The Rise & Triumph of the Modern Self – A Reflective Response

This has taken me far far longer than I intended it to take, and far longer than it should have taken. It’s not a short book (407 pages) and it isn’t a particularly easy book to read. It isn’t a lightweight book. It isn’t a cheap book. I’ve been told Dr Trueman is working on a briefer more accessible edition. I think that’s good, and bad. Good because more people might read it than otherwise, but bad because so much will need to be left out in order to fit the brief. An idea might be to produce a Study Guide – perhaps on its own. That, I think, would be helpful, perhaps to use in a church setting or reading group. Anyway, I’ve read the book. Having read it, I really could do with reading it again.

After saying that, It’s not my purpose here to review the book, others have done that already. But what I want to do is share some thoughts I had as I was reading it. As I say then, this post is more response than review. I do need to say that this is an absolutely brilliant book. If I get to meet him I ought to thank him for writing it. It is well written. I like his style. It’s divided up well with plenty of headings. It has an index, and footnotes. so what’s not to like. It’s a significant book. It’s a book that should be read by Christians, and especially ministers, seeking to understand not just where we are, but how we arrived at such a juncture.

What struck me most powerfully is the momentous task we face. This was my thinking very early on  as I read, some of which are picked up in the last section of the book – more of that later. The realisation that the ‘cultural moment‘ isn’t a moment at all but is in fact two or three hundred years of movement away from God and his authority. In the West that is anyway. Yes, there have been revivals, and I do not want to minimise them at all, but the trend continues downward. And the trend is not just down, but is picking up speed as well.

I don’t know how true this is (perhaps someone can tell me) but I was told by a friend (no longer with us) that Dr Lloyd-Jones told him that the length of time it takes to get ill, is the length of time it takes to (fully) recover. If that is true of individuals, could it also be true of churches, and of the ills of society? and maybe of Nations too – unless there is a Revolution (or a Reformation) when everything can change. So bearing that in mind will give you some idea of what we are facing. The Catholic church and Islam do not think in moments, but in centuries. Perhaps us Protestants need to have a more realistic perspective of time.

Another analogy I thought of is the Oil Tanker. Once the decision is made to turn round, or to stop, it can take a very long time to for anything happen. Although with that analogy we may be completely unaware the command to stop, or to turn, has already been given. This may be the case. The command has been given, but to us everything goes on as before. Rather, it seems as if everything is going on as before. From our perspective then it’s still moving and it seems as though nothing has changed. But in reality everything may have already changed. We just aren’t aware of it yet. The command to turn may have been given. That’s an encouraging thought. Obviously, the Command I’m talking of here is that given by God.

Encouraging as that thought may be, and it is, the reality is that revival may not come (for us) and God may not intervene in any obvious way at all. When we read of the past it’s sobering to realise the culture still has a very long way down to go, and despite us thinking how bad it is, and it is, it has not yet reached the bottom. When will that be? No one can say. No one can say what is at the bottom either. Carl does make a comment in a footnote, about the culture destroying itself. You would’ve thought we would be crying out to God for help. I don’t see too much of this happening.

How are we then to respond?

In writing to our MP’s, for example, we will have to realise making logical arguments isn’t going to cut it. Here in Wales (and the UK in general) the Assembly are absolutely committed to pursuing policies that push a Transgender ideology. Biology makes no difference now. Even in the church making rational arguments sometimes makes no headway against someone saying ‘how it makes me feel.’ If that’s where we are in the church how can we expect arguments with godless governments to be any more effective! Perhaps, and I’m being quite serious, when we write to our MP’s we need to sprinkle our letters or emails with several references to how it makes us feel. Not a very good idea but surely when we see truth trampled in the street it makes us feel something. Doesn’t it? To illustrate where we are at I’ve typed up a few quotes from Carls book. These are mainly in the last section:

‘Yet transgenderism is only the latest and most extreme form of this move; it stands in obvious continuity with antimetaphysical thought of the nineteenth century, most notably Friedrich Nietzsche. Transgenderism is a symptom, not a cause. It is not the reason why gender categories are now so confused; it is rather a function of a world in which the collapse of metaphysics and of stable discourse has created such chaos that not even the most basic of binaries, that between male and female, can any longer lay claim to meaningful objective status. And the roots of this pathology lie deep within the intellectual traditions of the West.
The contemporary debates surrounding LGBTQ+ also offer evidence of Alasdair Macintyres contention that ethical debate today is not about reasoning from commonly accepted premises but rather about the expression of emotional preferences.’ Page 376.

‘The agreed rational basis for debate has gone. All that is left is emotional preference.’ P. 377.

‘But as i noted in the introduction, this book is neither a lament nor a polemic. It is rather an attempt to explain how the revolution of the self came to take the form it has in the West and why that is so culturally significant.’ Page. 382.

‘It should also enable us to have a better understanding of why the sexual revolution has apparently moved so fast and, if anything, appears to be gaining speed, as transgenderism seems to be making such headway in the culture and as one after another sexual taboo collapses in the face of what often looks like an unstoppable tidal wave of sexual revolution. The reason for this speed is that the underlying causes of these phenomena are deeply embedded within our culture and have been slowly but surely transforming how we think of ourselves and our world for many, many generations.’ Page, 386.

The book sets where we are in context, and I think sets before us an overwhelming and impossible task. That was my response as I read it. Even after reading this book, we still believe ‘the arm of flesh’ will deliver us. My friends, it will not. The ‘arm of flesh’ will not undo 300 years of movement away from God. And ‘the arm of flesh’ will not undo where we are now. That’s one reason why we need to be reading and hearing about what God has done in the past.  I’m reminded of something Leonard Ravenhill said: ‘The answer isn’t in the White House (or Downing Street), it’s in God’s house.’ It doesn’t mean we stop reading books like this, or stop writing to our MP’s, or engaging where we are able (The Lord does use means), but it does mean we have to face up to the current situation – or the cultural moment that we find ourselves in. When chatting to someone recently I was reminded of Isaiah 42:13:

‘I will work, and none shall prevent it.’

I will work, and who shall let it? as when he wrought the work of creation, there was no opposition to it, or hinderance of him; and in providence all things are done as he pleases; so all his purposes and decrees, which are his works within him, are exactly accomplished according to his pleasure, and none can resist his will. The work of redemption is finished just according to the draught of it in his eternal mind; and when he works upon the heart of a sinner at conversion, whatever obstructions and difficulties are in the way, these are removed, and the work is begun, and carried on, and performed, until the day of Christ. The work of the Lord in his churches, and the setting up of his kingdom in the world, in a more visible and glorious manner, shall be done, and none will be able to hinder it: (John Gill)

Let us not forget, or be tempted to forget that God is at work even when we cannot see it. The Gospel is the power of God unto Salvation!

 

Some (positive) thoughts on Red Letter Bibles.

Just in case you don’t know, a Red Letter Bible is a Bible with the words of Christ in Red. It’s peculiarity, it seems, is for American editions to have the words of Christ in red. I’m sure there’s a reason but English (UK) Bibles don’t have the words in Red. It’s often not a choice. For example if you want an NASB (New American Standard Bible) the words are in Red – full stop. The Bible app on your phone or tablet probably has an option to turn them on or off. Maybe you read a Red Letter Bible because you didn’t have a choice but feel guilty each time you read the words of Christ in red. Maybe you see ‘red’ that such things even exist.

The problem in a nutshell.

The problem with a red letter edition is that it gives the impression that the words in red are the only words of Christ. Or that the words of Christ are more authoritative (than other words) so they are in red to highlight their importance.

I can remember red letter bibles being condemned from the pulpit. The reason is because all of the words in the whole Bible are the words of Christ (God) not just the words that are physically spoken by the Son of God. I’m guessing here, but, the reason for resisting, back then at any rate, was the assaults that came (still do) upon the authority of the Bible. Accepting some words to be more authoritative than other words weakens the authority of the whole. It plays into the hands of thinking how wonderful and loving Jesus is over against a wrathful and vengeful Old Testament God – which is not true. There is no part of the Bible that is more the word of God (or more authoritative) than any other words. The Scriptures are God breathed (2 Tim 3:16). All of them. Every word. Including, of course, the words Jesus physically spoke while on earth.

