not believe in Christ if the word has been "sown in their heart?" Because they are dead to spiritual things; and when the word is left lying dormant on the hard surface of the road it is easy for the devil to snatch up the seed so to remove the possibility of the word bearing fruit in the future.
2. Why do some fall away quickly? Insincere faith that buckles under pressure.
3. Why do some fall away gradually? They begin well but their spiritual growth is choked out by worldliness and even neutral distractions.
4. How can you tell if someone is securely established in the Kingdom of God? They bear fruit.
2. This has been helpful for me as I've seen many of my friends begin to fall away in the past year. This is new for me, and grievous, but God remains true.
2. The Parable of the Tares
1. Here we see an explanation for the many forms of false Christianity that abound in our day. It seems Jesus is more or less preparing his disciples for the onslaught of heresy and ungodliness that will mix itself with true Christianity. The disciples are not to despair in this. Jesus isn't the one responsible, the devil is; and they don't have to do anything about it. God will clear everything up on judgment day.
2. Some see the admonition to leave the tares alone as some kind of negation of church discipline. To view it this way in effect means "in your local church there are going to be false professors" and then "but don't try to exercise church discipline as you might do more harm than good." I agree with the first statement, but disagree with the second. And yes, church discipline should always be exercised with caution, but that's not what Jesus is saying. He is saying don't bother with pulling up the tares period. So what does he mean? I think he means what I said above. The reason why I take this parable the way I do is because Jesus, in unpacking the parable, says that the field is the world, i.e. not the local church. I think this is important to notice. Thus, in effect he is saying you may run into people that say at some health/wealth/prosperity telethon:
   
   "Now, get up and go to the phone! When God begins to speak to you dial that number on your screen. Don’t you miss this moment! If you miss your moment you miss your miracle! ... He’s [God’s] giving you a Rhema Word right now ... The God that I serve is speaking to you right now!"
   
   and then...
   
   “You will die! You will die unless you go to the phone and do what God says to do.”
   
   In case you're curious, I found this here, somewhat on accident.
   
   
3. The point is, Jesus is saying that we shouldn't be surprised about these things happening. They may seem to stain the name of Christ, and cause the gentiles to blaspheme, but you don't have to go on a world crusade to eliminate those kinds of stumbling blocks. He'll do that on the last day (Matt. 13:41). You just be faithful in following God and effecting the sphere around you for good. He'll take care of the rest.
3. The Parables of the Mustard Seed and the Leaven
1. Simply put, God's kingdom starts small then expands. This would serve to encourage the relatively small group of disciples at the time of Christ's death, but it also encourages those who today are involved with smaller stewardships and ministries. There is unseen growth promised for the man sowing seed, or the woman kneading dough.

On Bible Reading Plans

I proposed reading through Robert Murray McCheyne's reading plan together in 2008. Let me mention a recipe for disaster with such an endeavor. Most people attempt too much with their reading plans. You want to do Bible study. You also want to simply commune with Christ through reading the Scriptures, allowing your soul to be nourished on the Word.

Both of these are good and necessary. The Christian needs rigorous Bible study. The Christian also needs to simply read the Scriptures, enjoying God through every line. But let me quickly add that if you attempt deep study on this reading plan, you will only end in discouragement. Here's what happens - Since you are going so deep in study, you began to fall behind. The next day, you allot more time for catch-up. After a period of time, you fall hopelessly behind. You aren't enjoying the time at all - you are only trying to get somewhere near the day's reading. In misery you eventually quit the plan.

Though Bible study is vital for the Christian, I would advise against using this plan as your study method. Use this plan to simply read the Bible. Let your soul be fed and nourished through each line. Yes, you will stop occasionally to look up a cross-reference or make a note in your margin. But your primary purpose will be to simply commune with God.

Bottom Line: Decide before you start what you want to do. You will not be able to accomplish both rigorous study and the simple reading of the Scriptures on the same plan. I would advise only attempting the latter on this plan.

Denominationalism Gone to Seed

-
Another reason why I'm thankful to be out of the denominational loop (see also here, here and here). And you thought the government had the corner on politicking...

On the other hand, some hard questions need to be asked. What basis do we even have in scripture for churches being "funded" in this way? Take a step back: what basis do we have in scripture for "denominations"? Or is this whole mess another case of piling unbiblical practice upon unbiblical practice, and then wondering why the whole thing tumbles down?

I know we have some Southern Baptist readers; any thoughts from you all?

Grace Upon Grace

---
Tim Challies has a wonderful post today about the grace of our Heavenly Father; I encourage you to check it out.

Zeal

When you bewail the world's iniquity, let not your emotions end in tears; mere weeping will do nothing without action. Get on your feet; ye that have voices and knowledge, go forth and preach the gospel, preach it in every street and lane of this huge city; ye that have wealth, go forth and spend it for the poor, and sick, and needy, and dying, the uneducated, the unenlightened; ye that have time, go forth and occupy it in deeds of goodness; ye that have power in prayer, go forth and pray; ye that can handle the pen, go forth and write down iniquity---every man to his post, everyone to your gun in this day of battle; now for God and for His truth; for God and for the right; let every one of us who knows the Lord seek to fight under His banner!

C. H. Spurgeon Autobiography, Vol. 1, p. 154

Are Mormons Christians?

Rob Bowman answers.



HT: Between Two Worlds

Who Do YOU Say That He Is?

13Now when Jesus came into the district of Caesarea Philippi, He was asking His disciples, "Who do people say that the Son of Man is?"

14And they said, "Some say John the Baptist; and others, Elijah; but still others, Jeremiah, or one of the prophets."

15He said to them, "But who do you say that I am?"

Here is the inescapable question that each one of us must face: "Who do you say that Jesus is?" There is no more important question that can be asked, for your eternal destiny hangs on how you answer. Here are some examples of wrong answers that can, and have, been given to this question:

Jesus is...
-a good man
-a prophet
-a good teacher
-a miracle worker
-a revolutionary
-a humanitarian
-a religious leader
-the highest created being

Now, there are elements of truth in some of these, but the bottom line is that not one of these answers is sufficient (and some are just downright heretical). Peter gives the correct answer in Matt. 16:16 - "You are the Christ, the Son of the living God." In another place, Jesus put it like this: "Unless you believe that I am*, you will die in your sins" (John 8:24).

In other words, you can say a lot of nice, proper, good religious things about Jesus. But who is He really to you? Is he just a man, just a created being? Or is He the eternal Son of God? Is He divine? Have you seen the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ (2 Cor. 4:1ff)? Or is Jesus just a nice religious teacher to you?

Reader, who do you say that He is? Heaven and hell hangs in the balance, awaiting your answer...


*Jesus is here identifying Himself with the I AM WHO I AM of Exodus 3:14.

Faith: Easy As 1, 2, 3?

I was talking to a brother a few weeks ago, and he mentioned a sermon he had recently heard where the pastor commented about how "easy" it was to believe; how "easy" it was to be saved. I mean, all you have to do is confess with your mouth, and believe in your heart (Rom. 10:9), right?

Now, there is a sense in which this is true, and a sense in which it isn't.

It is true that "faith" is constantly set over against "works" in the NT because faith is the exact opposite of working for your salvation (Rom. 4:5; Eph. 2:8-10). Faith is looking away from yourself to Christ (John 3:14-16) and resting (Matt. 11:28-30) in His finished work on your behalf (John 19:30) as that which alone can make you right with God. It is compared in Romans 5 to the receiving of a gift (v. 17), the gift of Christ's righteousness. In this sense, believing the Gospel is "easy," in that the person believing ceases to DO anything, and simply gives up, and rests their weight upon Christ. What could be easier than just giving up and resting? What is easier than receiving a gift?

On the other hand, however, faith is also absolutely impossible to the lost man apart from a supernatural work of God. One of the places this is illustrated is in a passage that is often used by those promoting an "easy believism" mentality regarding faith: Romans 10:5-11. But when this passage is seen for what it is, the unbelievably impossible and supernatural nature of saving faith becomes evident.

5For Moses writes that the man who practices the righteousness which is based on law shall live by that righteousness.

6But the righteousness based on faith speaks as follows: "DO NOT SAY IN YOUR HEART, 'WHO WILL ASCEND INTO HEAVEN?' (that is, to bring Christ down),

7or 'WHO WILL DESCEND INTO THE ABYSS?' (that is, to bring Christ up from the dead)."

8But what does it say? "THE WORD IS NEAR YOU, IN YOUR MOUTH AND IN YOUR HEART"--that is, the word of faith which we are preaching,

9that if you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved;

10for with the heart a person believes, resulting in righteousness, and with the mouth he confesses, resulting in salvation.

11For the Scripture says, "WHOEVER BELIEVES IN HIM WILL NOT BE DISAPPOINTED."

I just want to make one observation from vs. 9 with regards to the content of saving faith. Notice the two things that Paul states are required for a person to believe before they can be saved: 1) Jesus is Lord, and 2) God raised Him (i.e., Jesus) from the dead. Pretty simple, right? What could be easier?

