Skip to main content

Guess What Has Not Changed?

Written by Rick Shrader

Guess What Has Not Changed?

by Rick Shrader

Perhaps the most difficult problem in dealing with a postmodern culture is defining our terms.  I doubt that a generation has ever been so flexible with language as this one.  One hundred years ago W.H. Griffith Thomas, combating German Rationalism, said, “We cannot in any degree be sure of the thought unless we can be sure of the word.”1 Unfortunately that battle for context is all but lost on this generation.  Consider the familiar proverb, “A rolling stone gathers no moss.”  It doesn’t occur to us today that such a truth is not meant to be a good thing, but rather a warning!  Notice G.K. Chesterton’s comment from a past generation:

In the heated idleness of youth we were all rather inclined to quarrel with the implication of that proverb which says that a rolling stone gathers no moss.  We were inclined to ask, ‘Who wants to gather moss, except silly old ladies?’  But for all that we begin to perceive that the proverb is right.  The rolling stone rolls echoing from rock to rock; but the rolling stone is dead.  The moss is silent because the moss is alive.2

What had always been accepted as a bad thing: to be a rolling stone with continual motion but no purpose or life, has now become a good thing:  to be continually moving so as not to become stale and grow roots.  But as Chesterton noted, what some consider to be alive (because it is always moving) is only a misconception of what is really dead, and what some consider to be dead (because it is stationary) is actually the thing that is alive.

The Scripture always confronts the world’s thinking in similar ways.  What the world considers weakness, God says is strength; what the world believes is the way up is actually the way down and the way down is actually the way up; what the world concludes as folly is actually the wisdom and power of God.  We always have to be on our guard not to read a popular concept into a text and thereby come up with an almost opposite meaning.

We have read and studied the book of First John all of our lives in church.  We do it because it is short and to the point and speaks to a number of important issues such as love and assurance.  But the longer we read it or even translate it, the deeper it becomes and we wonder if we will ever get to the bottom of it (which, of course, we never will).  Chapter two gives the reader four tests for the sincerity of his faith.  At first these seem simple enough, but the more we read and reread them the more they take our thinking in the opposite direction from the thinking of the world.

The worldling would rather be a spiritual rolling stone, landing nowhere  in particular than a stone with Biblical moss on it, planted in a solid place, amid the raging stream of culture (so he thinks).  What he considers to be moveable and flexible God says is permanent, and what he considers to be accepted and factual God says will change with the power of His Word and Spirit.  What the worldling believes is new and fresh is actually as old as mankind and void of any spiritual life.

The Postmodern Mindset is Old

John’s first test of spiritual life and vitality is whether we keep God’s commandments (1 John 2:3-8).  But whoso keepeth his word, in him verily is the love of God perfected: hereby know we that we are in him.  He that saith he abideth in him ought himself also so to walk, even as he walked (vs 5-6).  Though love is one of the commandments, it is not all of the commandments of God.  The Living Word has come to us in the form of the Written Word and the believer that claims to be walking in the Light will be seeking to live as He lived and also to be abiding by every precept that he finds in the Scripture.

The new mindset toward the commandments of God is as old as John and probably as old as Adam.  The DaVinci Code/Jesus Seminar mentality of our day or the Rationalism of a hundred years ago, that God’s commands are not definite nor perceptible, leaves one in the old world and bars him from discovering new life in Christ.

Many Evangelicals (and some Fundamentalists) are flirting with the lure of being free from all of God’s commands.  They do this in many ways including creating unscriptural dichotomies between belief and practice; by claiming individual vision from God leading to para-biblical ministry; even exalting technological capabilities over textual priorities.

Douglas Groothuis insightfully observed, “Because postmodernists decry the tyranny of the author over the reader, they rejoice in these technologies.”3 He also quoted Benjamin Woolley saying, “Artificial reality is the authentic postmodern condition, and virtual reality its definitive technological expression….The artificial is the authentic.”4 This is to say that the old attempt (by Gnostics of John’s day) to separate the commandments of God from the life of the believer is nothing new nor refreshing.

The New Generation is Old

John’s second test of spiritual life and vitality is whether we love the brethren (1 John 2:9-14).  He that saith he is in the light and hateth his brother, is in darkness even until now.  He that loveth his brother abideth in the light and there is none occasion of stumbling in him (vs 9-10).  We have let a new generation totally steal John’s words from their meaning.  Today we are told that the ones remaining in church, the ones retaining their convictions, the ones going on doing what they have always done by God’s Word, are the ones not loving the brethren!  And why?  Because they, supposedly, are not accepting the change that the new generation is demanding.  But John obviously means (throughout this book and others) the opposite! Those who do not like what godly Christians do in church (and argue for a less demanding path) are the ones who do not love the “brethren.”

A few years ago (October 2001) I wrote an article titled, “Why Those Old People Won’t Change.”   I made the point that the older folks are rightly offended by a younger generation accusing them of not changing.  The fact is that the older generation DID change when they came to Christ and they have remained changed ever since.  The irony is that the new generation, which is demanding change, has never changed from their worldly ways and has no intention of changing even within the church.  The old truth is that such a new generation does not love the “brethren” (i.e. what Christians really are) and recoils at their very life of faith!

John’s example of this truth is in chapter three with Abel and Cain (3:10-16).  Cain is the one who did not love Abel and in fact killed him because his own works were evil and his brother’s righteous (12).  So John adds, Marvel not, my brethren, if the world hate you (13).  Today we still have the Cains not loving the Abels because the Abels have lived and done righteously, and the Cains have no intention of making the same sacrifice.

Isn’t it interesting that we start out instructing “children” (2:13-14) to be like Christ, pointing them to a life of maturity and wisdom, praying that godliness will grow with the years, but at the same time we dishonor the “fathers” (2:13-14) in the church when they arrive at that very goal!  One church father wrote, “This, then, is undoubtedly the genuine, legitimate rule of progress, the established and most beautiful order of growth: mature age always develops a person’s part and forms that which the wise Creator already framed in the infant.”5 How tragic then is the old truth that the new generation’s attitude is unloving toward “the brethren.”

The Contemporary Technique is Old

John’s third test of spiritual life and vitality is whether we do not love the world (1 John 2:15-17).  Love not the world, neither the things in the world.  If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him.  For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world (15-16).  The black and white nature of John’s statement is shocking to our generation.  We have let the abnormal Christian life become the normal.  Love of the world has become an accepted spiritual plateau, perhaps even an accepted theological position!  By a verbal sleight of hand we have replaced the Biblical word “world” with the non-Biblical word “culture” and have even (against history) made culture morally neutral.