Apparently there was a Bible with the words of Jesus in the Old Testament recorded in red. That would’ve been better (and interesting) but I assume that didn’t suit the narrative that divides the OT God of wrath from the NT one of love. i couldn’t find a sample of one.

A more nuanced view

I think it’s possible to take an ever so slightly more nuanced view. I take the Bible for what it is – every word is literally God breathed (2 Tim 3:16). That is, I subscribe to the orthodox view of the Scriptures. The Bible, all of it, is the word of God. But I have come to look on the words of Christ in Red in a slightly different way. Remember, the words in red are the words that the Lord Jesus speaks. Perhaps I should say the words that Jesus speaks, or spoke, while on earth. But I recently had some further thoughts on this.

When we read the words of Christ in red we are reading the words the Son of God spoke while on earth. When I read these words, as we all can, I think of Jesus having a real body with real lungs, with a real voice-box and tongue to be able to incarnationally articulate real words that people could hear him speak. In other words, the red letters point to a real incarnation – not a phantom. A phantom does not speak out real words, or breathe them out into the atmosphere.. So when we speak we need to be breathing. We take in air to our lungs and breath out. Our words are breath. This means the very air that Jesus breathed out is still here on earth! I think this is incredible! I doubt this was the original reason for the words in red and was far more to do with Jesus being more loving (and maybe authoritative).

So then, don’t be overly concerned (if you are concerned) about the letters in red. Use them to speak to your soul of a real bodily incarnated God. ‘Veiled in flesh the Godhead see, Hail the incarnate Deity’

More to ponder

I must admit my mind took a turn after this as I considered that the words in Red also record words that were spoken by the Son of God in a resurrection body. I’m not sure if these are angels on a pinhead but these are some of the things I mused on: If the Son of God was sealed in an airtight room would he still be able to breath since his body had the ability to pass through matter. The amazing thing to consider is that those resurrection words (in red) were spoken by a person with a body. A person with a resurrected body! Not only that, some of the recorded words spoken – in red – are uttered in heaven (e.g. Rev 1:17,18)

Also (bear with me), consider the wounds of The Lord Jesus. The wound in his side, had he not already died (by giving up his spirit), would have been fatal. And yet, he appears to the disciples with visible wounds. We know this because Jesus invites Thomas to put his hand into his side (John 20:27). In some way then, the wounds inflicted on the Saviour are visible and yet not fatal. His body is able to exist with what would otherwise be a fatal wound. This also is evidence of the physicality of The Lord Jesus. There’s a man in heaven, seated on a throne with a visibly fatal wound yet He is not (now) injured or harmed.

The words in red then point indirectly to other facts of the incarnation and of the fact that the Son of God even now has a body. Can you get your head round that? I can’t. These are mysteries indeed.

Chronological Red Letter Bible?

If such a Bible were to exist it would make for a fascinating edition. It would begin in heaven, then pre-incarnate speech in the OT. Then moving to incarnational speech from a body and then a resurrected body and finally to a fully glorified body in the NT. The culmination will be speech from a fully vindicated body uttered in heaven, by a man, who will say ‘Enter into the joy of the Lord (Matt 25:23).’ What wonderful words these will be. Words spoken by a real man – the man of heaven, and in heaven. How do we enter that place? Not by our own merit but by the wounds that He bore on the cross for sinners that are still visible. We enter because ‘He bore our sins in his own body on the tree (1 Peter 2:24).’ ‘In His own body.’ A body that was on earth!

Conclusion

There’s another way then for us to ‘read’ the red letters in the Bible. The normal way leads to confusion and error. But the way I’m suggesting we could read them, leads to worship and glory to God.

He appeared in a body
Was seen of angels.
Was preached on in the world
Was vindicated by angels (1 Tim 3:16)

Defining Evangelicalism?

Defining Evangelicalism?
by
Michael J. Iliff
(Any errors below are all mine)

What follows was first written back in 2007 (ish) and I’ve reproduced it here with a few changes in the hope that it makes sense. Some of the references might be a bit dated and some of the links are (sadly) no longer available, but, the point is to show that recent articles (or blog posts) on trying to define Evangelicalism is nothing new.

Evangelical[1] is, or can be, difficult to define, particularly when it has been suggested[2] that the term be dropped.  The word, whilst retaining a much older meaning,[3] has become so broad – it is said – to be of little or of no real value, and as regards any historic definition, become almost meaningless.  Evangelicalism is seen to be in crisis – at least definitionally. Is there any basis to this?  When one considers just a few titles[4] there is the impression of crisis. The evangelical umbrella has continued to widen, with several theologians, or popular figures, such as Clark Pinnock,[5] and Steve Chalke,[6] still[7] broadly viewed as evangelicals. They continue to write for evangelical publications, even though they have moved away from historic[8] orthodox teaching.

In 1992 Michael Horton[9] wrote,

‘Labels are often confusing, especially when the jar’s content changes. Grape juice can become vinegar over the years in the cellar, but the label doesn’t change with the changes in the substance.  The same is true of the term “evangelical.”’[10]

Evangelicals are finding it increasingly difficult to define themselves. Horton writing, again in 1992 said,

‘A number of evangelical leaders met at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School near Chicago two years ago for the purpose of defining the term “evangelical”, but many left as confused concerning what that label comprehends as they were when they arrived. It is becoming increasingly difficult to say what an evangelical is and is not.’[11]

John R de Witt[12] lists seven particulars of Reformed evangelicalism, rather than the Quadrilateral David Bebbington[13] suggests describing Evangelicalism as a whole.  de Witt calls this The Reformed Faith, not Reformed Evangelicalism.  Nevertheless, those of the Reformed Faith are Evangelicals, but not all evangelicals are Reformed.  For Reformed Christians the word ‘evangelical’ is packed with historic and Biblical meaning rather than an academic description[14] of a particular religious movement beginning in the 18th Century.  The distinction is between the reality of the evangelical movement, and Evangelicalism as understood by the Reformed Churches.  De Witt’s seven points are:

    1. The doctrine of scripture.
    2. The sovereignty of God.
    3. The grace of God.
    4. The Christian life.
    5. The law and gospel.
    6. The kingdom of God.
    7. Preaching.

Evangelical Times ran a series[15] of articles with the title ‘What is a Reformed Church’.

The Reformed Evangelical position is well summarised by the five Solas of the Reformation.  These are, “Sola Scriptura, Sola Fide, Sola Gratia, Soli Christus, Soli Deo Gloria”[16]. I don’t believe Reformed Evangelicalism can be summed up and categorised in quite the way David Bebbington describes Evangelicalism as a whole.  In 1977 Evangelical Times printed an article[17] that tried to answer the very same question that is being asked today in 2022 – What is an Evangelical? It’s been an ongoing problem for Reformed Evangelicals.  Lloyd-Jones addressed this same problem of definition in 1971 at the International Fellowship of Evangelical Students – reprinted as late as 1992.  Under a subheading, ‘Succumbing to the Ecumenical Spirit’, we read the following,

‘…there is the … danger… of being so broad, so wide, and so loose that in the end we have no definitions at all.  As I see things today, this is perhaps the greater danger because we are living in what is called the ecumenical age.’[18]

In 1996 The Alliance of Confessing Evangelicals (ACE) issued ‘The Cambridge Declaration’[19] calling Evangelical churches to repentance and a return to Reformation theology.  The Alliance, although primarily American,[20] through Evangelical Times published[21] the ‘Declaration’ in full, taking up a centre page spread.  Restating the “five Solas” it lamented the current condition within Evangelicalism. The opening statement of the ‘Declaration’[22] describes churches as dominated by the spirit of the age and changes to how evangelical is defined.

Whatever happened to the Reformation[23] urges readers ‘to turn to the theology of the Reformers’,[24] and is described as more ‘hard-hitting and to the point’[25] than other books and ‘as the title indicates, the problem with modern evangelicalism is its complete abandonment of all the Reformation stood for.  It has cut its ties with the Reformation and is like a ship adrift on stormy seas’.[26] With no clear alternative ‘Evangelical’ will continue to be used albeit with a defining hyphenation.