But let's think about this. Take just the first one: "Jesus is Lord." Don't just think about what it says, but think about what it actually means. When someone confesses "Jesus is Lord," what are they really saying? They are saying that a man born two thousand years ago in a small town in an insignificant part of the world, a man who grew up as an uneducated carpenter's son and died the death of a petty criminal, is actually the Creator of everything that exists (John 1:3; Col. 1:16) who is right now seated on the throne of the universe, reigning and ruling (1 Cor. 15:25ff) over every particle of matter that there is. And to top it all off, even though he has never seen Him before with his physical eyes, the Christian believes that this same Jesus is going to come back to earth at the end of time to judge all men (Acts 17:31) and to set up an eternal order of "a new heavens and a new earth" (Rev. 21:1ff)!

When considered in this way, the radical nature of saving faith becomes apparent. How in the world could anyone believe that?! Is it any wonder then, that the gospel always appears as absolute foolishness to the lost man (1 Cor. 1:18ff)? Indeed, as Paul himself says in another place, "no one can say, 'Jesus is Lord,' except by the Holy Spirit" (1 Cor. 12:3).

Now, I do NOT want to give the impression that we shouldn't use passages like Rom. 10 to encourage the lost (and ourselves) to call out to God for mercy and grace; I've used it many times myself, and will continue to do so. But, we must also not give the impression that believing is "easy," in the wrong sense. "Just do this, this and this, and BAM! you're in. Just confess with your mouth and believe in your heart; that's all there is to it!"

Dear reader, that is NOT all there is to it. And if saying "Jesus is Lord" is just a matter of repeating a few words to you, then you need to repent and get right with God. When you cry to Him in truth, you will find that He really is "abounding in riches to all who call upon Him."

We Shall Sit On His Throne

Worms should be made kings!

(Thomas Watson, "The Beatitudes" 1660)

"Don't be afraid, little flock, because your Father
delights to give you the kingdom!" Luke 12:32

See here the mercy and bounty of God, who has prepared
a kingdom for His people. It is a favor that we poor worms
should be allowed to live. But that worms should be made
kings—this is divine bounty! It is mercy to pardon us—but it
is rich mercy to crown us! 'Behold, what kind of love is this!'

Earthly princes may bestow great gifts on their subjects—but
they keep the kingdom to themselves. Though Pharaoh advanced
Joseph to honor and gave him a ring from his finger—yet he kept
the kingdom to himself. 'Only in the throne will I be greater than
you' (Genesis 41:40). But God gives a kingdom to His people—He
sets them upon the throne!

How David admires the goodness of God in bestowing upon him
a temporal kingdom. 'Then king David went in, and sat before the
Lord and said—Who am I, O Lord God—and what is my house, that
You have brought me hitherto?' (2 Samuel 7:18). He wondered
that God should take him from the sheepfold—and set him on the
throne—that God should turn his shepherd's staff into a king's
scepter! O then, how may the saints admire the riches of grace—
that God should give them a glorious kingdom above all the
princes of the earth—nay, far above all heavens!

God thinks nothing too good for His children. We many times think
much of a tear, a prayer, or to sacrifice a sin for Him—but He does
not think a kingdom is too much to bestow upon us! How will the
saints read over the lectures of free grace in heaven, and trumpet
forth the praises of that God, who has crowned them with such
astonishing loving-kindness!

See here, that which may make the people of God long for death.
Then, they shall enter upon their glorious kingdom! Indeed the
wicked may fear death. It will not lead them to a kingdom—but to
a horrid prison. Hell is the jail where they must lie rotting forever
with the devil and his demons!

HT: Grace Gems

Right Doctrine, Wrong Text?

I had a brief conversation the other night with a brother regarding the way that the New Testament authors use the Old Testament, and whether their hermeneutical methods are normative for us as believers today. I think this post has some very helpful thoughts on the subject.

What Hath Jerusalem To Do With the Delta?

In this article, titled "Theology in a Minor Key," Stephen J. Nichols manages to combine two of my favorite interests: theology and blues music.

HT: Between Two Worlds

By your words you will be Justified

Matthew 12:36-37 is one of the strongest warning passages in the New Testament.

"But I tell you that every careless word that people speak, they shall give an accounting for it in the day of judgment. For by your words you will be justified, and by your words you will be condemned." - Jesus

Every careless word you speak will be taken into account... every one. And the outcome of this judgment is not more or less rewards in heaven, the passage says the outcome leads to justification, Heaven, or condemnation, Hell.

How many times have Christians trembled under that verse? But the verse deserves another look, and the topic in general deserves more thought. Is it right to think of the judgment day as being a fearful thing for the Christian? Surely unbelievers have reason to cower and groan, but does the Christian? What about justification, and peace with God, and "no condemnation?" How does the joy of peace with God fit with what the bible says over and over about God "rendering to each man according to his deeds" at the last day? Are they even compatible? Doesn't our being judged by our works cast a gloomy light over the course of our life?

Here are three biblical teachings that I think help clear things up quite a bit.

• 1) Yes, all Christians are unchangeably justified, on earth, at a point in time, by faith, apart from works, because of the blood of Christ.
  
• We all know this.
  
• 2) However, as verses like this make clear all Christians need to take their obedience to God seriously as the criteria for examination on judgment day will not be their profession to be in Christ, but the fruit of their lives proving that they are in Christ (and thus justified by his blood). Your fruit, determines whether or not you go to heaven or hell. So this is indeed serious and sober. Just like Matthew says here.
  
• This is so true scripturally, but often misunderstood or overlooked by many.
  
• 3) However, all Christians will live godly, pure, and yes even "blameless" lives on earth so as to prove their profession.
  
• This is the one that I hear taught the least.

You would think that if we are indeed "justified" in a real sense on the last day by our works, surely then, all is lost. After all who can't think of a plentiful number of "careless words" that they have said. Maybe the bible does indeed hold up a standard of blamelessness, but isn't the sincere objection in everyone's mind, "But I'm not blameless!?"

This is where point three comes in. You are blameless. At least, if you're a true child of God then you will be by the time you die. I'll prove it.

1 Cor. 1:8 (blameless in the day...)

2 Cor. 11:2-3 (present you as a pure virgin... purity of devotion to Christ)

2 Cor. 13:7-9 (do no wrong... made complete)

Eph. 1:4 (that we would be holy and blameless)

Eph. 5:27 (present to himself the church... holy and blameless)

Phil. 1:10 (sincere and blameless)

Phil. 2:15 (blameless and innocent, children of God above reproach)

Col. 1:22 (holy and blameless and beyond reproach)

1 Thess. 3:13 (without blame in holiness)

1 Thess. 5:23 (sanctify you entirely... preserved complete, without blame)

1 Tim. 6:14 (keep the commandment without stain or reproach)

2 Pet. 3:14 (be diligent to be found by Him in peace, spotless and blameless)

Jude 1:24 (keep you from stumbling... blameless with great joy)

Now, read the above verses carefully and in context. You'll find them to almost assuredly be referring to the Christian's blamelessness in terms of their personal holiness, that is, their "lived-out righteousness" not their "righteousness of God, as a gift, by faith." And you'll find it interesting that in context they're all referring to what is examined on the judgment day.

If this all seems unbelievable then know that what's important to keep in mind is that "blameless" in these verses, and in the bible in general does not mean perfectly righteous and having never sinned. It is more or less a matter of the heart. People can commit sins and repent and be blameless in God's sight, if they are pure in heart.

Daniel was blameless, Job was blameless, Noah was blameless, David was blameless, Asa was blameless, and you, as a born again Christian are to be blameless too. And (as the above verses show) God will work it in you.

After all the verse in Matthew says:

"For by your words you will be justified, and by your words you will be condemned."

It doesn't say:

"For by your words you will be condemned, and by your words you will be condemned."

The verse refers to two groups of people in context, those of bearing good fruit and those bearing bad. Christians then will actually be justified by their words! All the love for God truly deep down in your heart will be manifested on that day to the vindication of God's work in his people.

Fear then, for the Christian will usually take the form of something more like soberness, and only the Christian living a life of willful unrepented sin will need to have the heart-wrenching kind of fear that is often inspired by these verses, and rightly so. They may not be a true child of God at all. The bottom line is, if you are a Christian you are indeed holy, and blameless, and pure in heart and God sees to that. He takes it upon himself to make that a reality in your life before the judgment day. He died to make that the case.

My Hope is Built on Nothing Less Than...My Faith?

Brian over at One Thing posts some helpful thoughts from William Romaine on the danger of "making a Jesus out of your faith."

J. C. Ryle on Regeneration

"Truly, truly, I say to you—Unless a man
is born again, he cannot see the kingdom
of God." John 3:3

To be born again is, as it were, to enter
upon a new existence, to have . . .

a new mind,
a new heart,
new views,
new principles,
new tastes,
new affections,
new likings,
new dislikings,
new fears,
new joys,
new sorrows,
new love to things once hated,
new hatred to things once loved,
new thoughts . . .
of God,
of ourselves,
of the world,
of the life to come,
of salvation.

He who has been born again, is a new man, a
new creature—for old things are passed away.
He receives an utterly new bias and direction.
All things have become new! It is the implanting
of a new principle which will surely bear good
fruit. It is . . .

opening the eyes of the blind;
unstopping the ears of the deaf;
loosing the tongue of the dumb;
giving hands and feet to the maimed and lame

—for he that is born again no longer allows his
members to be instruments and servants of
unrighteousness—but he gives them unto God,
and then only are they properly employed.