The new technique is to draw people into church with “culture” and to embrace it ourselves as an artist embraces his work.  We hear, for example, things like, “there is no such thing as Christian music” and “God made all music” as if man has never put his sinful hand to anything and “made” it.  The fact is God doesn’t make art, man makes art!  And it is an expression of our natures which we rightfully call “culture.”  It has always been a godly man’s duty to change and improve the culture of the world, not embrace it.  Donald Whitney wrote, “The world finds the church and the things of God the most boring things imaginable.  At best it finds them much less meaningful than other things.  And the people of the world can’t understand why we don’t get as excited as they do about the things that turn them on.”6

The Ecumenical Spirit is Old

John’s fourth test of spiritual life and vitality is whether we do not love the antichrists (1 John 2:18-27). Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist will come, even now are there many antichrists (18).  Anything that neutralizes our doctrine is aiding and abetting the flow of the age into the final antichristian religion and person.  Doctrine is being down-played in favor of cooperation.  Separation has become a nadir of the faith rather than a badge of courage.  Denominating your faith honestly with an honest title has become hateful and prideful.

Pergamos and Thyatira have become the models for Christian ministry, active and busy in works while allowing things which God hates.  These things still bring success with the world and in our pragmatic day we have learned to ignore the leaven and enjoy the growth.  In chapter four John demands that we “try the spirits” (4:1) not “try them out.”  He said of the false messengers, They are of the world, therefore speak they of the world, and the world heareth them.  We are of God: he that heareth God heareth us; he that is not of God heareth not us (4:5-6).

And So . . . .

Guess what has not changed?  The world has not changed!  Whether outside the church or inside, it will not and cannot live by the Spirit.  Even carnal believers will continue to walk after the flesh, desiring only milk but carrying the baggage of the old life like strong men!

Guess what has changed?  The church of Jesus Christ has changed!  She is as a bride adorned for her Husband, as a chaste virgin to Christ, waiting to be removed from her present surroundings and transported in the skies to her Father’s house, where she will reflect the glory of her Lord forever!  She is not of them that turn back!

Notes:
1. W.H. Griffith Thomas, “Old Testament Criticism and New Testament Christianity” R.A. Torrey, A.C. Dixon & others, eds., The Fundamentals (Grand Rapids:  Baker Books) 144.
2. G.K. Chesterton, Heretics (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 2000) 23.
3. Douglas Groothuis, The Soul In Cyberspace (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1997) 69.
4. Quoted by Groothuis, 27.
5. Vincent of Lerins, “Spiritual Maturity,” Sharrer & Vanker, eds. Day by Day With the Early Church Fathers (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 1999) 243.
6. Donald Whitney, How Can I Be Sure I’m A Christian? (Colorado Springs: NavPress, 1994) 56.

 

Click here for more “Senior Saints & Sensibility” articles.
Articles
Leave a Comment
Read More

Local Church Methodology

Written by Rick Shrader

Local Church Methodology

by Rick Shrader

Every time I read advocates of contemporary worship, I can see why many have said things like, “Every time a new book is published, read an old one.”1 The old truth that you are what you read becomes true in those who spend their time reading about the contemporary church scene.  You can only digest so much love of the world, disdain of the brethren, thrill of the crowd and loathing of anonymity until you start to become what you read.  An older writer well described the phenomenon,

A spirit of zeal is therefore incompatible with a frequent intercourse with the world; you will find less to reprove in proportion as you familiarize yourselves with what is reprehensible; attention to religious books will become a disagreeable and wearisome occupation to you; you will soon lose a taste for them; and in place of serious study and such as is adapted to your calling you will substitute vain and frivolous reading, if not such as is indecent and dangerous, because this will make you appear better in the view of men of the world.2

Now such an introduction to this article may receive the accusation of begging the question, since I have assumed from the beginning that the contemporary church scene is worldly.  I can’t speak for everyone who is attempting to read in this area, nor for everyone who is already adopting those practices, but I can speak for what I have read and observed.  It seems obvious that those who are leading thinkers and writers in the contemporary church scene are intent on shutting up the conservative churches and relegating them to the silent backwaters of church history.  Only some will actually say so, but it is difficult to reach a different conclusion in most of their books.

I have read The Church on the Other Side, by Brian McLaren, a leader in the “Emergent” movement.  This is a reprint of his book, Reinventing Your Church.  McLaren’s position is that we have crossed over into a postmodern world and we had better like it because there’s no turning back, not even for the church and in fact, most churches will not survive.  “Either they are creating time warps where the past will be preserved so reactionary folk can flock there for a safe—temporary—old familiar haven; or they are among the learners at the top who are surfing change into the new world and transitioning old churches of yesterday into the new churches of the other side.”3

This “transitioning” is sometimes overt and sometimes covert.  I have seen and read email chat rooms for youth pastors of fundamental Baptist churches who were discussing how to bring about this change in their church without the pastor or people realizing it.  It would start in the youth department and then gradually work its way through the whole church.  As often as not, the pastor was not of a mind to resist the change.  (At some time our churches will have to face the biblical teaching of respecting our elders and listening to their wisdom, if it is not already too late.)

Other contemporaries are less caustic and propose a blending of traditional and contemporary.  Robert Webber, professor of theology at Wheaton College and President of The Institute for Worship Studies, has written Planning Blended Worship in which he attempts to show that traditional, contemporary and blended churches all practice the same essential thing.  But by “traditional” he means liturgical and this may be any mainline denominational service.  He is content to retain words such as “sacrament,” “Eucharist,” “confirmation,” “genuflecting,” and even the use of the “Book of Common Prayer.”  One wonders if Bunyan’s imprisonment for refusing to use the Book of Common Prayer is now seen as unnecessary fundamental fanaticism!4 Interestingly, Webber approvingly sees the contemporary church as a newer form of the older liturgy, the screens and bands being a newer form of icons and priests.  I recommend to the reader my article from January and February, 2003 titled, “The Generic Church:  The New Formalism” (2 parts).  In it I described the contemporary church as a new kind of tradition (it certainly has no room for diversity!) that will eventually lead back to the old denominational Traditionalism with its liturgies, icons as well as music.  Of music Webber says, “Music provides the emotional substance of worship.  Since worship is now understood as a rehearsal of our relationship with God, music is seen as the wheels that move the gathering of the people into the presence of God” [or the “mysterium tremendum” what he calls the “journey into the dazzling light of the transcendent otherness.”5]  Notwithstanding the strange existential language, this type of liturgy (old or new) will eventually dismiss personal faith and replace it with conformity of physical posture and mental assent.