Moving forward to June 2005 in Evangelicals Now, evangelicalism appears to be no further forward.  Jonathan Stephen[27] writes,

‘…there is currently a huge crisis in evangelicalism …the term itself has become virtually meaningless. Virtually every conceivable religious deviation can now shelter under the umbrella of evangelicalism, if it so wishes’.[28]

However, it does appear that Dr Bebbington’s[29] four-point definition[30](Bebbington’s Quadrilateral) has become a commonly used umbrella term, even though many Reformed churches may find it a difficult and unsatisfactory category, as it falls short in addressing the distinctiveness of Reformed churches. Evangelical then, has a much longer history than what is presented to us in the Tele-evangelism found in America. You’ll get no argument from me about continued vigilance over usage and commentary on its abuse, but I see no reason why historic Evangelicals should abandon it. However, we, Evangelicals, should perhaps, be more careful how we use and abuse it ourselves and continue, or switch to, maybe, hyphenating it as ‘Reformed’ – Evangelical.

As a late addition: In 2006 Geoff Thomas gave two lectures in Rugby on Evangelicalism (Especially Part 2). Both well worth a listen. Evangelicalism: What’s in a Name – Part 1 & Part 2. ‘I’m not going to give it up because other people have abused it (Geoff Thomas Part 2).’ In fact you’d be much better off listening to these two lectures by Geoff! The links for these work.

[1] According to Strongs: G2097 εὐαγγελίζω – euaggelizō – yoo-ang-ghel-id’-zo

From G2095 and G32; to announce good news (“evangelize”) especially the gospel: – declare, bring (declare, show) glad (good) tidings, preach (the gospel).  Translated Preach/Preaching & Gospel/Good News

G2098 εὐαγγέλιον – euaggelion – yoo-ang-ghel’-ee-on

From the same as G2097; a good message, that is, the gospel: – gospel.  Translated Gospel.

For a more comprehensive definition see Thayer.  Available on e-sword.

[2] See Hart, D. G.  Deconstructing Evangelicalism: Conservative Protestantism in the Age of Billy Graham.  2004.  Baker Academic.  Grand Rapids.  R. C. Sproul has been heard to say the same, but no reference is available at this moment.

[3] Iain Murray writes: ‘Evangelion (that we call the gospel) is a Greek word; and signifieth good, merry, glad and joyful tidings, that maketh him sing, dance and leap for joy.  So Tyndale wrote in 1525, and at the same period all who so thought became described as ‘gospellers’ or, less commonly, as ‘evangelicals’.  Over two hundred years later it was the latter term that was to pass into more permanent usage at the time of the ‘Evangelical Revival’.  That it did not do so earlier is largely due to the fact that all the churches of the Reformation were ‘of the gospel’ in their creeds and confessions.  By the eighteenth century, however, while the profession of the national churches in England and Scotland remained orthodox there were many pulpits from which no gospel was heard and when the evangel was recovered a term was necessary to distinguish its preachers from others: they were the ‘evangelicals’.  Murray, Iain H.  Evangelicalism Divided.  2000.  The Banner of Truth Trust.  Edinburgh. p. 1.

[4] A small selection of titles: Armstrong, John.  (Ed.)  The Coming Evangelical Crisis.  1996.  Moody Press.  Chicago; Armstrong, John.  (Ed.)  The Compromised Church.  1998.  Crossway Books.  Wheaton; Glover, Peter C.  The Virtual Church and How to Avoid it.  2004.  Xulon Press; Johnson, Gary L. W. & Fowler White, R.  (Eds.)  Whatever Happened to the Reformation?  2001.  P & R Publishing.  Philipsburg, New Jersey; MacArthur Jr, John F.  Ashamed of the Gospel: When the Church Becomes like the World.  1993.  Crossway Books.  Nottingham; Murray, Iain H.  Evangelicalism Divided.  2000.  The Banner of Truth Trust.  Edinburgh; Phillips, Richard.  Turning Back the Darkness.  2002.  Crossway Books.  Wheaton.

[5] Pinnock holds to and promotes the doctrine of Open Theism.  For a larger treatment of this topic see: Ware, Bruce.  in Johnson, Gary L. W. & Fowler White, R.  (Eds.)  Whatever Happened to the Reformation?  2001.  P & R Publishing.  Philipsburg, New Jersey. P. 95 – 131.

[6] This refers to the recent controversy over penal substitutionary atonement as expressed by Steve Chalke in his book The Lost Message of Jesus.  Reviews of this book are available by searching the ET & EN websites. Also see Evangelicals Now September 2005 for a review of ‘The EA Symposium – Conference on the Cross’ by Mathew Mason.  Mason writes, ‘it is also sad that EA appears willing to permit people who deny a core evangelical belief to continue as members’.  Available: http://www.e-n.org.uk/3129-Conference-on-the-cross.htm

[7] ‘The Evangelical Alliance has so far failed [at the time of my writing] to act with regard to Steve Chalke’.  EN Jonathan Stevens.  There is also no sign of this happening at the Alliance Website. Available: http://www.eauk.org/theology/headline_issues/atonement/atonement-statement.cfm

[8] See a previous footnote.  Three people in three different areas of theology will demonstrate this and why they compromise evangelical theology.  Briefly, the names of three people; John Stott on eternal punishment; Clark Pinnock on Divine Foreknowledge and Steve Chalke on the Atonement.  In addition to this, more recently, ‘The New Perspective on Paul’ (e.g. Bishop Tom Wright) has caused concern.

[9] The Rev. Dr. Michael S. Horton is the J. Gresham Machen professor of systematic theology and apologetics at Westminster Seminary California. He is the main host of The White Horse Inn radio broadcast and editor-in-chief of Modern Reformation magazine. He received his M.A. from Westminster Seminary California, his Ph.D. from Wycliffe Hall, Oxford and the University of Coventry, and also completed a Research Fellowship at Yale University Divinity School.  Dr. Horton is the author/editor of more than fifteen books.  Available: http://www.whitehorseinn.org/about.htm

[10] Horton, Michael S. ‘What is an Evangelical?’ Available: http://www.christianity.com/partner/Article_Display_Page/0,,PTID307086|CHID560462|CIID1415584,00.html.

[11] Horton, Michael S.  ‘Evangelical Arminians: Option or Oxymoron?’  Available: http://www.modernreformation.org/mr92/mayjun/mr9203oxymoron.html (21/04/03).

[12] de Witt, John R.  What is the Reformed Faith?  1981.  The Banner of Truth Trust.  Edinburgh.

[13] Bebbington, D W.  Evangelicalism in Modern Britain: A history from the 1730s to the 1980s.  Routledge.  London and New York.  2000.  The four are: Biblicism, a particular regard for the Bible (e.g. all spiritual truth is to be found in its pages); Crucicentrism, a focus on the atoning work of Christ on the cross; Conversionism, the belief that human beings need to be converted; and Activism, the belief that the gospel needs to be expressed in effort.  Pp. 2 – 17.  Or, as on page 3, Bebbington puts it: ‘Together they form a quadrilateral (the underlining is my Emphasis) of priorities that is the basis of Evangelicalism’.

[14]  Hart, D. G.  Deconstructing Evangelicalism: Conservative Protestantism in the Age of Billy Graham.  2004.  Baker Academic.  Grand Rapids.  Hart argues the popular usage of the word ‘evangelicalism’ is a modern academic construct.

[15] ET. November 1996 – February 1997.

[16] Or, scripture alone, faith alone, grace alone, through Christ alone, to the glory of God alone.  We may also add to this the TULIP acrostic.  Also see Appendix 2, The Cambridge Declaration for an elaboration of the Solas of the Reformation.

[17] Evangelical Times. July 1977. p. 15 & 4.  ‘Who are we?  What is an evangelical?  Tell us somebody please!’  This was a report on the NEAC conference of that year.  The report in ET began by saying ‘It comes up here, it comes up there, the issue comes up everywhere.  Some duck it, some face it.  Some dismiss it, some debate it.  It is the burning issue of: ‘what is an evangelical?’’