"You must be born again." John 3:7

The Living God - D. Martyn Lloyd-Jones

This sermon from the late Martyn Lloyd-Jones is an absolute must-read (another is "He and He Alone"). If you have not seen it before, I encourage you to set aside some time this weekend to read through it, prayerfully and thoughtfully.

THE LIVING GOD

D. MARTYN LLOYD-JONES

Each year since its inception in 1955 the Doctor attended the annual Ministers' Conference unless prevented from so doing by ill-health or absence from the country. He would chair the open discussions and bring the Conference to a memorable conclusion with a closing address. Here is one such address, delivered in June 1971, but still relevant.

I THANK God for this privilege of being allowed to do this year by year. I always feel it is a great responsibility, and yet it is, as I say, a very great pleasure and I am deeply grateful.

The remark that I want to try to give to you is in many ways a continuation of what we were discussing together on Monday night. The emphasis was that our troubles are mainly due to the fact that there is a lack of life amongst us. Ultimately all our problems can more or less be traced back to that - a lack of life. Now I want to go on from there to ask the question, Why is there this lack of life? Or at any rate, what is the main cause? If I were asked to name one cause, what is it? And I for myself would not hesitate to answer that it is due to a lack of a realization that God is a living God. We are not only in trouble about life in ourselves; we seem at times to forget that there is life in God.

It is this neglect of the living God - the God who acts. That is why I asked our friend Mr. Swann to read that portion of Scripture to us (Acts 13:24-42), because it is one of the many summaries that you have in the Bible that brings out this great point. Have you noticed how that so frequently in the Old Testament and in the New, when there is a crisis, when there is trouble, what the man of God does is to give a review of history. The psalmist does it constantly. You have several instances of it here in this book: Stephen did it in his great defence; Paul does it here in Antioch in Pisidia. A review, a grand review! Why? Just because it brings out the main element.

I feel that, as in the secular world, our greatest danger in the spiritual world is to miss the wood because of the trees. This is a perpetual thing. We are obsessed by details, over-concerned about particulars, and our greatest danger of all is to miss this whole, this grand whole, because of our inordinate preoccupation with these particular trees. I feel that at a time like this, and especially in these conditions, this is perhaps our greatest need. Our discussion which has just finished is, I think, an instance of it. It is inevitable. We cannot help this because we are in the flesh still. But I believe we have to be very careful about it, especially because it ultimately leads to the position in which (though it sounds almost incredible) our greatest sin of all is to fail to realize that God is an acting God - He does act.

Our whole position depends upon that: God's action in the past, God's action in the present, God's action in the future. Now I believe it is important that we should analyse for a moment the ways in which we have tended to forget that God is a God who acts. One, of course, is the danger always of religion. Religion is generally the greatest enemy of the Christian faith. To be a religious person is one of the greatest hindrances to becoming a Christian, because it gives certain satisfactions. And we know today that, speaking of the churches in general in this land, there are congregations with an alarming percentage of people who are religious but who are not Christians. Religion is dangerous, you see, for this reason, that it is always something that puts emphasis upon our activities, our practices - we practise religion. And thereby we tend to think that it is entirely a matter of our activities, our conduct and behaviour, with the result that God is nearly always forgotten - taken for granted, of course, but therefore forgotten.

Then another cause of this - which comes a little bit nearer to us, speaking as evangelical brethren - is that we become so immersed in our activities that we do not stop to think what we are doing, or why we are doing it. Professionalism is the greatest curse of the minister. And although we are born-again men, we are ever in danger of becoming professionals. We are involved in preparation of sermons and preaching them. We are announced to do it; it is a part of the machine. And we have pastoral duties, funerals to take and marriages. The pastor is a very busy man - and this has to go on and on and on. As I think I was saying on Monday night in that story about Wilberforce, one of the easiest things of all is for a man to forget his own soul and to forget God. Of course, he still gets on his knees mechanically and says his prayers, but sometimes he stops at that. Even praying is part of a routine, part of the thing to do, and there is no realization of the living God, this God who acts. So then, that is one of the causes why we are constantly falling into this particular error.

Another one, of course, and a very prolific one, is false evangelism. We are all familiar with this; we have all seen it, perhaps taken part in it. When I talk about false evangelism, I mean that type of evangelism which conceives of itself primarily as a matter of organizing a campaign. The church is losing numbers. What can we do? We can hold a campaign. You decide who to have as your missioner, and so on. The whole outlook is one of activity - what can we do? We must have a campaign. Or if you are eager young people, it is a part of the outlook and the routine, and certain students go on a campaign and decide which town to attack and to evangelize, and so on. That is the mentality. This is the way in which the thinking takes place.

NOW ... AND THEN

Now, you know, we have dealt with this many times in this conference. But there has been a very great departure here from what used to be the custom and the habit of our fathers. I do not mean our immediate fathers; I mean our great-great-great-grandfathers. You have to go back a long time. You see, when things were not going well in the churches, they reacted in a very different way. What they did was to say: 'What's the matter? Why has God left us? Have we offended Him? There must be some cause for this.' So the minister and deacons would talk together and they would decide to call a day of prayer and humiliation. Humiliation was the word used - prayer and humiliation, sometimes accompanied by fasting. And they would tell God. They felt that they had wounded Him and hurt Him, that He was obviously turning His back on them like a wayfaring man. They would acknowledge and confess their sins and they would plead with Him to come back. That was their way. But, you see, that has gone, and it has been missing from the background of most who are troubled here today. Many of us, most of us by now probably, have seen the error of all this. But that has been our background, and these things tend to go on influencing us even though we have seen they are wrong.

Well then, what makes it so terrible is this, that when these arrangements are made and the organizations are set up and they have their committees to deal with this and that, generally, towards the end of the meeting, somebody will say: 'Ah well, of course, we must have some prayer backing.' Prayer backing! God as an afterthought! So you set up a subcommittee for prayer. And it is generally an afterthought, the last thing. You see, the whole approach is in terms of what man can do and human activity. God is only remembered almost casually at the end, and in a perfunctory manner. Then in the actual carrying out of the evangelism, the same thing comes in. The controlling idea has been this. Here is a statement made of the gospel. The people are asked to believe this and to receive it. And if they do so, they are told they are Christians. They take a decision, or they sign a form or a book or do something else. The whole emphasis again is, you see, upon man, upon man's response. A number of doctrines are put before him, and he is asked to receive them and to accept them and to believe them, and he is assured that if he does so he is a Christian. Now we know that that is Roman Catholic teaching. Their view is that what a man does is to accept the body of doctrine and of dogma that is put before him.

It seems to me that evangelicals in this country, speaking very generally, have been doing precisely the same thing. It is put not so much in terms of 'coming into contact with the living God', as of accepting a number of propositions. If you accept those, you are a Christian. 'Do you believe these things? If you do, all is well.' Now again, you see, the departure from the old evangelicalism is quite alarming. There you read, in biographies and church histories and so on, of men coming under conviction of sin, and perhaps it would last a long time. John Bunyan was eighteen months in tremendous agony of soul, searching for God. Now I have often heard evangelical people saying today that this was all wrong, that these people were ignorant. Why didn't they show the man salvation? Why eighteen months of repentance? He could be put right quite simply. Some evangelical organizations could put this man right in a matter of a few seconds. There is a verse - and a verse - one, two, three, four, five - got it all! But you see, the point then was that men conceived of salvation as coming to a knowledge of the living God, not accepting a number of propositions. So while the emphasis is on accepting a number of propositions or a statement, God is really forgotten. I know they all believe in God, they may make statements about God. But what is never brought out is that the essence of this matter is a meeting with God - doing business with God.

The old preachers, you see, brought this out very well. I remember having a most excellent illustration of this in my first year in the ministry in 1927. I had the great privilege of preaching on that occasion with a great old preacher in South Wales, called W. E. Prytherch. We were preaching together at Pyle in Glamorgan, and I had to preach first. The old man went up after me. He would not preach, but he said that I had stated the gospel and that he had a function to perform. And he said that he was just a little agent representing a great master, the Lord Jesus Christ. Now what he told the people was this - he didn't simply ask the people to believe what I had been saying-he put it like this: 'This is what I am here for-to tell you that Jesus Christ is in the office now. Come and see Him - the Person - go to your office.' With a break in his voice - and what an extraordinary voice it was - he said, 'Go to your office.' Well, it was the personal encounter. That is the thing that I am concerned to emphasize. We, in our false views of evangelism, tend to put our stress upon the acceptance of a number of statements, and we are then incidentally forgetting God, and forgetting that the main thing is the activity of God.

APOLOGETICS?