My purpose for this article is to give the conservative, traditional (in the “normal” sense) church some hope that remaining a simple, reverent, body of believers that meets together to do the “normal” things believers have always done is not only good but biblically sane!  As Bunyan said in his defense, “The prayers in the Common Prayer-Book were such as was made by other men, and not by the motions of the Holy Ghost, with our hearts; and as I said, the apostle saith, he will pray with the Spirit, and with the understanding; not with the Spirit and the Common Prayer-Book.”6 Or as secular postmodern analysts have said, “Texts produced in the postmodern temper display a tendency to efface the boundaries between the past and the present in a way that situates the subject (and the viewer and the reader as well) in a perpetual present that is flooded with signifiers from the past.  This is postmodern nostalgia, which shows no respect for the integrity of the past.”7 Neither will the new traditionalism nor the old satisfy those who worship in Spirit and truth.

Here are a few of the biblical methodologies with which believers have always been satisfied.

The Scriptures

The Word of God is a living Word that does supernatural things within the believer, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart (Heb. 4:12).  The first believers in Jerusalem were sitting and listening before the day of Pentecost.  In Troas, the believers sat all night listening to Paul explain the Scriptures.  Bruce Shelley describes our forerunners as, “Little groups of Anabaptist believers gathered about their Bibles.  They discovered a different world in the pages of the New Testament.”8 The Bible must remain the center of our worship, preferably in our hands, being led through its chapters verse by verse.

The Holy Spirit

Though there is much talk about the Holy Spirit in worship today, we manipulate and limit Him to the kind of work we want Him to do.  When we slight the Scriptures, we slight the work of the Author of Scripture.  R.A. Torrey said, “The Holy Spirit works His prayers in us through the Word, and neglect of the Word makes praying in the Holy Spirit an impossibility.”9 It is hard enough to be quiet and wait on our divine Guest to do His work within us without offending Him by our commotion, but doves like stillness and we are commanded to let Him abide… and remain in us (1 John 2:24).

Preaching

We cannot forget that preaching is the divine methodology for communicating God’s Word.  J.I. Packer said, “I have nothing against books, films, tapes, and study groups in their place, but the place where God sets the preacher is not their place.”10 J.S. Whale wrote, “Instead of putting off our shoes from our feet because the place we stand is holy ground, we are taking nice photographs of the burning bush from suitable angles:  we are chatting about theories of Atonement with our feet on the mantelpiece, instead of kneeling down before the wounds of Christ.”11 Shame on us Baptists for letting Anglicans remind us of these things!

The Ordinances

We believe that baptism and the Lord’s supper are memorials and not sacraments.  They remain the best testimonies of a simple form of worship.  In the days of the Reformation, Baptists and other independents were called Sacramentschwärmer, a derogatory term which meant they were  “sacramentarian” and not “sacramentalist.”12 They kept the ordinances as a simple object lesson of their doctrine, and not a participatory means to the grace of God, and refused to participate in the idolatry of bowing to a morsel of bread.    It was sad to see Catholics and Evangelicals, and perhaps some Fundamentalists, take communion together at the Atlanta Promise Keepers rally in 1996, a sober reminder that familiarity breeds consent to things we would otherwise hold in contempt.

Prayer

All of our churches are guilty of slighting the prayer services.  Leonard Ravenhill wrote, “Let twenty percent of the choir members fail to turn up for rehearsal and the choir master is offended.  Let twenty percent of the church members turn up for a prayer meeting, and the pastor is elated.”13 But there’s something those few know, however, that the Sunday-only crowd doesn’t, and that’s the sweet fellowship of believers listening to one another familiarly talking to God.  I spent ten weeks last summer at The Baptist Church in North Berwick, Scotland (Dan McCaskill, missionary).  Hearing George and Frank (two great Scottish saints) pray during those services in the old way, unhurried, with much Scripture and reverent tones, I often wished I could transport them back to our American-Lite services just to lead in prayer!

Music

If there are two things from which I’ve always recoiled, they are tinseled prayers and manipulated emotional singing.  The stereotyped contemporary music follows the old traditionalism of music manipulating people into the presence of God.  This is a marked difference in thinking from the simple, biblically-based, thankful singing that recognizes we’re always in God’s presence.  As I have written before, we do not come together to worship, we are worshipers who come together.  What we do, we do because it is an expression of what we always are, not what we will become for sixty minutes.  That is why emotional manipulation in contemporary singing has become so tiring, boring and unfulfilling.  As Spurgeon said,  “The kind of religion that makes itself to order by the almanac and turns out its emotions like bricks from a machine, weeping on Good Friday and rejoicing two days afterwards, measuring its motions by the moon, is too artificial to be worthy of my imitation.”14 By this same means contemporary music has become what it set out to remedy—lively singing without life like the church at Sardis.  Our singing should be spirit and it should be life.

And so . . . .

Conservative, traditional churches do not need to hang their heads because fame and fortune have passed them by.  Perhaps we should rejoice!  We should keep doing the things we read about in the Scripture, letting that move us to true ministry motivated by the Spirit and the Word.  Do we persuade men, or God? Or do I please men? (Gal. 1:10).  Let’s keep pleasing God and persuading men, and not let those get turned around.

Notes:
1. Quoted by Benjamin Schwartz, “New & Noteworthy,” The Atlantic Monthly, March, 2003, p. 95.
2. Jean Baptiste Massillon, “On the Spirit of the Ministry,” Orations From Homer to Mckinley, vol. 4 , Mayo Hazeltine, ed. (New York: Collier, 1902) 1720.
3. Brian McLaren, The Church on the Other Side (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2000) 15.
4. Read Bunyan’s autobiography, Grace Abounding to the Chief of Sinners (Belfast: Ambassador, nd) and especially the latter portions where he is discussing with his prosecutors whether he will use the Prayer Book or not.
5. Robert Webber, Planning Blended Worship (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1998) 51.
6. Grace Abounding, 200.
7. Norman Denzin in Postmodernism & Social Inquiry, Dickens, David R. & Fontana, Andrea eds. (New York: Guilford Press, 1994) 182.
8. Bruce Shelley, Church History in Plain Language (Dallas: Word, 1995) 248.
9. R.A. Torrey, How To Pray (Chicago:  Moody Press, nd) 69.
10. Quoted by Donald Whitney, Spiritual Disciplines Within the Church (Chicago:  Moody Press, 1996) 64.
11. J.S. Whale, Christian Doctrine (Cambridge: University Press, 1963) 152.
12. Leonard Verduin, The Reformers and Their Stepchildren (Grand Rapids:  Eerdmans, 1964) chapter 4.
13. Leonard Ravenhill, Revival God’s Way: A Message for the Church (Minneapolis:  Bethany House, 1983) 24.
14. Charles H. Spurgeon, My Conversion (New Kensington, PA: Whitaker House, 1996) 77.
 