[18] Lloyd-Jones, D.M.  What is an Evangelical?  1992.  The Banner of Truth Trust.  Edinburgh.  P. 22.

[19] The ‘Cambridge Declaration’ is essentially a restatement of the five Solas of the Reformation.  The full text of this document is available at: http://www.alliancenet.org/CC_Content_Page/0,,PTID307086|CHID581262|CIID,00.html

[20] Now also has UK members on the council.

[21] Evangelical Times, December, 1996, p 12 – 13.

[22] See Appendix 2 for the Declaration in full.

[23] Johnson, Gary L. W. & Fowler White, R.  (Eds.)  Whatever Happened to the Reformation?  2001.  P & R Publishing.  Philipsburg, New Jersey.

[24] From the Alliance bookstall: http://www.reformationalresources.org/merchant2/merchant.mv?Screen=PROD&Store_Code=RR&Product_Code=B-JOHNS-1

[25] Hanko, Herman C.  PRT Journal.  Vol 35, No.2, April 2002.  Book Reviews.  Review of ‘Whatever Happened to the Reformation’  Available: http://www.prca.org/prtj/apr2002.html#WhateverHappened

[26] Hanko, Herman C.  PRT Journal.  Vol 35, No.2, April 2002.  Book Reviews.  Review of ‘Whatever Happened to the Reformation’  Available: http://www.prca.org/prtj/apr2002.html#WhateverHappened

[27] Jonathan Stephens was for many years the Pastor of Carey Baptist Church, Reading, and combined this with becoming President of the Fellowship of Independent Evangelical Churches.  He also became General Secretary of the BEC, changing to Affinity under his leadership.  He is presently Principal of the Evangelical College of Wales (Bryntirion).

[28] Stephens, Jonathan.  Evangelicals Now, June 2005, ‘The current crisis in evangelicalism’.  Available:  http://www.e-n.org.uk/2005-06/3026-The-current-crisis-in-evangelicalism.htm

[29] http://paulhelmsdeep.blogspot.com/2007/08/calvin-am-toplady-and-bebbington-thesis.html

[30] David Bebbington continues to use his four-point definition in his latest book THE DOMINANCE OF EVANGELICALISM: The Age of Spurgeon and Moody.

Job speaks what is right

I just finished reading through Job again. What an amazing book it is. If you have never read it I suggest you do. So many things to say. But in this post the phrase in the last chapter (42) which is found in verses 7 & 8. It struck me very powerfully this morning. Here’s the phrase with some thoughts:

v.7 ‘”for you have not spoken of me what is right, as my servant Job has.”‘

and again in v.8 ‘”For you have not spoken of me what is right, as my servant Job has.”’

In both of these it is God that is speaking to Job’s friends. And it is God that commends Job for speaking what is right. Job said some quite outrageous things, as well as some very wonderful things and it made me wonder what these things were that Job had said that were right that his friends didn’t say or had missed. I heard it suggested recently that Job’s friends were not believers – that is non-Christians in NT language. But I don’t think this is the case. I believe (in New Testament language) they were Christians. It’s an easy get out to label someone as a non-Christian just because they say things that are outrageous or even untrue. Any reading of Church History should put that thinking to bed. Christians say crazy stuff sometimes. We can say stupid things and we can get things seriously wrong, while getting other things right, but it doesn’t necessarily mean we aren’t believers – just stupid ones or just plain wrong. Job prays for them and a sacrifice is offered on their behalf. What is this but repentance and a coming to the Lord’s table as we would in the church today. There is forgiveness and restoration – especially at the Lord’s table. ‘The blood of Jesus his Son cleanses us from all sin (1 John 1:7).’ We see this with the three friends.

That hasn’t really answered the question. I turned to see what the Puritan Commentator John Gill had to say on this (v.7) and it is well worth reading. Here is Gill below in full:

Job 42:7 ‘… for ye have not spoken of me the thing that is right, as my servant Job hath’; they had said many right things of God, and Job had said many wrong ones of him, and yet upon the whole Job had said more correct things of God than they; their notion, and which they had expressed, was, that God deals with men in this life according to their outward behaviour; that God did not afflict good men, at least not sorely, nor long; and that wicked men were always punished now: from whence they drew this inference, that Job, being so long and so greatly afflicted, must be a bad man, or God would never have dealt with him after this manner. Job, on the other hand, affirmed, that wicked men enjoyed great prosperity, which good men did not; and therefore the love and hatred of God were not known by these things; and men’s characters were not to be judged of by these outward things; in which he was doubtless right: some render the words “have not spoken unto me” (p), before him, in his presence; for they were all before God, and to him they all appealed, and he heard and observed all that was said, and now passed judgment. No notice is taken of Elihu, nor blame laid on him; he acting as a moderator, taking neither the part of Job, nor of his friends, but blaming both: nor did he pretend to charge Job with any sins of his former life as the cause of his calamities; only takes up some indecent, unguarded, and extravagant expressions of his in the heat of this controversy, and rebukes him for them; and throughout the whole vindicates the justice of God in his dealings with him.’ John Gill (Available free on e-Sword).

I thought it was interesting what he says about Elihu who really just disappears at this point. Thomas Watson (another Puritan) said:

‘There are two things, which I have always looked upon as difficult. The one is, to make the wicked sad; the other is; to make the Godly joyful.‘
From the  (1663) preface to ‘A Divine Cordial’ by Thomas Watson.

Unfortunately, it is true that Christians can be engaged in neither, and sometimes even make things worse. Thankfully in the case of Job, God did step in. But that doesn’t always happen – certainly not in the way it did for Job.

Another way of expressing Watson’s difficulty is of getting Saints to see their standing in Christ, and the difficulty of getting sinners to see their plight without Christ. I know Christians (as far as I know they are) that will not come to the Lord’s table because they feel their sin more than looking to what their Saviour has done for them in dying for them and cleansing them. And then there are others that drink without any understanding and place no real value on the death of Christ. Job’s friends gave him awful counsel. But it still goes on in the church. We really MUST see our standing in Christ. We haven’t earned it. God doesn’t look upon us because we’re wonderful people and get everything right – we don’t. The bias of the heart is always towards works, which was what Job’s friends did. If you think Christians can’t give wrong or foolish counsel you need to get out more. And before we commend ourselves as being so holy that we’d never do such a thing – I think you need to take a reality pill. I’ve certainly said and done many foolish things. And will do again. Yet for all that ‘we are complete in Him'(Col 2:10).

I also noted this in Job 42:10: ‘And the LORD restored the fortunes of Job, when he had prayed for his friends…’ I read into this that Job had to forgive his friends for their appalling treatment of him. Otherwise the blessing of God would not come. See the way they treated him, and how they added to his suffering. And yet Job must forgive. That’s grace that is. This is as instructive as it is challenging. And it is incredibly challenging. Do I forgive from the heart as the Scripture tells me to? Is blessing withheld when I fail to forgive from the heart? Tough questions. Then they all celebrated together – including his three friends. Maybe Elihu as well.

When Job’s friend did get it right, they said it with such a sense of self-righteousness that was simply unhelpful and did Job no good at all. We need to be true – of course we do. But we also need to be gracious and merciful. As Andrew Davies put it when preaching through Job – ‘Don’t beat people with the truth.’ We have much to learn. I know I do. We have been privileged on occasion to administer ‘The balm of Gilead’ which is the Gospel – let’s do it with grace, with love, and with mercy, even as our dear Saviour the Lord Jesus Christ has done to and for us. There is a balm in Gilead – praise God for it.

 

Image: Job on the Dunghill (detail), Gonzalo Carrasco 1881. Wikimedia

Are we stirred? Are we Alive? Some thoughts on Revival

A few (further) extended thoughts on The Experience Meeting (EP Press 1973) & Revival. (Some of what follows appeared in previous Blog posts – Here, Here, and Here.)