But then, coming still nearer to our subject, I have a terrible feeling - and it is terrible, because I am one of the chiefest of the sinners - that nothing has so caused us to forget God and to forget the living, acting God, as our concern about apologetics. We have regarded ourselves as the defenders, the guardians, the custodians of the faith. We are that of course, but I am afraid that we have often stopped at that, and we have given the whole of our time and energy to defending the faith, defending the propositions- and forgetting God. Now you see, it is all a question of balance. We have got to indulge in apologetics. But what worries me, as I look back across my life, is that I have probably given too much time and attention to apologetics. Thirty years ago it was still more necessary than now. It is always necessary, but then we were still fighting the old liberalism up to a point. And quite unconsciously one could be found a sort of an apologete and no more. God was really forgotten, and one got engaged in endless discussions and debates. You were defending the truth at this point and that point, and safeguarding the whole position, steadying the ark and putting your hands on it to steady it - forgetting God! I am quite sure of it, and I plead guilty to it myself. One often indulged in these apologetics in a more or less carnal manner, and one enjoyed scoring points off the other side. But the terrible thing was that God tended to be forgotten. So let us be very careful about this matter of apologetics. Let us keep it in its place. I am almost coming to the conclusion that the only place that apologetics should have is briefly in an introduction to a sermon. If you spend the whole of your time on apologetics, you are really not preaching the gospel. Start with it if you like and just do a little demolition work; but do not pat yourself on the back and go home and have a wonderful meal because you have just pulled down a rotten building! The question is: Have you put anything up? The danger of being negative! And the danger of feeling 'It's our gospel, my church I am protecting, my interests' - and forgetting God!

Or then, still more recently, something else has been happening, which has aggravated this whole tendency to forget God. And this is the new and increasing preoccupation with what is called in general 'the application of the gospel'. Now we are creatures, you see, of reaction. The charge that has been brought for many years against those of us who are evangelical is that we have taken no interest in social and political conditions. This has been the constant attack against us. All our interest was in our little personal souls and their salvation - forgetting the world. We have not had a social emphasis. This attack, of course, was made for years and years upon us. I remember very well in about 1947 reading a book by Dr. Carl Henry, soon afterwards the editor of Christianity Today. He wrote a book with the title of The Uneasy Conscience of Modern Fundamentalism, and I read this with great interest. He tells us that the lost note in Fundamentalism was this lack of social interest. I remember feeling at the time what a serious misjudgment this was, what an utterly false diagnosis. He was dealing with American Fundamentalism; and he said the missing note in American Fundamentalism was this lack of a social interest. I remember writing to him at the time and discussing it with him afterwards and venturing to suggest to him that he had missed the point, and that the real trouble - the missing note in American Fundamentalism as I have met it and known it - was a lack of spirituality, a carnality, professional evangelism, professional apologetics. That was the thing that appalled me when I first met American Fundamentalism - the sheer carnality of the outlook. They were more like business men than Christian men.

Well now, you see, the more intellectual men began to react to this criticism, and they said: 'We must bring in this note!' And they have been doing so ever since. So that now it is almost the controlling idea - Christian philosophy! You know, it has been going for a long time in Holland. It was started there by Professors Dooyeweerd and Vollenhoven. And this is a teaching which talks about Christian politics, Christian medicine, even Christian mathematics, Christian everything! It is this idea of law and of spheres, and so on. Well now, this has come down in many, many different ways, sometimes almost purely philosophically. I remember attending a conference in the South of France in 1953. And, to be honest and to be helpful, I have got to say this: I had to keep on reminding myself that I was in a Christian conference! I had to remind myself of it, because all the papers were entirely philosophical, and the arguments and disputations were almost entirely on that level. There was virtually no prayer at all. It was all a question of papers and of discussions, but it was a Calvinistic conference.

'CHRISTIANITY AND.........'

This is the thing that has now come in like a flood into evangelicalism, particularly in England. Everybody is talking about the Christian attitude towards this and that. I happened the other day casually to pick up the syllabus of a well-known Christian organization, and I noticed that the next two meetings are to be on these things. The first is to be on 'The Christian attitude towards strikes', and the other on 'The Christian attitude towards art'. You see, this is the thing! We have been missing this. And some of them press it so far as to say that if you want to evangelize the modern world, you have got to know something about politics, you have got to know something about art, you have got to know something about literature, you have got to know something about novels, the modern drama, the modern films - and so on. The argument is that you cannot evangelize the modern man if you cannot speak to him in his own idiom, if you do not know how he thinks. So you have got to familiarize yourself with these things. I do not know that I have told you here of an experience I had about fifteen months ago. I was preaching in a certain place, and a young man and his wife, who were going to be missionaries, were very kindly driving me there and back. They belonged to the church where I was preaching. As we were going home that night, the wife, sitting at the back, suddenly burst upon me, 'Could I ask you a question?' I said, 'Yes, what is it?' 'Now', she said, 'what's your view about reading modern novels?' I was somewhat taken aback, because I knew that she was in a well-known missionary training college. I said, 'Why do you ask that question?' She replied: 'I am in great trouble about it in my college. I am actually being persecuted.' 'What's this?' I asked. 'Well', she said, 'one of our lecturers told us that if we want to evangelize the modern man, we really must know what he reads, what he is talking about, the way in which he thinks.' So now, one of the first things she has to do is to read modern novels. The lecturer had commanded certain novels. 'I read one of them', said this candidate. 'You know, it did me such harm, and it made me so unhappy and so miserable that I decided I should not read another one. I could see no purpose in it and it did me great harm. I refuse to read any more.' She added 'I am now being attacked by my fellow-students and by the lecturers. They say I am not doing my duty, and I cannot be an effective missionary' - because she was not reading these modern novels! I said: 'Didn't they tell you that you ought to spend three to six months in a public house every night, so that you could evangelize drunkards? Did they tell you that?' No, they had not told her that! I said: 'They should have - to be logical - they should have!' - But this is the attitude. What does it mean? It means that God is forgotten. You see, we do it all.

Now, the extraordinary thing about this is that this teaching has come from the Free University of Amsterdam, the great Calvinistic College, founded by Abraham Kuyper in 1880, the great bulwark of the Reformed Faith. That is where it has come from. This is what is so interesting. Calvinism, which has always exalted the sovereignty and the glory of God, has now become thoroughly Arminian in this matter! God is more or less forgotten. And that outlook I met in America two years ago, where even in well-known seminaries they on the whole did not believe in preaching any more. What you do is this: you go to people's houses and you start talking politics to them, and you show the defects in their politics and try to introduce them to Christian politics. Or, if they are interested in art, you see paintings on the wall and you start talking about modern art; you expose the wrongfulness of modern art and its background, and then you tell them about Christian art - and so on. That is the way in which you evangelize. The declaration, such as Paul made in Athens - 'whom ye ignorantly worship, him declare I unto you!' - that is out. You do not declare Him with a dialogue! You hold a discussion. So you see, in this way God, I maintain, is being forgotten. The whole emphasis is upon our trying, our becoming well-versed in these various disciplines and interests and aspects of culture today. This is the way. Brethren, I maintain that this is a denial of God - the living, acting God and His sovereignty in all these matters!

THEOLOGICAL SCHOLASTICS

I must go one further step. I believe the same thing is happening in the realm of what I call a 'theological scholasticism' which is beginning to manifest itself amongst us - a 'theological scholasticism' in which we talk about the doctrines of grace instead of talking about God, the doctrines of salvation instead of Christ, the living Saviour. I believe that this is a new form of Deism. I could convict so many today of a new Deism. You know what that means. It took this form at the beginning of the eighteenth century: God was regarded as the great Creator, described as a great watch-maker. He made the watch, He wound it up, and then He put it down and He has no more to do with it. That was their way, you see, of denying miracles. Miracles are nonsense, they said. God does not interfere. He has made the watch, He has put it down, and on it goes; He does not interfere with it. Deism! Well, I suspect a new kind of Deism is with us. I was referring to it partly yesterday in talking about miraculous healing and miracles and things of that kind. On some sort of theological and biblical grounds, as they would claim, they say that miracles cannot happen today, because all this ended with the Apostles. As if to say, 'Oh yes, God acted then; but He hasn't acted like that since.' He is shut out, on a priori grounds, on what they call biblical and theoretical grounds. They say, 'God does not act like that now.' They are shutting Him out. Is not that Deism? Who has given them the right to say this? The Scriptures do not say it, but they are saying it.

The fact is, of course, that there are many such people, who not only will not admit the possibility of miracles today, or at any time since the apostolic era, but equally reject the possibility of demon-possession today. They are dismissing it all as psychological. They will not grant that it is possible for a person to be demon-possessed today. They admit, of course, that it happened in New Testament times; but, they say, not now. I am not imagining all this. I have been involved in discussions about it, and I know that this is their standpoint. They will not accept the possibility of demon-possession today. It is all explained in terms of psychology. This is as if to say, you see, that because, on their understanding of it, God had decided at the end of the apostolic era that He would not interfere any more in a miraculous manner, the devil also very kindly and very politely said, 'Well, I will not act either.' That is what it comes to. You see, the thing is monstrous and ridiculous. In other words, these men have worked themselves into a theoretical and academical theological position in which God is not allowed to act, and the demons are not allowed to act; there is no spiritual activity. What is Christianity? Well, Christianity is an acceptance of a body of doctrine, and a discussion of this and a defence of this, and an attempt to understand it more and more.