 

Click here for more “Senior Saints & Sensibility” articles.
Articles
Leave a Comment
Read More

You Shall Be Witnesses Unto Me

Written by Rick Shrader

You Shall Be Witnesses Unto Me

by Rick Shrader

No more daunting task could have been given the church than to evangelize the whole world.  Surely for such a job God would have chosen angels to speak to the world as they first spoke the good news to shepherds and caused such urgency on their part.  Or perhaps a multiplication of apostles and prophets throughout the gospel era with their miraculous power and prophetic voices would persuade far more than average Christians.  Even letting the rocks cry out would draw more interest than most preachers!  But His ways are not our ways and whether it seems like an impossible task or not, it is plain that God has commissioned His own people to reach the people of the world.

Our Lord did promise us power to accomplish our monumental task by the witness of His resurrection and the possession of the Holy Spirit.  We see that power on display in the book of Acts as the church spread the gospel around the world during that generation.  G. Campbell Morgan wrote, “The essential message of the Gospel is the declaration that through the Cross and Resurrection of Christ a new dynamic is at the disposal of men, in the power of which they may be victorious, trampling under their feet the lust of which hitherto they have been the slaves.”1 With this power at our disposal we can be successful in the stewardship to which Christ has called us.

Opposite errors in evangelistic fervor have been made on both sides of the theological ledger throughout the church’s history.  There have always been those such as John Ryland who told Carey, “When God pleases to convert the heathen, he will do it without your aid or mine.”2 There have also always been those who simply manipulate sinners into verbal professions of faith that do not last beyond the back door of the church.  Between these two extremes lies a biblical evangelism that, as Ignatius said, prays as though everything depended on God and works as though everything depended on you.3

There are at least four reasons why power for evangelism comes from God’s part and also from our own submission to His plan.

1. God’s Part:

Calvary – The most powerful message

Paul explained to the Corinthians that The preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved, it is the power of God (1 Cor. 1:18).  Only Christianity has a message of redemption.  This plan that upholds God’s righteousness while at the same time condemning man for his sin and yet providing for his salvation will make the hearer fall on his face and report that God is in you of a truth (1 Cor. 14:25).  John Bunyan, in the account of his conversion records,

I remember that one day, as I was traveling into the country, and musing on the wickedness and blasphemy of my heart, and considering the enmity that was in me to God, that scripture came into my mind, Having made peace through the blood of his cross. Col. i. 20.  By which I was made to see, both again and again, that God and my soul were friends by His blood; yea, I saw that the justice of God, and my sinful soul could embrace and kiss each other, through His blood.  This was a good day to me; I hope I shall never forget it.4

The Holy Spirit – The most powerful Being

Paul’s gospel came to the Thessalonians not in word only, but in power, and in the Holy Ghost, and in much assurance (1 Thes. 1:5).  To the Corinthians he wrote, And my speech and my preaching was not with enticing words of man’s wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power: that your faith should not stand in the wisdom of men but in the power of God (1 Cor. 2:4-5.  Of preaching with Holy Spirit power, Martyn Lloyd-Jones wrote, “There is a cord of three strands which should not be broken.  Without the endeavor of the preacher, the reaction of the congregation, and the enabling of the Holy Spirit, whatever might result, preaching would not.”5 But if we would preach the Word as we ought, the Spirit would be freer to use us mightily in our evangelism.

The Word of God – The most powerful book

The word of God is quick (living) and powerful and sharper than any two-edged sword (Heb. 4:12).  Writing in The Fundamentals, L.W. Munhall wrote, “The Bible assumes to be from God in that it meets man face to face with drawn sword and says: ‘Thou shalt!’ and ‘Thou shalt not!’  and demands immediate, unconditional and irreversible surrender to the authority of heaven, and submission to all the laws and will of God, as made known in its pages.”6 God said through Isaiah that, as the rain falls to the earth and does not return to the sky until it waters the ground and brings forth food for the eater, So shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it (Isa. 55:11).

The Love of God – The most powerful emotion

Herein is love, not that we loved God, but that he loved us, and sent his Son to be the propitiation for our sins (1 John 4:10).  Though in a real way the sinner does not want an unconditional love because he would rather think there is a virtuous reason to be loved, God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us . . . . for if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son; much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life (Rom. 5:8, 10).  When the sinner is about to be crushed under the weight of his own sinfulness, the love of God comes streaming in as a powerful morning light in a dark room.  “A human heart cannot produce love, but it can experience it.  To have a heart that feels the compassion of God is to drink of the wine of heaven.”7

2. Our Part:

The power to be witnesses comes from God but needs earthen vessels from which to be broken and spilled out that this power may truly be of Him and not of ourselves.  Therefore, we are at least four kinds of tools in God’s hands.

A Fool – The most self-effacing messenger

We preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness (1 Cor. 1:23).  Paul scolded the Corinthians for their refusal to be seen as foolish by the world, We are fools for Christ’s sake, but ye are wise in Christ; we are weak, but ye are strong; ye are honorable, but we are despised (1 Cor. 4:10).  The power of God is lost when His messengers protect their image at all costs.  We will either be willing to be shamed by the world or we will become ashamed before the world.  E. Glenn Wagner, calling for servant-leadership in our churches writes, “We must come to see that part of a pastor’s glory is being willing to accept and even to embrace the foolishness, disgrace, and shame of the cross.”8

An Ambassador – The most dependent being

Now then we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God did beseech you by us; we pray you in Christ’s stead, be ye reconciled to God (2 Cor. 5:20).  Just as an ambassador is representing the homeland to a foreign country, the soul-winner is representing his homeland of heaven to this foreign land of earth.  He is here in Christ’s stead.  Peter declared to the Jerusalem council that God at the first did visit the Gentiles to take out of them a people for his name (Acts 15:14).  God desires to go visiting in our bodies!  G. Campbell Morgan wrote, “The Holy Spirit is waiting in the far-distant places of the earth for the voice of [some] anointed man to preach, in order that through that instrumentality He may carry on His work of convicting of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment.”9 We are truly a habitation of God through the Spirit (Eph. 2:22), a “habitat for divinity!”