Why bother with looking at this book, or even mentioning it, and Revival? I’ll answer the why by quoting Paul Cook from his book ‘Fire from Heaven‘:

‘The year is 1826. The location is Nottingham. The occasion, a crowded Methodist love-feast never to be forgotten by those present. Presiding was a Yorkshireman, John Smith, one of the greatest preachers ever to arise in Methodism, but whose ministry was cut short by an early death.

He led the people in earnest prayer and concluded by repeating the Lord’s Prayer. The effect was extraordinary. We read that the people

Responded with peculiar fervour to each petition as it was pronounced, till he came to the doxology, at each clause of which he raised his voice and ascribed to the Almighty ‘the kingdom and the power and the glory, for ever and ever’ in tone and with an unction which fell on the congregation with irresistible force.

The people were gripped with a sense of the glory of God.

A glow of heavenly feeling pervaded the whole assembly: many gave vent to their emotions by bursts of tears and some with irrepressible shouts of praise. Others laid hold of the words, repeating them again and again even after he had ceased; and whispers of ‘for ever and ever’ mingled with sobs passed from one to another… in fact, it was some time before the regular business of the meeting could be resumed.

We are not surprised to learn that there was an increase in the membership of the circuit that year of six hundred. God had visited his people.
Scripture encourages us to recollect such events, in order to strengthen our faith and increase our confidence in God. The Bible reminds us of the heroes of faith and urges us to keep them in mind, so that we might follow their example (Heb 1; 12:1). The history of God’s great acts is recorded in his word, and we are exhorted to ‘remember the days of old’ and learn from them. The Psalmists were constantly doing this to their great encouragement.’

(Fire from Heaven, Paul Cook. p. 13 & 14.)

Back to The Experience Meeting. Who is the author?

William Williams. We might think of him as primarily a Hymn Writer and poet. But he was also a Pastor and theologian, as well as a gifted organiser. And as we shall see he must have been someone with considerable spiritual discernment.

When was it written? It first appeared in 1777. Rules had been introduced (1742) for their meetings that ‘… bore the title Sail, Dibenion, a Rheolau’r Sociteties neu’r Cyfarfodydd Neilltuol a ddechreuasant ymgynull yn ddiweddar yng Nghymru (The Basis, Purposes, and Rules of the Societies or Private Meetings which have lately started coming together in Wales). Four hymns were appended, the one by Rowland used the familiar pilgrim imagery for the Christian life, and one by Harris was on ‘brotherly love and Christian Unity’. This work remained the standard code of practice for the societies until the appearance in 1777 of William Williams’ Drws y Society Profiad (The Experience Meeting).’ (Daniel Rowland, Eifion Evans, Banner, 1985. p. 181.).

Why was it written and what’s it about? The book looks back then to the events of the 1730’s & 40’s, and then forward as the ‘Experience Meetings’ or Societies that continued to be organised. It was written in response to a need that came about because of the Evangelical Awakening in the 18th Century.

From the previous account you can see that we are not in the same situation as an awakened fellowship. Philip Swann has written on ‘Experience Meetings’ in our day that is worth reading. In that article he helpfully contrasts then and now in this way:

‘Our current situation is less fervent and weaker than that in the evangelical awakening, but there is still spiritual life among us. It’s like a light connected to a dimmer switch; our light is on but turned down to a little glow, whereas William Williams and others were turned up to the max. Wherever we are on the scale, there is spiritual life, but it needs to be nurtured and encouraged.’

Source: Evangelical Magazine, July/August 2017, page 12.

These Experience Meetings were in a way, perhaps, what our home groups (if you have them) aspire to – to nurture and encourage. Most of the book is given over to leading them, the qualities of the leaders and many other things. Here’s Dr Lloyd-Jones from the introduction:

‘The task of conducting these ‘experience meetings’ obviously called for great wisdom, spiritual insight, tact, and discretion. They could easily degenerate into exhibitionism on the part of extroverts, and lead to scandal, as very private matters were related involving others. It was in order to obviate such troubles and disasters, and to instruct the leaders in this most important work, that the Rev. William Williams wrote this little book now translated into English for the first time.’ (From Dr Lloyd-Jones Introduction to The Experience Meeting, p.6)

They aren’t called chapters but dialogues. Much like catechising. So each chapter or dialogue is made up of sometimes quite lengthy questions and answers (It’s not a long book btw). The first dialogue then, if these are his headings, is ‘An imaginary history of the deadness of the land of sleep’ as Williams calls it. This corresponds, as we shall see, with the condition of the church(es) prior to an awakening. ‘The deadness of the land of sleep.’

Here are a couple of accounts prior to a Revival. The following is a bit long but worth it as it helps set the context:

‘There has been a great and just complaint for many years among the ministers and churches in Old England, and New (….), that the work of conversion goes on very slowly, that the Spirit of God in his saving influences is much withdrawn from the ministrations of his word, and there are few that receive the report of the gospel, with any eminent success upon their hearts. But as the gospel is the same divine instrument of grace still, as ever it was in the days of the apostles, so our ascended Saviour now and then takes a special occasion to manifest the divinity of this gospel by a plentiful effusion of his Spirit where it is preached: then sinners are turned into saints in numbers, and there is a new face of things spread over a town or a country. The wilderness and the solitary places are glad, the desert rejoices and blossoms as the rose; and surely concerning this instance we may add, that they have seen the glory of the Lord there, and the excellency of our God; they have seen the out-goings of God our King in his sanctuary.

Certainly it becomes us, who profess the religion of Christ, to take notice of such astonishing exercises of his power and mercy, and give him the glory which is due, when he begins to accomplish any of his promises concerning the latter days: and it gives us further encouragements to pray, and wait, and hope for the like display of his power in the midst of us. The hand of God is not shortened that it cannot save, but we have reason to fear that our iniquities, our coldness in religion, and the general carnality of our spirits, have raised a wall of separation between God and us: and we may add, the pride and perverse humour of infidelity, degeneracy, and apostacy from the Christian faith, which have of late years broken out among us, seem to have provoked the Spirit of Christ to absent himself much from our nation. “Return, O Lord, and visit thy churches, and revive thine own work in the midst of us.”’

From A Narrative of Surprising Conversions first published in 1736. Select Works of Jonathan Edwards, Vol 1, p. 2 & 3, Banner of Truth, 1965.

Here’s another account from 1850:

‘During the intervening years, apart from the movements – chiefly local – in 1850, the churches had, by 1858, declined to an alarming state of deadness and barrenness. The means of grace had become more or less a formality, made unattractive to the world by the coldness of its orthodoxy; sinful practices were rampant and carried on openly without any sense of shame; the church was spiritually “asleep”, oblivious of its mission to the world, and satisfied with its lukewarmness. The prayer meetings were not burdened for the souls of the unconverted, and preaching was theoretical, oratorical and “popular” in the worst sense.

Thus E. Richardson writes in the Drysorfa for June, 1854: “We must confess that we have become too formal, lukewarm and unwilling in the work of the Lord generally in these days, but especially so in our prayer meetings”.’

Revival comes to Wales by Eifion Evans, p.23.

We could look at many more….

I’ve spent some time describing the condition of the church because I think we need to understand the situation. Although Williams describes his account in Dialogue 1 as ‘imaginary,’ what is described there, it seems to me, is based on his own experience and what he witnessed take place, as we have seen, in the previous Revival accounts. That is, the condition of the churches described prior to the visitation of the Spirit of God. Remember, he’s describing ‘The deadness of the land of sleep.’ Here is a part of that description from Dialogue 1:

EUSEBIUS continues….: ‘This is the way the Lord worked in that part of the world. One time, there were just a few of us, professing believers, gathered together, cold and unbelievably dead, in a meeting which we called a special service, so discouraged as to doubt whether we should ever meet again, some who were usually absent from every meeting, some in a deadly apathy, with nothing to say of God nor their own souls, some given over to the world and its cares, some backslidden completely from all means of grace and the ordinances of the gospel, some given over to the flesh and its lusts, as in the days of Noah – seeking a wife, seeking a husband marrying and giving in marriage – and I myself well nigh disheartened and thinking often of coming to live in warmer spiritual climes, and moving my tent from Ur of the Chaldees nearer to the borders of the Promised Land.