Now I say that this shuts out God. The fact that men talk a lot about God does not mean that they really believe in the living God. They are talking about God; they are making statements about God; they are experts on the attributes of God; but they seem to shut out the living God, God Himself, the acting God. By their theories, He is not allowed to act. This is Deism; it is a kind of theological scholasticism. And this is the terrifying thing, that you can be talking about God and His attributes and so on, and yet have no contact with and no personal knowledge of this living God. I am not exaggerating, brethren, I am speaking solemn truths and facts. You can find some of the highest and most orthodox seminaries and collections of Christian men, reformed, Calvinistic, orthodox up to the latest dot, and the guardians of this faith, and some of them never have a prayer meeting and never talk about prayer. As I say, in their actual teaching they exclude the activity of the spiritual realm directly and immediately today, whether from the side of the Holy Spirit, or from the side of the evil spirits.

REVIVAL - DANGEROUS?

In the same way, of course, they are not interested in the whole notion of revival. They never talk about it; in fact, they dislike it. Revivals are regarded as enthusiasm, as something excessive, dangerous, ecstatic. They say this is not what is needed. We have received everything, we are born again, we have the Scriptures. What we need to do is just to go on to understand the Scriptures more deeply. They not only do not expect the Spirit to come upon them, but they do not like teaching which suggests that He can come, and that we should pray for Him to come. All this is disliked. Now I am not imagining this. I could prove this to you. Those of you who have the three volumes of Charles Hodge on Theology, observe the amount of space which he gives to the Holy Spirit in those three volumes; observe the amount of space he gives to revival. You can do the same with the works of Warfield. I say this with profound regret, because of my debt to these men. But I think that was the great weakness in their whole position, as it was still more in the case of Abraham Kuyper and Herman Bavinck of Holland. The result is that today institutions that were founded as bastions of orthodoxy have become hotbeds of modernism and liberalism. And I would attribute it entirely to this, that it had become theoretical, intellectual; it has become an intellectualism, God is shut out, even though they are always talking about God. This is the tragedy of the situation, and it reminds us of the subtlety of the devil.

This further shows itself in this way, in an antipietistic attitude. Pietism has become a term of abuse by now. When you talk about the subjective element and the experimental, it is dismissed as Pietism. It has been a word of taboo for years on the Continent, and in Holland in particular, where they call it either Pietism or Methodism. They dislike it; they show bitterness with respect to it. It is astounding that many who claim to be the most biblical of all men should react even with temper and with an element of violence against what they call Pietism. They dislike the eighteenth century, and so on.

GOD WHO ACTS

Well now, these are the ways, I think, in which unconsciously so many of us have been forgetting God, the living God. Why is this so wrong? There is only one answer: because it contradicts the main message of the Bible. The main message of the Bible is to tell us about the activity of God. What did the men filled with the Holy Spirit talk about on the day of Pentecost? Well, fortunately we have the evidence of the people who were there. These men 'were all amazed and marvelled, saying one to another, Behold, are not all these which speak Galileans? And how hear we every man in our own tongue, wherein we were born?' Then the list of the people follows - '. . . Cretes and Arabians, we do hear them speak in our tongues' - speak what? the wonderful experiences we have had? No, - 0'the wonderful works of God.' That is the theme of the whole Bible. The Bible is the record of the wonderful works of God. It is not a textbook of theology primarily; it is a history book, the history of the wonderful works of God. The Bible is really the history of the salvation of God. In order to be that, it has to start with the beginning: the creation and so on. But its real message is God's activity in the redemption of a fallen human race. Is not that its message from beginning to end? 'In the beginning God created.' How can we possibly go wrong after that? But we do - we forget that it all begins with God.

Then the story goes on. Every time man acts, he always does something wrong, doesn't he? He sins, he rebels, he goes astray in his cleverness, and so on. And the whole thing had ended, were it not that God comes in. Isn't it amazing how we can miss this? Adam and Eve listen to the devil, you see, and they sin, and they immediately realize they have done wrong, and they are alarmed and they are troubled, and they go and hide. God comes down - God coming down! - in the cool of the evening, and He shouts, 'Adam, where art thou?' And out they come, trembling. God - God coming down! This is a summary of the whole message. I wish I had the time just to take you through the whole thing again. You say that we know all this. I know. The people to whom the psalmist recapitulated the history, they knew. And you remember what old Peter says in his second Epistle. He is going to die, he says. What is he going to do with them? Is he giving them a new message? No. He is reminding them of the things they already know. Why? Well, because although they knew them, they had forgotten them. The greatest need in the Church and the greatest need of ourselves is to be reminded of what we know. 'Though you know them', says Peter, 'and are established in the present truth' - and he keeps on repeating this. Yea, he says, while I am in this tabernacle I am to go on reminding you. Is it not tragic that we need to be reminded of the central thing? We are experts on details, but we have forgotten the centre. So we need to be reminded of all this.

The Bible is full of it. God did not stop acting when He came down to the garden of Eden. He went on acting. The tower of Babel, the flood before the tower of Babel, the call of Abraham - this is God acting, God interfering, God erupting into it all, choosing men, speaking, giving them a message - and on you could go. Go through it all. Those patriarchs: Jacob - that night and the ladder, the living God, the house of God, and the great vision. Are you asking me to believe that Jacob was in a superior position to us? Are you in the position in which you say, 'I wish I was living in the times of Jacob, and that I could have a direct contact with God'? That is what is being taught, you know. What is being taught in Christendom today is this, that since we have got the New Testament canon, since we have got the Word now, we do not need these direct interventions, we do not need God to speak to us directly, as He spoke to Abraham and to Isaac and to Jacob and these patriarchs. We have got the Word now! Is this superior to the direct speech of God? I think we are mad! There is no other word for this. We are mad' We are meant to be in a superior position to every Old Testament saint because of what has happened in our blessed Lord and Saviour! But this teaching would have us believe that we do not need this direct contact with God now, and that all that has come to an end since the formation of the New Testament canon.

Well, go on, read about Moses, read about Joshua and about David. Go and read about the messages as they came to the great prophets. And all is God raising up, God acting, God interfering. Then, 'when the fulness of the time was come, God send forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law, to redeem them that were under the law.' And the whole time we have the law, the finger of God. 'The words I speak, I speak not of myself'. We see His utter dependence upon His Father. He is repeating the message that has been given to Him. He puts His whole emphasis upon the activity of God. This is a part of His self-humiliation. He does not empty Himself of His Godhead, but He empties Himself of some of the prerogatives, and He is living as a man, and He is dependent. That is why He used to pray so much. 'Our Lord had a greater need of prayer than you and I. We can get on much better without prayer than our Lord could!' That is our position! Why? 'We have got the New Testament canon - work out the theology! We do not need this now! We have got the truth; it is understanding of the truth that matters', we say! So we do not pray. So we do not know God!

Well, here it is. This is what I want to emphasize. Our Lord has given this teaching, and He returned to heaven. Has God stopped acting? Read the book of Acts. And it is a book of acts, as has been pointed out; not so much the acts of the Apostles, as the acts of the Holy Spirit, the acts of the risen Lord through these Apostles. That is what they keep on saying. When the people came to Peter and John in the temple and were ready to worship them, they said, 'It is not we. It is His Name, - through the power that is in His Name - that has done this wonderful thing.' All along they pointed people to Him. It is the activity of the risen Lord. Luke at the very introduction speaks of the things which 'Jesus began to do'. He is still doing them! The same Jesus! He has gone back, but He has not stopped acting. They are the acts of the living Lord and on they go. You find it running right through this book of the Acts of the Apostles. Then you get your Epistles with their great expositions. But does this mean that because we have got it all recorded, He has stopped acting? I suggest that that is to deny the message of the Scriptures. He goes on acting. He has not stopped acting. As He did not stop when He rose from the dead, and He did not stop when the Spirit was sent, still less has He stopped because we have got the New Testament canon.

GOD'S METHOD

He has gone on acting subsequently throughout the running centuries. We would not be here this afternoon, if it were not for the living and the acting God. The study of the Scriptures alone would have finished the Church long ago. Your great experts your orthodox men - it was dead - and it would have died! And what has kept the Church alive has been God acting in revival. John the Baptist was not the last man that God called - of course not! The Apostles were not the last men that Christ called. He has been calling men ever since. Brethren, He has called us. It is because of the acting God that we are where we are and what we are. But you see it, of course, supremely in this matter of revival. Jonathan Edwards is surely right when he says, that God's main method throughout the centuries of adding to the Church and adding to the number of the elect has been through revival. I think that this is true. I think the history of the Church proves this. That has been God's main method: the hundreds, the thousands are brought in in revival. There are conversions in the intervening periods, but the great additions - the majority of the people when the final number of the elect is made up and they are counted - you will find that the vast majority have come in during periods of revival. And revival is nothing but the direct activity of God the Holy Spirit, the mighty rushing wind, the Spirit coming down, the Spirit being poured out. It is Christ who does this. He is the One who baptizes with the Spirit. He pours out His Spirit. And this, I say, is what is meant by revival.