A Herald – The most restricted reader

A preacher is a herald (a khrux, 2 Tim. 1:11) who is sent out by a King to proclaim His message.  He has no right to change or negotiate with the hearers, but must proclaim the King’s message just as He gave it.  So are we heralds of God’s Word and must preach it (khrrussw, 2 Tim. 4:2) in the way it is given so that we preserve the message (khrugma, 2 Tim. 4:17) of salvation exactly.  Oswald Chambers put it this way:

The Word of God is never without power, and as a servant of God you have nothing whatever to do with whether people dislike and reject the Word of God or purr over it.  So you preach it no matter what they think of you — that is a matter of absolute indifference; sooner or later the effect of that word will be manifested.  The great snare is to seek acceptance with the people we talk to, to give people only what they want; we have no business to wish to be acceptable to the people we teach.10

A Servant – The most demanding emotion

The love of God, the most powerful emotion, is only properly used by His servants who willingly display a selfless and giving spirit.  Our generation has taken the Lord’s words, whosoever will be the greatest . . . ., shall be servant of all (Mark 10:43-44), as a way to greatness rather than an invitation to servanthood, the greatest of occupations.  We should be as Paul and Bunyan and see ourselves as the chiefest of sinners rather than chief executive officers!  Of such an occupation the world knows nothing.  Luther said “A Christian man is a free lord over all things and subject to nobody.  A Christian man is a ministering servant in all things and subject to everybody.”11 In this day of success and achievement, the Lord chooses servants to entrust with His gospel.

And So . . . .

May the Lord help us to be instruments in His hand for the salvation of a lost world.  Moody, a man who knew something of the power of God, after searching for joy in ministry, wrote, “But I found, afterward, namely, the joy of the salvation of others.  Oh, the privilege, the blessed privilege, to be used of God to win a soul to Christ, and to see a man or woman being led out of bondage by some act of ours toward them.  To think that God should condescend to allow us to be coworkers with Him.  It is the highest honor we can wear.”12

Notes:

1. G. Campbell Morgan, Understanding the Holy Spirit (USA: AMG Publishers, 1995) 134.

2. Thomas Armitage, The History of the Baptists, vol. II (Watertown: Maranatha Baptist Press, 1976) 581.

3. Bruce Shelley, Church History In Plain Language (Dallas: Word, 1995) 277.

4. John Bunyan, Grace Abounding to the Chief of Sinners (Belfast: Ambassador Productions, nd) 69.

5. Tony Sargent, The Sacred Anointing: The Preaching of Dr. Martyn Lloyd-Jones (Wheaton: Crossway Books, 1994) 175.

6. L.W. Munhall, “Inspiration,” The Fundamentals, vol II, orig. printing 1917 (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2000) 55.

7. L.S. Chafer, He That Is Spiritual (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1972) 48.

8. E. Glenn Wagner, Escape From Church, Inc. (Grand Rapids:  Zondervan, 1999) 185.

9. Morgan, 109.

10. Oswald Chambers, “The Moral Foundations of Life,” Biblical Ethics (Grand Rapids: Discovery House, 1998) 290.

11. Quoted by R.C.H. Lenski, Interpretation of First Corinthians (Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1963) 374.

12. D.L. Moody, Spiritual Power (Chicago: Moody Press, 1997) 105.

 

Click here for more “Senior Saints & Sensibility” articles.
Articles
Leave a Comment
Read More

Tell It To The Church

Written by Rick Shrader

Tell It To The Church

by Rick Shrader

When the Lord Jesus Christ announced, I will build my church (Matt. 16:18), it was established as an absolute monarchy with Himself as the sovereign Head.  As long as this supreme Monarch was physically present with the disciples, their commission and instructions were held in abeyance, waiting for the enabling Power for operation.  With the coming of the Holy Spirit, however, and the ascension of Christ to the heavenly throne, the church could begin operating by the Spirit-filled direction of its entire membership.  Augustus Strong says of this change, “While Christ is sole king, therefore, the government of the church, so far as regards the interpretation and execution of his will by the body, is an absolute democracy, in which the whole body of members is entrusted with the duty and responsibility of carrying out the laws of Christ as expressed in his word.”1

The typical forms of church government

Almost all forms of church government could be placed under one of four categories.  1) Papal.  This is the Roman form of the church which is ruled by the Pope who proposes to have apostolic authority successively passed to him from Christ.  2) Prelatical.  This is a human monarchy run by the prelates or bishops and has been mostly known as Episcopal.  3) Presbyterian.  This is the rule of the church by the presbyters or elders in a human oligarchy.  4) Congregational.  This is the rule of the church by the church in a democratic fashion.  Though there have been combinations, variations and abuses of each of these forms of church government, the congregational has been the form taken by the great majority of Baptist churches throughout their history.

Because Baptists have believed that each member has received the Holy Spirit through a personal salvation experience, and has voluntarily been baptized and placed himself under the care of the church, his actions are the actions of a free moral agent before God.  He is a believer-priest who can offer spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God.  Richard Clearwaters wrote, “The only Biblical System is the Local Church as a pure democracy; self-owned, sovereign, and autonomous.  The local church owned itself and controlled itself and its affairs by the democracy of its regenerated members who would be received into membership, after regeneration, by baptism.”2

Baptist history and confessions of faith

Baptist confessions are records of what churches have believed, not what they have to believe.  They do, however, give us a history of beliefs of brethren who are like-minded.  From a cursory reading of a book on Baptist confessions such as William Lumpkin’s, one will see the congregational principle throughout.  Ridemann’s Rechenschaft (1540):  “In its nature the church is spiritual, but concretely it is known as the pure sacred community.”3 The London Confession (1644): “Every church has power given them from Christ for their better well-being to choose to themselves meet persons in the office ….”4 The Second London Confession (1677): “To each of these churches thus gathered, according to his mind, declared in his word, he hath given all that power and authority, which is any way needful, for their carrying on that order in worship, and discipline which he hath instituted.”5 The New Hampshire Confession (1833): “We believe that a visible Church of Christ is a congregation of baptized believers, associated by covenant in the faith and fellowship of the Gospel; observing the ordinances of Christ; governed by his laws; and exercising the gifts, rights, and privileges invested in them by his word.”6

In summarizing this history, Edward Hiscox, whose work has become a standard of Baptist churches for over one hundred years, writes, “This statement is broad and comprehensive, and needs not defense, but explanation only.  That Independency is the true form of Church government, as opposed to Prelacy and Presbyterianism, will not now be argued, but is assumed, as accepted by all Baptists, taught in the New Testament, verified by history, and justified by the genius of the gospel itself.”7

The doctrine of Baptist churches commends it

The form of church government must finally be settled by the New Testament.  A common interpretive rule for establishing church doctrine and practice is whether the doctrine or practice in question is taught by Christ in the Gospels, then practiced by the church in the Acts, and finally reinforced by the writers of the Epistles.  The congregational form of local church government passes this test on every account.