But, even though all things were as i have described them – the world, the flesh and Satan victorious – these special services were yet conducted in an incredibly lifeless manner. There was no encouragement for anyone to carry on the work, save only the promise of God, that wherever there were two or three coming together in His name, if their purpose were right, however lifeless their present state, He would come to them and bless them. This alone had made us come together to pray; but our prayers were not much more than groans.’

What we read there should encourage us to not give up meeting. Revival comes not at the behest of man but by Gods gracious intervention – and that, when we are at our lowest ebb. Perhaps that is one of our problems. Our churches are so well organised that if God were absent from our meetings, or our evangelism, would any of us really notice?

‘And she said, “The Philistines are upon you, Samson!” And he awoke from his sleep and said, “I will go out as at other times and shake myself free.” But he did not know that the LORD had left him.’ Judges 16:20

What’s so encouraging is that these believers were in such a low spiritual state. God visits us when He chooses to do so. Not because we’ve reached a point where we might be tempted to say ‘God will bless us now.’

EUSEBIUS continues…. ‘But at last, forced by cowardice, unbelief and the onslaughts of Satan, we resolved to give up our special meeting; and now we were about to offer a final prayer, fully intending never again to meet thus in fellowship. But it is when man reaches the lowest depths of unbelief that God imparts faith, and when man has failed, then God reveals Himself. So here, with us in such dire straits, on the brink of despair, with the door shut on every hope of success, God Himself entered into our midst, and the light of day from on high dawned upon us; for one of the brethren – yes, the most timid of us all, the one who was strongest in his belief that God would never visit us – while in prayer, was stirred in his spirit and laid hold powerfully on heaven, as one who would not let go.

His tongue spoke unusual words, his voice was raised, his spirit was aflame, he pleaded, he cried to God, he struggled, he wrestled in earnest, like Jacob, in the agony of his soul. The fire took hold on others – all were awakened, the coldest to the most heedless took hold and were warmed; the spirit of struggling and wrestling fell on all, we all went with him into the battle, with him we laid hold upon God, His attributes, His Word and His promises, resolving that we would never let go our hold until all our desire should be satisfied.’

The Experience Meeting: An Introduction to the Welsh Societies of the Evangelical Awakening, William Williams, Evangelical Press, 1973. Pages 8 & 9.

We have much to learn. I like the phrase ‘we all went with him into the battle.’ I don’t think that means everyone was praying at the same time or that everyone prayed. But that when one prayed, all prayed (Acts 4:24). Such was their united assault upon the throne of Grace. That’s the sort of unity we want in our prayer meetings.

It’s a fine line, perhaps, between not despising the day of small things (Zech 4:10) and the realisation that without God we are sunk. God is at work. He does not stop working. The Lord Jesus is building His church (Matt 16:18), and He will continue to build it until He returns. He gives us persevering grace. We are not fallen away because He keeps us in the way. For this we are thankful and raise our Ebenezer (1 Sam 7:12). But we pray: “Lord, give us that longing we know we need.” ‘O, that Thou wouldest rend the heavens and come down (Isaiah 64:1)’ and ‘that glory may dwell in our land (Ps 85:9).’

In 2008 I invited Paul Cook to come and lecture to us, giving him the title of ‘Have we lost interest in Revival’ because it seemed to me that that was the case. Paul was more than pleased to come. It’s available online although the last section for some reason didn’t get recorded. I believe this is where we mostly are now, nearly 15 years later. I don’t see too much to convince me otherwise. But I’m happy to be wrong.

‘They prayed and they worked’ is a quote that has rattled around in my mind for many years since I first read it in Revival comes to Wales. Here’s the quote in context.

‘”It is a big thing to have a feeling God would revive His work. Whoever possesses such a feeling will be compelled to do all he can to revive the Lord’s work. By reading the history of the Church we find that the great cause fluctuates up and down through the ages, but that, whenever the Lord drew near to save there was some considerable expectancy amongst the godly for His coming. As well as praying, we should be doing our utmost to revive the work. So did the godly of old: they prayed and they worked.”

It is said of David Morgan “that for ten years before 1858 a petition for the outpouring of the Holy Spirit was never absent from his public prayers.”‘ p. 25.

We must be honest, that does not describe most of our prayer meetings. We are not in the 17th or 18th centuries but the lethargy, or ‘deadness‘, that was experienced back then is not unfamiliar to us.

In 1979 Peter Jeffery (and Bob Cotton) went as he had for many years to the Bala Ministers Conference. When he came back after the Sunday evening service, he called the church to prayer. I’d have to double-check the facts on this, but I believe he called the church (the people) into the schoolroom that adjoins the main church (I’m sure this was described to me this way). After that people began to be saved. One of those was me – and that without any contact with the church, or any church for that matter. Or with other Christians. And I wasn’t alone in that, there were others.

Here’s Peter in his own words:

‘Immediately on my return to Rugby (from the Bala conference), I called a special meeting and put all this to the church. I called the church to prayer for forgiveness and to intercede that the Lord would give us conversions again. I believed the church had become lifeless and that few were being converted because there were few unconverted people at the services. I urged the church to consider Isaiah 62:6-7 ‘You who call on the Lord, give yourselves no rest, and give him no rest …’ in response to this challenge, a letter was sent out to every member by the elders and deacons, and the prayer meetings were stirred to a spirit of prayer for the lost.’

(Chains of Grace, Peter Jeffery, DayOne, p. 45.)

People came. Why? God was at work. There’s no other explanation. It’s interesting to look back. I only realised this recently, but when we (Some of us from completely non church backgrounds) walked into Rugby Evangelical Free Church – AKA Railway Terrace – we didn’t walk into a dead orthodoxy or a lukewarm church. We walked into a church that was alive (in the sense of being refreshed). Even though it wasn’t like the ‘Evangelical Awakening(s)’ in intensity, the church, and especially the ministry, was experiencing ‘times of refreshing from the Lord. (Acts 3:20)’ As I found out it was far from perfect, and like every church (See the NT) it had its own problems, but it was alive. When I was baptised in February 1980 there were 12 of us being baptised, and later that year another 12 (or more – including Trevor and his Dad) were baptised and maybe other baptisms in between. In some ways, it’s what I think of as normal. The friends I have from then (Trevor Thomas & John Lee, Mike, Ruth, Adrian, and others), are still my closest and dearest friends. My own wife Sue was converted at this time, and baptised, as well as my own parents. I will never forget those days. And I don’t believe I’m supposed to forget them. As Trevor said recently, ‘They were special.’

As I say Bob Cotton and the church in Bury St Edmonds experienced a similar move of God. I remember Bob coming to Rugby to tell us about the blessing of God (not recorded because of personal details). He used to stay with my parents when he visited Rugby to preach.

I could have said a great deal more, perhaps another time, but I hope you have found this helpful, encouraging, and maybe even stirring. I know I need to be stirred.

I’m more convinced than ever that Revival (like the New Birth) is a sovereign, and undeserved visitation of God upon a people or even an individual. Oftentimes He comes when we least expect it, and more often than not when we are at our lowest ebb: as in Williams ‘imaginary’ account, when we are ready to give up. And yet, like David Morgan, we ought to be ‘praying and working.’ We need His help and enabling to do, and to persevere, in either. May the Lord visit us – for His Glory.

God at work – and the miracle of means

I’m older now so it’s possible to look back over several years of Christian life – about 42 years so far. More for some of you maybe. Over that time I have met some fascinating people. One of those was Eric Williams. Eric was for many years the general secretary of The Evangelical Tract Society. Eric and his family moved to Rugby and for a few years we used to hold a prayer meeting in their home specifically to pray for the open-air work that we used to do each Saturday. In those meetings from time to time we knew and felt the presence of God. They were special times. It’s about the general work of evangelism that I want to encourage you in this post.

While Eric was secretary he received many many letters from around the world relating how the ETS tracts had been used by God in the salvation of sinners. Eric had, it seemed to us as ‘his boys,’ an endless supply of miraculous stories of how God had saved men and women. He also related to us amazing testimonies of remarkable providences (some might say that’s what a miracle is). The point with all the stories was twofold really. The first and most important was that God doesn’t need us at all. The second and perhaps in some ways even more remarkable is that he chooses to work through sinful people – but not always.