Now it sounds as if I am discouraging the study of the Scriptures and theology, which I am not. All I am saying is that if we stop at that, we are excluding God. Do that for all you are worth, but on top of it all, remember that the great point of the whole teaching of the Bible, of all you can deduce from it, is to tell you that God is a God who acts. And our only hope this afternoon is that this is still true. He has not finished acting. He is going on. The number of the elect is going to be made up; all Israel is going to be gathered in. What comfort have you got as you face your modern humanism and materialism, and the various philosophies, and communism, and everything that is so much against us? Is your study in the Scriptures, is your apologetics going to deal with this? If you believe that, you are the biggest fool in Christendom! There is only one hope. That is that He is still the living and the acting God. Christ is at His right hand, and He is seated and waiting until His enemies should be made His footstool. God knows when the end is coming. He alone knows it, but it is coming. It is coming! There is a day coming when Christ will come back conquering and to conquer. Let the world do what it will. Let hell be let loose. It will make no difference; there is nothing that 'can make Him His purpose forgo' - thank God! -'nor sever my soul from His love.'

OUR SUPREME NEED

Very well, what I deduce from all this is this, that our supreme need is the realization of the fact that God is alive, and that God acts and is still acting. History, of course, is so full of this. We are not the first to be fools and to go astray. Remember what they did at the end of the seventeenth, at the beginning of the eighteenth century. Things were very bad then much as they are now. Robert Boyle felt that something must be done about it. What did he do? Oh appoint a lectureship; we are going to do it, you see! Lectureship! We are going to defend the truth. Bishop Butler - Butler's Analogy! What is he doing? Oh, defending the truth against the rationalists, Cambridge Platonists, the rationalists and the deists. Defending the truth! Wonderful - great men - great scholars! They are going to defend the truth of God! But do you remember the story of what happened? It was George 1, I think, who asked somebody one day about Bishop Butler: 'Is Bishop Butler dead?' 'No, Sir', said this man, 'he is not dead, but he is buried somewhere in the country.' What a good commentary that is on so much of our scholarship! Very learned, very wonderful, but buried in the country! It did not make the slightest difference. But something did make a difference. What was it? God laid His hand on George Whitefield and something happened. Is it not obvious? Now, do not misunderstand me. I am not saying that we do not need apologetics; but it has a very small place - keep it there. This is the thing. What the Boyle lectures and Butler's Analogy did not do and cannot do, nor any other such similar endeavour, God comes in and does. He acts - the living God. He is still the same. And He has done it even since that eighteenth century.

'PROVE ME NOW'

And now it seems to me that it comes to this. I feel that the message that God is giving to us in this conference is in the words of Malachi. I believe He is saying this to us: 'Prove me now' - 'Prove Me. I am there; you prove Me.' This has become a tremendous conviction with me. Maybe because I am facing my last years and I have been defending the faith - and people have praised me for doing it. Rubbish! What a miserable failure it has all been! From now on I am determined to do one thing only, and that is to give God no rest nor peace, until He does prove Himself and show Himself. I have expended so much energy in reasoning with the people about this faith. We have got to do that, it is part of preaching. But if we stop at that it will avail us nothing. But what I now am concerned about and I am concentrating on is this - asking God to show Himself, to do something, to give this touch, this manifestation of power. Nothing else will even make people listen to us. See, you bring out your apologetics; the others will answer. Every time you say something, you may say 'This is unanswerable; nobody can turn this back.' The reviewers wholly dismiss you, say you are a fool, you are ignorant, you do not know what you are talking about. That is what they will say. I can tell you now. You write your books. That is what you will get. I have had it! You see, one scholar . . . and another answers him. And they are satisfied. No, no! Nothing is going to call the attention of the masses of the people to the truth of this faith save a great phenomenon, such as the phenomenon of the day of Pentecost, the phenomenon of any one of the great revivals, the phenomenon of a single changed life. This is something that always arrests attention, maybe curiosity - what does it matter? The people come and listen. And the preacher has his opportunity. Nothing will avail us save this manifestation of the activity of God.

My plea, therefore, is simply this - and with this I close - that we keep this ever in the forefront of all our thinking, all our preparation of sermons, and all our praying in particular. We must not be content until we have had some manifestation of the activity of God. We must concentrate on this. This is my plea, that we concentrate on this, because it is the great message of the Bible, so substantiated by the lessons of history. That is obviously today the only thing that gives us any hope as we face the future. And God seems to be saying that to us. 'Prove Me now. Try Me. Risk your everything on Me. Be fools for My sake. Cast yourselves utterly upon this belief.' Let us put it like this: Do we really believe that God can still act? That is the question; that is the ultimate challenge. Or have we, for theological or some other reasons, excluded the very possibility? Here is the crucial matter. Do we individually and personally really believe that God still acts, can act and will act - in individuals, in groups of individuals, in churches, localities, perhaps even in countries? Do we believe that He is as capable of doing that today as He was in ancient times - the Old Testament, the New Testament times, the book of Acts, Protestant Reformation, Puritans, Methodist Awakening, 1859, 1904-5? Do we really believe that He can still do it? You see, it is ultimately what you believe about God. If He is the great Jehovah - I am that I am, I am that I shall be, unchanged, unchanging, unchangeable, the everlasting and eternal God - well, He can still do it. And I believe He is saying to us. 'Try Me. Prove Me. Cast your all upon Me. Go on until I have given you the proof you desire.' Then we will forget the trees for a while, and we will see the grand power of our God, and God's gracious and eternal purposes in His dear Son. We will first be humbled, and I think many of us will feel that we have never been Christians at all. It will not be true; we are. But what we will experience then will be so great and glorious, so overwhelming, that we will scarcely believe that we have ever known anything about these things at all. May that day soon come!

HT: MLJ Recordings Trust

What I Believe - Sam Storms

One of my favorite theologians, Sam Storms, answers the question, "What's your theology?" His transparency is admirable, and some of his answers may surprise you...


HT: Challies

How to Ascertain the Will of God

HOW TO ASCERTAIN THE WILL OF GOD

by George Mueller

1. Seek at the beginning to get your heart into such a state that it has no will of its own in regard to a given matter. Nine-tenths of the trouble with people generally is just here. Nine-tenths of the difficulties are overcome when our hearts are ready to do the LORD's will, whatever it may be. When one is truly in this state, it is usually but a little way to the knowledge of what His will is.

2. Having done this, do not leave the result to feeling or simple impression. If so, we make ourself liable to great delusions.

3. Seek the Will of the Spirit of God through, or in connection with, the Word of God. The Spirit and the Word must be combined. If we look to the Spirit alone without the Word, we leave ourself open to great delusions also. If the Holy Ghost guides us at all, He will do it according to the Scriptures and never contrary to them.

4. Next take into account providential circumstances. These often plainly indicate God's Will in connection with His Word and Spirit.

5. Ask God in prayer to reveal His Will to us aright.

6. Thus, through prayer to God, the study of the Word, and reflection, we come to a deliberate judgment according to the best of our ability and knowledge, and if our mind is thus at peace, and continues so after two or three more petitions, we can proceed accordingly. In trivial matters, and in transactions involving most important issues, you will find this method always effective.

HT: Puritan Fellowship

The Robert Murray McCheyne Bible Reading Plan Poll

We will daily share our insights or encouragements from the day's reading. Suggestions will be given on how to use a reading plan and what to do if you fall behind. A brief background and setting will be offered as we enter a new book. Please indicate any interest via the poll on the left side of the page. A copy of the plan may be found here.

You may ask questions or comment here.

Are Seminaries Legitimate?

Are seminaries legitimate?

A Critical Look at Modern Theological Education

By Darryl M. Erkel

It must be said at the outset, that to question the legitimacy of our modern seminaries is not to be equated with the mistaken notion that theological training for church leaders is unnecessary. On the contrary, it is imperative that pastor-elders have a solid foundation of knowledge in systematic theology, church history, hermeneutics, apologetics, and other subjects. Thus, our churches must have men who are trained. My contention is simply that the seminary system is an inefficient tool to use in reaching this goal.

In asserting this, I am not suggesting that our seminaries have not produced some good. For many, seminary has been a rich and rewarding experience. Conservative institutions have been on the frontlines fighting theological liberalism and giving reasons for biblical truth. Some of our brightest scholars and theologians teach in seminaries.

Nevertheless, numerous inherent problems exist within the seminary system. Feeling the weight of these problems, some educators are calling for a renewal in theological education while others have simply given up on the hope of seeing genuine improvement. Haddon Robinson, a seminary professor and past President of Denver Conservative Baptist Seminary, in an interview with Christianity Today (Oct. 24, 1995), had serious reservations about the future of our seminaries feeling, at times, "an acute sense of despair and a hopefulness for theological education" (p.75). A study in 1994, funded by the Murdock Charitable Trust found that pastors, on average, believe they were "poorly prepared" for their jobs.

The attempt by some in rescuing the seminary through a cosmetic veneer of expensive new facilities, changes in educational curriculum which appeal to a modern age, and business marketing techniques all fail because they do not go to the root of the problem. They are ineffective in exposing the errors and limitations of a system which was non-existent in the apostolic age. While this article is not an exhaustive expose’ of today’s seminary, it will, nonetheless, highlight some of the major deficiencies in the way pastors are trained.

1. Our criticisms of the seminary system are primarily directed to its ability to properly prepare shepherds who will serve the local church, not upon its ability to train future college professors or academic researchers. Thus, we must ask: Is it really doing the best job in training pastors (not college professors)?