Baptism.  Christ gave His commission to the church, Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost (Matt. 28:19).  Immediately on the Day of Pentecost we find the church receiving members and witnessing baptisms, Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls (Acts 2:41).  Paul asked the Corinthian believers, Is Christ divided: was Paul crucified for you? Or were ye baptized in the name of Paul? (1 Cor. 1:13).  Baptism is by the authority of Christ’s command for the benefit of the whole church.

The Lord’s Supper.  Jesus instituted His supper with the whole band of disciples:  For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins (Matt. 26:28).  At Pentecost, They continued steadfastly in the apostles’ doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers (Acts 2:42).  Paul questioned the Corinthians about their motives in the supper, When ye come together therefore into one place, this is not to eat the Lord’s supper (1 Cor. 11:20).

Church Officers.  Though there were no pastors and deacons while Christ was still with the disciples, the Lord prepared the disciples to feed His sheep (John 21); to not be rulers over His flock (Mark 10:42-45); to not be above their Master (Matt. 10:24); to serve others with humility (John 13:3-10).  In Acts we find Judas’ replacement being selected by the whole group (Acts 1) and the church being instructed to, Look ye out among you seven men of honest report …. whom we may appoint over this business …. and the saying pleased the whole multitude (Acts 6:3-5).  Paul’s instruction to Timothy and Titus regarding the selection of pastors and deacons was given for the churches to fulfill (1 Tim. 3, Titus 1).

Prayer.  When Jesus taught the disciples to pray He said, After this manner therefore pray ye: Our Father which art in heaven (Matt. 6:9).  Prayer is for any who know God as Father.  In Acts, when Peter was miraculously released from prison, he came to the house of Mary the mother of John, whose surname was Mark; where many were gathered together praying (Acts 12:12).  Praying is the corporate business of the church.  Paul wrote, I will therefore that men pray everywhere [or “in every place”] (1 Tim. 2:8).  Baptists have never had priests who pray for them, but rather any member may lead them in prayer because prayer is a congregational activity.

Emery Bancroft concludes about the corporate nature of these activities, “The principle [is] that definite observances are more properly performed by regularly organized and accredited bodies than by unorganized and unaccredited individuals.”8

The business of Baptist churches incorporates it

Paul R. Jackson writes concerning the business of the local churches,

Here the authority remains with the local church.  Individuals or committees may be designated to perform certain responsibilities, but they are directly answerable to the church and to the Lord, Who is the Head of the church.  No other center of power or authority is recognized.  Baptists have always believed that this is the New Testament pattern of church government.9

Discipline.  Perhaps no other business of the church displays the action of the whole church like church discipline.  This was the first instruction Jesus gave to the church while He was still on this earth.  Tell it unto the church: but if he neglect to hear the church let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican (Matt. 18:17).  The Holy Spirit was the first to enact church discipline in Acts, which was incumbent upon the entire congregation (Acts 5).  No clearer passage of congregational activity exists than when Paul instructed the Corinthians, …when ye are gathered together, and my spirit, with the power of our Lord Jesus Christ, to deliver such an one unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh …. do not ye judge them that are within? …. Therefore put away from among yourselves that wicked person (1 Cor. 5:4-5, 12-13).

Missions and Evangelism.  Like the subject of prayer, the evangelization of the world is the responsibility of every believer.  Jesus commissioned the entire church to go into all the world and evangelize (Matt. 28:18-20; Acts 1:8).  When the missionaries were departing the church at Antioch, the whole church sent them away [lit. “released them”] being sent forth by the Holy Ghost (Acts 13:3-4).  Paul told the Philippians that they were of one mind striving together for the faith of the gospel (Phil. 1:27).  It was the Thessalonian church that sounded out the word of the Lord not only in Macedonia and Achaia, but also in every place your faith to God-ward is spread abroad (1 Thes. 1:8).

Instruction.  Jesus commanded the believers to make disciples and then baptize and teach them (Matt. 28:19-20).  After three thousand were converted at Pentecost, they continued steadfastly in the apostles’ doctrine (Acts 2:42).  It was by two laymen that the preacher Apollos was taught the way of God more perfectly (Acts 18:26).  Paul instructed the Galatians that when one brother is overtaken in a fault (Gal. 6:1), he (the one “being taught,” passive voice) should communicate unto him that teacheth (the one who “is teaching,” active voice) in all good things (vs 6).  All believers are to be taught and to teach.

Business.  We know that Jesus was pleased to have Judas act as the treasurer of the disciples, though He knew he was a thief (John 12:6).  Jesus taught ethical principles for church business that would be acted upon when He was gone.  In Acts the entire church was involved in selecting Judas’ replacement (Acts 1:21, 26); the whole church chose the first deacons (6:2-6); and the church bodies always heard the missionary reports (14:27, 18:22, 21:22).  When Paul was preparing to take the offering to Jerusalem we find that helpers were chosen [keirotonew,, “to raise the hand”] of the churches to travel with us with this grace (2 Cor. 8:19).  The erring brother at Corinth was held accountable by the many [pleionwn, the “majority”] (2 Cor. 2:6).

And so . . . . Before his retirement, theology professor Warren Vanhetloo wrote an article describing over twenty things churches do when they gather together.  His concluding remarks are appropriate for our topic.