I remember being in a service where Harry Sutton was preaching (One or two of you might remember Harry). He was preaching on Rahab. Then he gave the following illustration that I’ve never forgotten. He related how in a village the local drunkard was making his way home. On his way he happened to lean against a gate and as he leant on it, it collapsed and him with it. Being completely drunk he felt nothing and lay there till morning when he woke up. The difference was, when he woke up he had been converted. The Spirit of God had made that man alive. This happened as far we could tell with no contact with any church. You might think that was just hearsay and a bit of a tall tale. But the punchline, as it were, was that that man was Harry Sutton’s Sunday School teacher. It’s an amazing story that I have never forgotten. The point of the story was to illustrate, not just how Rahad was miraculously saved, but how God does not need us to save people.

Then very briefly, there’s my dear friend John who first told me of the Gospel and of The Lord Jesus. His conversion was without any contact with a church but was through purchasing a secondhand tape recorder that came with some ‘religious’ tapes (the recorder was apparently owned by religious nutcases). John was converted in his flat. He then played them to me. The Lord saved me. This was with no contact with a church. We didn’t know any Christians. For a while we thought we were the only Christians in Rugby – which of course we weren’t. Eventually, by other providences, ‘we found’ a church and sat under the ministry of Peter Jeffery. Again, the point is, God doesn’t need us.

I have absolutely no doubt that should God choose to do so your church would be packed. People would be banging on the door to be let in. And in times of Revival that’s what does happen.

When we don’t see that happening we shouldn’t lose heart. We do lose heart though, of course we do. Maybe this post will help to encourage you. The writing of it has encouraged me.

Although we know God doesn’t need us – at all – nevertheless, his ordinary way of working is through means. That is through people, their circumstances, and in the ‘ordinary’ means of simply living in the world. The miracle of ‘means’ is that we simply do not know what God by his grace might use. Perhaps a ‘chance’ encounter with someone and even though you didn’t get the opportunity to ram the Gospel down their throats, instead you maybe showed them a kindness that later on led to a conversation. I want to keep saying God doesn’t need us because I think deep down we really believe he does. As I write, saying that makes me wonder if that’s why most of the time our evangelism isn’t very fruitful. We’re not getting the message – God doesn’t need us. Perhaps when we get to really believe that God doesn’t need us he might bless the ‘means’ of our evangelism. Just a thought.

Looking beyond the immediate – Jesus rises Victorious!

Jesus Foretells His Death and Resurrection (ESV Heading)

Mat 16:21 From that time Jesus began to show his disciples that he must go to Jerusalem and suffer many things from the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and on the third day be raised.
Mat 16:22 And Peter took him aside and began to rebuke him, saying, “Far be it from you, Lord! This shall never happen to you.”
Mat 16:23 But he turned and said to Peter, “Get behind me, Satan! You are a hindrance to me. For you are not setting your mind on the things of God, but on the things of man.”

I read this passage recently and realised I’d probably have said something similar to Peter. Imagine that! Peter began to rebuke him! Peter actually takes him to one side. It’s extraordinary. He’s ready to jump in, shooting from the hip ‘This’ll never happen’ etc. Think of it in terms of State relationships – the State can’t be allowed to do this…. And in a way Peter is right. The greatest injustice ever in all history takes place there in Jerusalem. The Son of God hangs upon the tree!

Awake, my soul, and rise
amazed, and yonder see
how hangs the mighty Saviour God
upon a cursed tree!
(William Williams, 1717-91)

I find myself being so negative. Why didn’t Peter say: ‘Wow! That’s amazing Lord! You mean, they are going to kill you, but you’re going to rise from the dead and defeat death! Praise God. That’s incredible. We’re with you.’

No, he didn’t say that, and neither would I. Shame on me. He couldn’t see the plan of God. I’m sure there are times to be negative (to appear so anyway), to point them out – but not then. A time and a place. That wasn’t it. And then he got rebuked because he couldn’t see beyond the immediate. More than that, the Lord Jesus tells Peter that he’s a hindrance to him. Wrong views are a hindrance.In our fallen world, of sin, and death, and despair, of a struggling and seemingly weak church, and of negativity, we look up and see Him seated at the right hand of the majesty on high (Heb 8:1). We see a Lamb standing, looking as though it had been slain (Rev 5:6). See, the Lion of the tribe of Judah has conquered (Rev 5:5)! Then, we see the plan of God. 

Then, we have the things of God in mind and not of man.

Staying Safe this Christmas?

Last Friday we watched Mark Drakeford (First Minister in Wales) give his latest briefing. They are weekly now. It’s not in the transcript, that I could see, but he said in the briefing that 50% of the population of Wales would or could ‘fall ill.’ He’s used this phrase before. I’ve no idea what he means by ‘fall ill.’ And 50% of the population is over 1.5 million people. He seems to equate a positive test with being ill regardless of whether there are symptoms or not. In other words, they haven’t ‘fallen ill’ but have tested positive for a variant, as I understand it, that is mild. He also said in his briefing that being ‘double dosed is no good. You must have the booster to be safe.’ There’s a great emphasis from the Government on staying safe.

(There was another update yesterday.) A few days previous to the Friday Briefing he gave an impromptu broadcast in view of the seriousness of the situation and the rapid spread of Omicron. I thought he looked terrified. He should be. Many are terrified. Maybe you should be too. And even if the virus holds no terror for you – read on.

My question is this, and has been for the past 18 months or so: has Christ conquered death or not? (2 Tim 1:10) We’ll be singing this Christmas about how Christ was ‘born that man no more may die’ (Wesley). Was he?

Heb 2:14  ‘Since therefore the children share in flesh and blood, he himself (Jesus) likewise partook of the same things, that through death he (Jesus) might destroy the one who has the power of death, that is, the devil,
Heb 2:15  and deliver all those (that’s us) who through fear of death were subject to lifelong slavery.’

Luk 12:4  ‘“I (Jesus) tell you, my friends, do not fear those who kill the body, and after that have nothing more that they can do.
Luk 12:5  But I (Jesus) will warn you whom to fear: fear him who, after he has killed, has authority to cast into hell. Yes, I (Jesus) tell you, fear him!’

There is no antidote to death except in the Lord Jesus Christ. And specifically through his blood (Eph 1:7). Virus or no virus, vaccination or no vaccination, we are all appointed to die. Nothing will prevent this. The State cannot prevent this. The NHS cannot prevent this, and neither can you. There is no vaccine, test, or isolation, that can prevent death.

Heb 9:27  ‘And just as it is appointed for man to die once, and after that comes judgment,
Heb 9:28  so Christ, having been offered once to bear the sins of many, will appear a second time, not to deal with sin but to save those who are eagerly waiting for him.’

Jesus came into the world to save sinners. This is why he came (1 Tim 1:15). This is why we celebrate Christmas.

Heb 10:7 Then I said, ‘Behold, I have come to do your will, O God, as it is written of me in the scroll of the book.’”

In all the tinsel and presents, and even the virus, don’t lose sight of the coming of the Saviour who is Christ the Lord. He (alone) is the strong tower to which we run, and are safe. (Prov 18:10)

So if you have not trusted in the Lord Jesus Christ you are not safe. The Lord Jesus says:

Mat 11:28  Come to me (Jesus), all who labor and are heavy laden, and I (Jesus) will give you rest.
Mat 11:29  Take my (Jesus) yoke upon you, and learn from me (Jesus), for I (Jesus) am gentle and lowly in heart, and you will find rest for your souls.

The Lord Jesu Christ (alone) has indeed conquered death. Why? Because he has risen from the dead to die no more. This Christmas then, may we all find rest & safety for our souls in Christ alone.

Remembrance Day – Thank you for your service

My Father served in WWII in the Reconnaissance Corps, as a despatch rider, serving in Africa and Italy. He landed at Salerno, and if you know anything about military history, you’ll know that was an horrific conflict – all through Italy. Terrible brutality and suffering. He survived that, but not unscathed. He had bronchial problems all through his life and suffered many years of nightmares.