2. As we have already noted, to question the seminary system should not be equated with the mistaken idea that training is unnecessary or that pastors should be ignorant (2 Timothy 2:15; Titus 1:9). Actually, we should want the best trained pastors, but this does not necessarily have to come through the traditional seminary institution. If done properly, we believe that the local church can be even more effective in training future pastors.

3. Training for pastoral ministry should not be viewed in the way that one views training for the legal or medical profession, but should be understood as something distinct, spiritual, and character-oriented. Potential elders are not being called to a "career" or "profession" (as commonly understood), but to a pastoral function which is spiritual in nature! While the world has its ways of training people for a secular profession, this should not be the model for training future shepherds who will spiritually oversee the souls of men and women.

4. Those wishing to attend seminary must usually relocate to other cities and states. Housing and employment must be secured prior to moving. Naturally, this puts a tremendous stress on the seminarian’s family – particularly if his wife is expected to financially support her husband and children (or, at least, carry a major load of the financial obligations). If local churches were the training ground for pastors, such problems would either be reduced or non-existent. In contrast to our current practice, the New Testament pattern was for teachers to go to their students, rather than demand that their students travel far distances to be trained (Acts 11:22-26; 13:1; 16:4-5; 18:22-23; 19:9-10; 2 Timothy 2:2; Titus 1:5).

5. The costs to attend seminary are very high. The usual amount is about $2,000 per quarter and, upon completion of the entire program, the student may have billed out as much as $30,000 which, of course, does not include housing and general living expenses. Most often, seminary graduates are in debt for the next five to ten years seeking to pay off their schooling. It tends to put pastors into long-term debts and, hence, potentially discrediting their testimony if they are unable to repay their loan (1 Timothy 3:7). Must learning the Word of God cost so much? To charge people for learning the Word of God, which has been freely given to us in Christ, seems to go counter to the New Testament pattern (Matthew 10:8; Acts 20:20,33-35; 2 Corinthians 2:17; 11:7-9; 1 Thessalonians 2:9; 3:8; 1 Timothy 6:5). Even if, for the sake of argument, some costs are necessary, must it be this exorbitant?

One of the reasons why a seminary education costs so much is because not all of its funds are used for actually training pastors or missionaries, but for staff salaries, administrative tasks, building projects, religious fixtures and edifices, advertising, and the erection of new schools which, in many cases, may have nothing to do with the furtherance of the Gospel (e.g., a psychology school). The result is a quasi-religious institution that is weighed-down with tons of administrative red tape. In many instances, the seminary may find itself in horrific debt and must turn to questionable marketing or fund raising efforts in order to get itself out of the hole.

6. Seminaries tend to take potential pastors away from the life and concerns of the local church in which they are supposed to serve, and places them in an academic environment of abstract scholasticism – much of which has no real bearing upon their pastoral responsibilities. The seminarian is usually required to take numerous classes on subjects which do very little to promote a godly character (e.g., Hellenistic literature, Greek philosophy, early patristic fathers, etc.). Such courses may be interesting, but are they really necessary for pastors? Are such studies helping to promote godliness and maturity in character, or mere academic intellectualism? Are they truly helpful to the pastor who must deal with sin, marital problems, and a host of societal ills among the members of his congregation? Is it any wonder why so many graduating from seminary are great at theological discourse, but cold or indifferent towards the people they shepherd? Clay Sterrett notes the difference between modern methods of training and the New Testament model:

Modern training is primarily intellectual; New Testament training is primarily spiritual and practical. Modern training emphasizes the classroom; New Testament training emphasizes life and experience. Modern training targets young men and women; New Testament training includes older saints as well (Myths of "The Ministry" [Staunton, VA: CFC Literature, 1990] p.18).

Alexander R. Hay, similarly writes:

To separate those who are to be trained for ministry from normal church life and activity and from the conditions in which their ministry is to be carried on is a serious mistake. One preparing for the ministry of evangelism and church planting needs the church and the evangelistic field just as the medical student needs the Hospital and the clinic. To send out a young man to practice medicine who had little more than theoretical knowledge, who had little practical experience and never even seen a major operation performed, would not be justifiable. It would be hard on both the young physician and his patients! (The New Testament Order for Church and Missionary [Published by the New Testament Missionary Union, 1947] p.488).

E.W. Johnson, in his article, "Extra-Biblical Ecclesiastical Systems," writes:

Schools which are separated from the local church are very apt also to be separated from that real world where the future minister must labor. The cloistered school is no place for the training of the future pastor, unless that future pastor plans to remain cloistered in his study while the world goes to hell (Baptist Reformation Review [Summer – 1978, Vol.7/No.2] p.16).

7. Some institutions require their students to sign an elaborate doctrinal statement which may not even be fully understood by the seminarian. Before the student graduates and before his theological convictions are matured, his is immediately "strait-jacketed" into the seminary’s particular doctrinal system (even to the point of having to agree on secondary theological issues, such as Pretribulationism or the twenty-four hour six day creation view). If he deviates from the doctrinal statement, he is usually suspect by the academic staff or, in some cases, dismissed from the school. But why is this necessary, particularly on non-essential matters? The theological student must, to some extent, be permitted the freedom to do his own thinking. He must be allowed to come to his own conclusions (so long as he does not drift into heresy), instead of merely parroting the ideas of his professors who, in some cases, may not be correct at all.

8. Because of the numerous classes required, the complex nature of the subjects being studied, and the need to "cram" for soon-coming exams, the seminarian is allowed very little time for deep reflection upon what he learns. Mike Parker writes:

When one considers the exalted nature of the office and the commoness of youth to be aspiring to it, he must see that seminary is necessarily a compacted experience. Ten, twenty and more years of mature and careful reflection must now be crammed into three! Often, young men who have been converted and exposed to the Word of God less than two years are forced to wrestle with problems which have tested the greatest saints and scholars of all history, and come up with "creative" solutions by exam time in a matter of weeks. Such hurried and forced development has a built-in tendency toward unfounded convictions, faulty foundations, and resultant defective leadership for the people of God. Rather, let a man grow, study, and ponder the Word day and night in the context of normal Christian living without the synthetic pressure of examinations until in God’s good time the Spirit honors his diligence with illumination ("The Basic Meaning of ‘Elder,’" Baptist Reformation Review [Summer – 1978, Vol.7/No.2] p.42).

9. Genuine spiritual accountability and discipleship is usually very poor within the seminary context. The professors have many students and it is often difficult to establish close relationships. Moreover, many seminary professors do not see it as their personal responsibility to practice disciple-making. Some are simply too busy studying and writing books. In today’s seminary, it is virtually impossible to have a genuine life-style discipleship. The attempt by some schools to form fellowship groups that meet weekly with a seminary professor for one hour, though well-intentioned, does little toward developing deep relationships between mentor and protégé. But, then, that is not so surprising when one considers that the seminary is merely a product of the institutional church, which has its own problems with accountability and intimacy.

10. Seminary training does not, in itself, guarantee that one will graduate biblically sound in their soteriology and ecclesiology. I have spoken to numerous seminary graduates who were very weak and man-centered in their understanding of such doctrines as human depravity, God’s sovereignty, and election. In addition, most of them have never bothered to work out a philosophy of ministry based upon a fresh study of Scripture. Thus, they enter their pastorates almost as uninformed of New Testament ecclesiology as the people in the pews and, as Jesus said, "If a blind man guides a blind man, both will fall into a pit" (Matthew 15:14).

11. Most, if not all, seminaries teach and promote the Constantinian or institutional model of church practice. Thus, unfortunately, the same debilitating clerical system and church structures are perpetuated. Instead of helping to cure the problem, the seminary system exacerbates it. This is due to the fact that many of the administrators and professors within our evangelical seminaries, like most of us, have simply assumed that our inherited traditions regarding church structure and current leadership forms are biblically-based. Nothing could be further from the truth.

12. Many (perhaps most) of the professors within our seminaries have never served as shepherds within a local church. They may, indeed, know a great deal about various theological subjects, but if they have never served in a church leadership capacity, they are not going to be of much help to a potential elder in need of a pastoral mentor. In contrast to our traditional methods, Paul clearly established a pattern for training shepherds in 2 Timothy 2:2 which rested on church elders (not college professors).

We believe that training for the eldership should be given by other elders within the local church that they will serve, and with a hands-on, practical approach as opposed to one that is merely theoretical. Furthermore, theological training should primarily be directed toward seven major subjects: Old and New Testament survey; systematic theology; church history; biblical languages; hermeneutics; practical ecclesiology; and apologetics. Any secondary subjects will be learned as potential elders develop intellectually and pursue independent studies. Those who are truly called to church leadership will eventually prove themselves as informed and well-rounded Bible students, since they will be self-motivated to study a vast array of subjects connected to biblical theology. As E.W. Johnson points out, "A minister must be a self-motivated student, motivated by the interest he has in heart for the things of God. A minister who needs the motivation of school discipline, grades and degrees as the drives in his study needs to re-examine his calling to be a minister of God’s truth" ("Extra-Biblical Ecclesiastical Systems," Baptist Reformation Review [Summer – 1978, Vol.7/No.2] p.16).