It seems encouragingly evident from this survey of congregational activities in the early New Testament churches (1) that there is nothing in Scripture which we do not customarily do today and (2) that there is nothing which we customarily do today which was not characteristic of the founding churches as God has given us record of them.10

Notes:
1. Augustus Strong, Systematic Theology (Old Tappan:  Fleming H. Revell, 1970) 903.
2. Richard Clearwaters, The Local church of the New Testament (Chicago:  CBA, 1954) 38.
3. By William Lumpkin, Baptist Confessions of Faith (Valley Forge: Judson Press, 1980) 40.
4. Lumpkin, 166.
5. Lumpkin, 287.
6. Lumpkin, 365.
7. Edward Hiscox, The New Directory for Baptist Churches (Philadelphia: Judson Press, 1946) 145.
8. Emery Bancroft, Christian Theology (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1968) 275.
9. Paul R. Jackson, The Doctrine and Administration of the Church (Schaumburg: RBP, 1997) 34-35.
10. Warren Vanhetloo, “Church Gatherings,” Calvary Baptist Theological Seminary Update (Spring, 1989).

 

Click here for more “Senior Saints & Sensibility” articles.
Articles
Leave a Comment
Read More

Elders Worthy of Double Honor

Written by Rick Shrader

Elders Worthy of Double Honor

by Rick Shrader

Let the elders that rule well be counted worthy of double honor,
especially they who labour in the word and doctrine (1 Tim. 5:17).

 

Baptists have never thought they were the only believers in the world or the only ones with Bibles.  All believers have the obligation to apply the Scriptures to every part of life, including church life.  The great Southern Baptist Greek scholar, A.T. Robertson, said however, “Give a man an open Bible, an open mind, a conscience in good working order, and he will have a hard time to keep from being a Baptist.”1 Baptists have always had a definite opinion about those elders who are worthy of such double honor.

Baptists have generally taken Paul’s instruction to mean that the one office of “pastor” is also called “elder” and that any pastor/elder ought to be a good teacher as well as ruler, and that some pastors/elders do a better job laboring in the Word and proclaiming it in doctrine than others.  There have been, since the days of John Calvin (and especially among our Reformed friends), others who have taken Paul’s words to mean that every local church should have two “kinds” of pastors/elders; a less honorable kind to rule (“ruling elders”) and another kind worthy of double honor (“teaching elders”).  While neither Baptists (holding to one “kind” of pastoral office) nor some others (holding to two “kinds” of pastoral office) make this difference a matter of salvation or heresy, both strongly defend their view as the Biblical structure for the church.

The Two Views Delineated

Calvin wrote of this verse,

We may learn from this, that there were at that time two kinds of elders; for all were not ordained to teach.  The words plainly mean, that there were some who “ruled well” and honourably, but who did not hold the office of teacher.  And, indeed, there were chosen from among the people men of worth and of good character, who, united with the pastors in a common council and authority, administered the discipline of the Church, and were a kind of censors for the correction of morals. . . . To return to Paul, he enjoins that support shall be provided chiefly for pastors, who are employed in teaching.2

Augustus Strong, the most prominent Baptist theologian of the last two centuries, in describing the Baptist view says,

The only plausible objection to the identity of the presbyter and the bishop [being the same] is that first suggested by Calvin, on the ground of 1 Tim. 5:17.  But this text only shows that the one office of presbyter or bishop involved two kinds of labor, and that certain presbyters or bishops were more successful in one kind than in the other.  That gifts of teaching and ruling belonged to the same individual, is clear from Acts 20:28-31; Eph. 4:11; Heb. 13:7; 1 Tim. 3:2-episkopon didaktikon.3

Rodney Decker, following Strong, and writing in the Grace Theological Journal said,

The terms “teaching elder” and “ruling elder” do not appear historically until Calvin.  1 Tim. 5:17 refers to elders who are ruling well—not to a class of “ruling elders.”  The noun is oi presbuteroi, modified by the participle, proestwtes, which is further qualified by the adjective kalws.  It is thus the “well-ruling elders,” not the “good, ruling-elders.”4

Which Is The Novel View?

It would be fair to point out that even Baptists, at times, have had ruling elders in addition to teaching elders.  However, this is rare and is usually seen as ruling elders (plural) and a teaching elder i.e. pastor (singular).  For example, Peter Masters (whom I greatly admire and whose services I attend when in London), now pastor of Spurgeon’s Metropolitan (Baptist) Tabernacle in London is a Baptist but also Reformed in theology.  He defends the separate office of ruling elder while maintaining a higher, and singular office of preaching elder or “pastor” (which he is). He objects to the arrangement of the equality of elders as novel, but maintains three offices in the church:  pastor, elders, deacons, as the historical position.5

Most Baptists would maintain, however, that the New Testament teaches the local church has only two biblical offices:  pastor and deacons, an “elder” simply being another name for the pastor.  I have already quoted Strong and Rodney Decker commenting that the third office of elder, separate from the pastor or deacons, began with Calvin.   Strong also has an interesting quote from Henry M. Dexter in a writing on Congregationalism in which Dexter says,

Calvin was a natural aristocrat, not a man of the people like Luther.  Taken out of his own family to be educated in a family of the nobility, he received an early bent toward exclusiveness.  He believed in authority and loved to exercise it.  He could easily have been a despot.  He assumed all citizens to be Christians until proof to the contrary.  He resolved church discipline into police control.  He confessed that the eldership was an expedient to which he was driven by circumstances, though after creating it he naturally enough endeavored to procure Scriptural proof in its favor.6

Now, whether one agrees with Dexter, or even has a dislike for his tone, it is worthy to note that it was the elder rule system that was seen as novel, not the two office system of the Baptists.  The greatest Baptist thinker of the eighteenth century, John Gill, wrote in his commentary on 1 Tim. 5:17,

There are no other that rule in churches, but such who also speak to them the word of God; wherefore by him that rules, and the labourer in word and doctrine; are not meant two distinct orders, but different persons of the same order; some of these ruling well, but do not take so much pains in the ministry of the word; whilst others of them both rule well and labour in the word, and who are to be reckoned deserving of the honour hereafter mentioned.7

In addition, Dr. Gill wrote in his great work on theology, “These pastors, teachers, bishops, and elders, are called rulers, guides, and governors.  A pastor, or shepherd, is the governor and guide of his flock; a teacher, and a ruling elder are the same, 1 Tim. v. 17.”8 Such a voice from the eighteenth century can hardly be said to be “novel” to our time in history.  Alexander Maclaren, who pastored the Union Baptist chapel in Manchester, England for 45 years (1858-1903), wrote concerning our text, “Of course a comparison with verse 17 shows that elder and bishop were two designations for one officer.”9 Edward Hiscox, writing a standard Baptist church manual in 1894 confesses that the pastor and elder are two names for the same office.10 An older Southern Baptist publication designed for use by their churches in 1907 delineates the same.11

Where Do Baptists Stand Today?