He never attended any Remembrance Day parades or visited any of the places where he served – many did that, but he didn’t, the memories were just too painful. He did eventually attend the Remembrance Day parade, and I’ll explain how that came about later. He especially, and my mother, as I recall, always watched the Remembrance Day Sunday service on TV. He always had the utmost respect for the Armed Forces.

Dispatch Riders (Dad)

He picked up many habits from that time, I’m sure. One habit he never lost, and it was so ingrained in him, was to tip his shoes or slippers back before putting them on to check for scorpions. He did it every single time. A habit learned in the desert. I don’t recall him ever putting on a pair of shoes or slippers or any footwear without tipping them back first.

The big change came for him when his rebellious son became a Christian. Quite extraordinary. He was clearly not a religious man, even though my parents sent me to Sunday School, as many did back then. As he told my mother ‘he didn’t want his son ramming religion down his throat.’ To which my mum said, ‘You leave him be Maurice, it’s doing him some good.’

Well, his rebellious son did ram it down his throat – and down my mother’s throat as well. I didn’t see it quite like that of course – and I’m glad I didn’t otherwise I might not have said anything at all. Oh to have that zeal!

Remarkably, my parents came to a Christmas Day morning service at Railway Terrace (in Rugby), where I was a member. (Thinking about it, they must have come to my baptism, but my memory isn’t clear of the order. I digress. Perhaps I could check the date?) At this service Clive Goulden was preaching. And my word, he did not pull any punches. His text was ‘And you shall call his name Jesus for he will save his people from their sins.’ (Matthew 1:21) And I clearly remember that! It was a full on, both barrels, no holds barred, Gospel message. You have to understand, my Dad was a plain speaking man. He would tell it straight. A spade was a spade. He respected plain speech.

We went home after the service, and before we ate, I was asked to give thanks. I’m not sure if it was after this service, but they both said ‘what terrible sinners they were.’ My parents were good folks. And they thought so too. So this confession of being sinners, especially from my Dad, was a really big deal!

As things went on my Dad softened towards the things of God. Then one time they were away in Bournemouth on holiday. While they were away, on the Sunday they went to the church where Harry Kilbride was the Pastor / Minister. After the service they both went to see him. Back then after the service the minister would go into the vestry and see anyone that had spiritual concerns or was affected by the ministry. This was Peter Jeffery’s practice as well. I’m not sure how widespread this was but I think a) There seemed to be a need for it. Sometimes there was a queue to see the minister out of concern for their souls. This is unbelievable! A queue. To see the minister. Do we see this now? Not to my knowledge.  And b) this was what Dr Martyn Lloyd-Jones did at Westminster Chapel. Whether it was a case of simply copying MLJ, I don’t know. All I know is people wanted to talk and ministers made themselves available in that way at the time.

At that time then, they went in to see Harry. After chatting for a while about where they were spiritually, and I think each was waiting for the other to become a Christian, but he told them he thought they were already converted. Somewhere along the line both had trusted The Lord Jesus for their Salvation. The evidence of this inward change was beginning to manifest itself. For the first time in a very long time my Dad and I began to have a real relationship.

Back to where we started. My parents started to regularly attend the services, eventually becoming members, and entering fully into the life of the church. It was during this time my Dad struck up a friendship with, I think at the time, a serving soldier. His name was Ian. Ian had been a Christian for many years, coming to faith, I think, through the ministry of SASRA (The Soldiers & Airmen’s Scripture Readers Association). Because of my Dads time in the Army they got on really well with much in common. It was Ian that encouraged my Dad to get his medals mounted – up to that time they simply sat in a box, almost hidden, at the bottom of his wardrobe. (Dad said they gave them out like Smarties – sweets) The other thing Ian did was to encourage him to take part in the Remembrance Day parade. Up till then, as I said, he never went on a single one. I had never been on one either. It was a great moment to watch my Dad march past (with other Veterans) wearing his Reconnaissance Corp Beret, Blazer with Badge, and his recently mounted medals. It was a great sight. I was proud of my Dad.

And that’s why, or partly why, I try to attend some sort of Remembrance Service each year. I believe we should remember and be thankful for our Armed Forces and their sacrifice. But I also attend and remember for my Dad. Dad is in Glory now. But Dad, thanks for your service.

On Supporting Christian Bookshops

On Supporting Christian Bookshops

I’ve come to believe that Christians ought to support their ‘local’ Christian Bookshop. At least more than they do already. I put local there in ‘quotation marks’ because ‘local’ doesn’t necessarily mean where you live anymore (see below).

Bookshops are Closing

Speaking to a rep recently I learnt first-hand that Christian Bookshops are closing all over the place. At least two not so far away have closed. The rep I spoke to used to supply them, but not anymore. When I’ve been serving in the shop, customers here on holiday are thankful we are open. Why? Because ‘the one near us has closed’ they say. It’s not uncommon to hear that. Local Christian bookshops are closing!

As a Christian book buyer, I have used Amazon, like many of you, quite extensively. I’ve bought a lot of books from them. Two things have changed my thinking on this.

The Amazon Factor

The first was when they (Amazon) banned Ryan T Andersons book (When Harry became Sally) from their website. In fact, it looks like just about everyone of the main booksellers (e.g. Smiths & Waterstones) in the UK have followed their lead. To my knowledge, you still can’t buy it anywhere over here. However, I ‘read’ it on Audio, but on principle I’d buy a copy if I could get hold of one – from a Christian bookstore. I admit, some books you just can’t find anywhere else but on Amazon so I’m not advocating a ban. They have huge buying power and independent bookstores find it difficult to compete. Actually, it’s virtually impossible to compete on price – though on rare occasions it can happen. Things have changed, or become clearer. Despite the convenience, and they are convenient, Amazon are not our (Christians) friends. It’s that simple.

The Community Factor

The second reason was an article I read some months ago about local bookshops. This was in the US, but the principle was the same. The principle being that as a local business they supported the local community. The article demonstrated how they slotted into the life of wherever it is they are situated. Like everything in the US, as my Dad used to say, is BIG. So I think a small bookshop over here cannot compare to small over there. Context is everything I guess. The principle holds though. Small over here does more often than not mean small.

Providential Bookshops

The Bookshop in Rugby

In addition to that, was my own experience that hadn’t quite registered until very recently. When I first became a Christian through the witness of a friend one of the things I realised was that we needed to get Bibles and find a church. As strange as it may seem, we thought we were the only Christians in the town (we can discuss that another time). Here’s the thing, somehow or other, I knew there was a Christian bookshop in the town. So with my raggy old jeans and unkempt beard I made my way to the Christian bookshop in Castle Street, Rugby. (As far as I know it’s still open.) I went in, held my hands up in the air and proclaimed, ‘I’m Saved!’ Wally then proceeded to tell me of a church where I would get good teaching. And he sold me a Bible. That’s why (and how) I went to Railway Terrace (Evangelical Free Church) where Peter Jeffery was the Pastor. Going there was absolutely foundational to my Christian life. I can’t stress that enough! Isn’t the providence of God amazing!

Then Sue, my first wife, through the witness of a friend, in great distress went into her local Christian bookshop in Leamington (now closed). There she met David Arnold, a lifelong friendship emerged through this – especially with their daughter Ruth. David was an elder in the church in Rugby. Funny that isn’t it. Sue started attending the church in Rugby with David & Fi and their family. We then met at the church and were married, and the rest as they say is history. Isn’t the providence of God a wonderful thing!

The Conclusion of the Matter

The point being, as I said to someone recently, is that bookshops are ‘more than the sum of their parts.’ Here in Aberystwyth, we get people come in that just want to talk. It isn’t always convenient, true, but they come in. If Christian bookshops aren’t there no one can come into them. We are just a tiny tiny part in the scheme of things. But in the providence of God, we are a part. Like most Christian bookshops, we aren’t just a shop – it’s a ministry.

Here’s my conclusion then, and something for us all to consider: If you, we, don’t buy our Christian books from local Christian bookshops they will close. It’s that simple.