13. Most seminaries continue to promote young and inexperienced men to the churches which look to these institutions for pastors (1 Timothy 3:6). Carl Hoch, Jr., professor of New Testament at Grand Rapids Baptist Seminary, writes:

In the New Testament, they selected their leadership from men of experience. No novice was considered. Since the church was based upon the family and met in homes, it was natural to look to the older, experienced men in the church community for leadership (1 Timothy 3:4-7). Today the church views ministry as a career structure. Education, personal charisma, and managerial skills appropriate for the business world are valued over age, character, and experience (All Things New [Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1995] p.239).

We are not suggesting that God cannot use a young man, in a unique circumstance, to shepherd a congregation. Church history does, indeed, have examples of young men who were mightily used by the Lord (e.g., C.H. Spurgeon, Robert Murray M’Cheyne). But these were clear exceptions and not intended to be the norm.

14. Much of the seminary curriculum is now no longer centered on systematic theology, doctrinal and exegetical studies, but is geared toward making church leaders into business marketing wizards, administrative professionals, and virtual psychologists, instead of shepherds of the sheep. This is due to a large percentage of our evangelical seminaries being deeply influenced by the contemporary church growth movement.

15. Our seminaries have been a witting accomplice in promoting the ineffectual "pastoral search committee." Instead of encouraging our churches to raise and train its own men for leadership, the seminary system continuously offers their young and inexperienced men to us. Rather than working itself out of a job by equipping churches to educate its own people, most seminaries seem to be doing their best to keep us dependent upon their institutions. They want our money; they want our men; but they do not was us to be independent enough to be able to educate our leaders without their approval and guidance. This impression is subtly, but clearly, conveyed in their advertisements and brochures.

Our churches, when evaluating pastoral candidates, place a greater emphasis upon one’s academic accomplishments than one’s moral character and spiritual maturity. We virtually ignore (or downplay) the qualifications for elders listed in 1 Timothy 3:1-7 and Titus 1:6-9. Such descriptions by Paul are far from the seminary scholar that we usually envision. I am not against theological education but, following the world, contemporary Christianity has "professionalized" pastoral ministry and practically deified academic degrees. In our obsession with formal degrees, we seem to have forgotten that some of the greatest saints in church history have been men without a college or seminary education, including most of the apostles (Acts 4:13) and others such as John Bunyan, C.H. Spurgeon, Robert Murray M’Cheyne, D.L. Moody, A.W. Pink, and A.W. Tozer. E.M. Bounds was correct when he said, "The church is looking for better methods; God is looking for better men."

Far too many seminaries in our day are seeking academic respectability from the world’s educational institutions. Their goal appears to be one of showing to the world that we evangelicals can be just as "scholarly" and "intellectual" as they. To imagine, however, that the Christian church will ever gain respectability and acceptance from hostile, anti-Christian universities is naïve at best, for all the intellectualism and educational attainments that one can imagine will never impress the unregenerate mind which is at enmity with God (Romans 8:7-8; 1 Corinthians 2:14). Rather than seeking academic respectability, our seminaries should pursue academic responsibility and an unswerving commitment to teaching Scripture, as opposed to instruction mixed with elements of both Scripture and psychology, or Scripture and business marketing principles, or whatever popular humanistic ideas catch the fancy of modern Christians.

16. The apostolic pattern was not to train a mass of young and inexperienced men for pastoral leadership, but a few mature and faithful men who would be able to teach others also (2 Timothy 2:2).

17. We believe that the local church should be the primary training ground for church pastors. While the early church could have turned to outside educational institutions for the development and training of its shepherds, it chose not to do so. Rather, as the great puritan, John Owen, observes: "Every church was then a seminary, in which provision and preparation was made, not only for the continuation of Gospel preaching, but for the calling and gathering, and teaching of our churches" (Commentary on Hebrews [Vol.3], p.568). R. Paul Stevens has written:

The best structure for equipping every Christian is already in place. It predates the seminary and the weekend seminar and will outlast both. In the New Testament no other nurturing and equipping is offered than the local church. In the New Testament church, as in the ministry of Jesus, people learned in the furnace of life, in a relational, living, working and ministering context (Liberating the Laity [Downers Grove, IL: Inter-Varsity Press, 1985], p.46).

Once again, we cite the words of E.W. Johnson, who notes:

The local church is itself a school. If believers are also disciples, then they are students, and the local church is a place for the study of the Gospel. If these local churches under their constituted teachers are schools for the training of God’s people, why cannot these schools also train future ministers? Why must these schools be set aside and higher schools be established by men in their superior wisdom for the training of ministers? It is true that the local church has but one text book – the Bible – but what need do we have for schools where Barth and Bultmann are also studied? Do we need these higher schools for the clergy where men finish their education and have completion of their education certified? Can men ever finish their study of the Bible and receive their diploma of having mastered the Gospel? In this school called the local church we never finish our education and receive our degree. We are always learning and studying here, ever fascinated by the knowledge of God and His way of salvation ("Extra-Biblical Ecclesiastical Systems," Baptist Reformation Review [Summer – 1978, Vol.7/No.2] pp.15-16).

Alexander Strauch, an author and elder at a church in Littleton (CO), concurs:

The local church is not only a place to learn Scripture, it is the very best place to learn the skills required for shepherding people. It is in the local church that leaders learn to apply God’s book to real-life situations. Thus the local church is to be God’s school for the spiritual development of His children and the learning of Scripture (Acts 2:42; 11:26) (Biblical Eldership [Littleton, CO: Lewis & Roth Publishers [Revised], 1995] p.81).

Frank A. Viola, author of Rethinking the Wineskin (Brandon, FL: Present Testimony Ministry, 1997), has said:

We may also say that the New Testament church is the school of Christ – the laboratory of the redeemed, wherein the necessary lessons of interdependence, inter-relatedness, suffering, self-denial, forbearance, meekness, kindness, and love are learned. It is the place where living the Christ-life is tested, fleshed out, and mastered. In short, corporate conformity to Christ is the central feature of the purpose of God, and the local assembly is the Divinely-ordained environment for this transformation to occur (pp.109-110).

18. Until the church returns to its responsibility of training its own men for the eldership, the seminary system is, perhaps, a necessary evil. Although it is not God’s best, we would not discourage a potential shepherd from attending a conservative seminary if his own congregation has abdicated its training obligations.

19. Finally, we must be willing to ask some honest and hard questions concerning the effectiveness of our modern seminaries: (1) With the abundance of theological seminaries scattered throughout our country, have they truly produced a generation of godly shepherds who are unswerving in their commitment to teaching the full-counsel of God and making certain that the sheep are properly pastored – or – have we, instead, seen a generation of clergymen who are less than fervent in declaring the Word of God; men who are more often concerned with establishing a name for themselves and securing greater financial perks, than in humble, sacrificial service? (2) Have our seminary-trained pastors been marked more by an intense knowledge and devotion to Scripture – or – men who are deeply influenced by the latest trends in psychology and business marketing methods? (3) Have our seminaries produced the kind of men who possess a deep love for the sheep – or – men who are content to remain impersonal and distant from the people they supposedly pastor? (4) Have our seminaries produced men who are disciple-making pastors, diligently engaged in raising and training future shepherds within their congregations – or – men who are steeped in administrative tasks and a plethora of committee meetings that they have no available time to pour their lives into a Timothy or Titus?

We conclude this paper with the words of Alexander R. Hay (former General Superintendent of the New Testament Missionary Union), who provides four principal reasons for the weakness of our modern theological schools:

1. The teaching we give may not be adequate. We may give thorough courses on doctrine and on the general contents of the Bible, but only a brief sketch of such vital subjects as New Testament church order, the gifts of the Spirit, faith, prayer and the guidance of the Holy Spirit [Note: Since the publication of Hay’s book, more seminaries are now providing courses on spiritual gifts and practical Christianity. Even still, this is primarily learned in the context of a vibrant church life, not within a classroom]. 2. The claims which we make for our teaching ministry may be too great. To consider that a course of Bible study, however extensive, is an adequate preparation for ministry is a serious error. The teaching ministry provides an essential part of the preparation of the worker, but equally important are personal spiritual equipment and practical experience. This was definitely recognized by our Lord in the method He employed in the preparation of His disciples. 3. We separate the student from normal contact with the church’s life and work and with the world, depriving him thus of essential practical knowledge and experience. The result is that the knowledge he acquires is largely theoretical. The local church was the training ground of the New Testament worker. 4. We fail to attach sufficient importance to growth in personal spiritual experience and to see that provision is made for it. Through being separated to a great extent from the church’s life and from the world the student is removed from the best position for acquiring personal spiritual experience. It is vitally important that he come to know the practical use of faith and prayer both in personal and in corporate ministry, learning how problems should be prayed through, how the guidance of the Spirit is sought and the victory over Satan’s work obtained. Actually, the student is taught to consider such prayer and guidance as glorious spiritual truths that have little practical application. They see the school largely run without them. Our Lord not only taught the theory of prayer, faith and the guidance and power of the Spirit to His disciples, He led them into the practice of these truths (The New Testament Order for Church and Missionary [Published by the New Testament Missionary Union, 1947] pp.485-486).

Written by Darryl M. Erkel (1996)

HT: Solo Christo