For the last fifty years, fundamental Baptists in similar practicing fellowships and associations have also described their method of church polity as the two office system of pastor and deacons.  Elders have always been seen as a different title for the office of pastor, not a third officer of the church.  Richard V. Clearwaters, in 1954, in a book that became the standard for the Minnesota Baptist Association, wrote, “By comparing Scripture references it seems obvious that both elder and bishop (1 Tim. 3:1, 2) can designate the same office (Titus 1:5, 7); sometimes referring to the officer or man at other times the office or its function (Acts 20:28, 29).”12 Paul Jackson, in his book that has been a standard for the General Association of Regular Baptist Churches, wrote, “Very honest differences of opinion may exist unless it is understood that the terms pastor, elder and bishop refer to the same office.”13 Mike Randall, writing in the Baptist Bible Tribune (of the Baptist Bible Fellowship) in 1987, wrote, “It seems unmistakable that the elders of the New Testament were all of them teachers and preachers . . . . New Testament elders, then, were ministers in the churches who exercised leadership as overseers and served their flocks as shepherd or pastor.”14

Though there will be exceptions to this view, they are just that, exceptions!  The twentieth century could hardly show anything other than the two office arrangement in conservative or fundamental Baptist groups.

“Especially” in  1 Timothy 5:17

If it is true that the apostle Paul was merely commending those elders that do a good job of laboring in Word and doctrine, not delineating two different kinds of elders, we would expect to find this expression reinforced in other uses in his writings.  My proposition is that in every instance where we find the expression “especially” (always malista), it carries the same meaning or picture of one among equals who stands out in some particular thing.  The word is used twelve times in the New Testament: three times by Luke (Acts 20:38; 25:26; 26:3, though quoting Paul in one); one time by Peter (2 Pet. 2:10); and every other time by Paul (Gal. 6:10; Phil. 4:22; 1 Tim. 4:10; 5:8; 5:17; 2 Tim. 4:13; Tit. 1:10; Phile. 16).

The word “especially” or “specially” (“chiefly” in Phil. 4:22) always gives a unique picture of a circle within a circle.  The larger circle A, contains a large group while the smaller circle B (placed within A) contains a smaller but special part of A.  If I said, “I like to watch high school basketball, but especially when my own sons play,” I would be drawing a large circle (watching high school basketball) but also drawing a smaller circle which points out a special part of the same thing (my own sons playing high school basketball).  We might say, all B is A, but not all of A is B.  In contrast, the elder-rule system would give a picture of two distinct circles of ruling elders and teaching elders.  Due to space, I cannot illustrate all of Paul’s usages, but a few will suffice to see the consistency in the way “especially” is used throughout.

Gal. 6:10.  As we have therefore opportunity, let us do good unto all men, especially unto them who are of the household of faith.  Here the large circle is all men.  The smaller circle within the larger circle is especially .  . . . the household of faith.  Believers are still men, but they have taken advantage of a special opportunity which is available to all men.

2 Tim. 4:13.  The cloak that I left at Troas with Carpus, when thou comest, bring with thee, and the books, but especially the parchments.  Of all the books Paul had (the larger circle), the Scriptures on parchment (the smaller circle within the larger) were of “special” desire to him.  The Bible is still a book, but is a “special” book.

Phile. 16.  Not now as a servant, but above a servant, a brother beloved, specially to me, but how much more unto thee.  Paul counted all converts dear (the large circle), but the ones he had led to the Lord such as Onesimus (the smaller circle) were “specially” dear to him.  Our own sons in the faith are still converts, but they are “special” to us.

I believe we would find that the same pattern repeats itself in every usage of the word malista (specially, especially, chiefly).  Some elder-rule brethren may object that they see all elders as ruling elders and from among those there are a few teaching elders, thus showing the same pattern.  But my observation has been that when you view their system from the top view it looks the same, but when you view it from the side, it is a pyramid with two distinct levels or “kinds” of elders.  The Baptist view would be more like a slice out of an old tree:  viewed from the top you see the circles and circles within circles, and when viewed from the side all the circles are still level.

Who are the elders?

All pastors are elders and all elders are pastors.  Every man who desires the office of a bishop desires a good work (1 Tim. 3:1) and that work is both ruling (lit. “to do the thinking”)  and preaching.  Those elders who labor diligently in the Word and in the proclamation of its doctrines are worthy of a double amount of honor from the fortunate people who hear them.

Notes:
1. In his book, A.T. Robertson: A Biography (New York: MacMillan, 1943) 181, Everett Gill quotes Robertson from his writing, “How To Make Baptists.”
2. John Calvin, Calvin’s Commentaries, vol. XXI (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1981) 138-139.
3. Augustus Strong, Systematic Theology (Old Tappan:  Fleming H. Revell, 1970) 915.
4. Rodney J. Decker, “Polity and the Elder Issue,” Grace Theological Journal 9.2 (1988) 275.
5. Peter Masters, “Confusion Over Eldership,”  The Sword & Trowel.  Note: I apologize that my photographed copy did not have the date on it.
6. Strong, 915.
7. John Gill, Dr. Gill’s Commentary, vol. 6 (London: William Hill Collingridge, 1853) 614.
8. John Gill, Body Of Divinity (Atlanta: Turner Lassetter, 1965) 864.
9. Alexander Maclaren, Expositions Of Holy Scripture vol. 8 (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdman’s, 1959) 191.
10. Edward T. Hiscox, The New Directory For Baptist Churches (Philadelphia: Judson Press, 1946) 90-91.
11. Montgomery Essig & others, The Churchmember’s Guide and Complete Church Manual (Nashville: The Southwestern Co., 1949) 68.
12. Richard Clearwaters, The Local Church of the New Testament (Chicago: CBA, 1954) 32.
13. Paul R. Jackson, The Doctrine and Administration of the Church (Schaumburg: RBP, 1968) 45.
14. Mike Randall, “A Defense of Baptist Elders” Baptist Bible Tribune, April 24, 1987, p. 12.

 

Click here for more “Senior Saints & Sensibility” articles.
Articles
Leave a Comment
Read More

Repeat His Mercies In Your Song — Again!

Written by Rick Shrader

Repeat His Mercies In Your Song — Again!

by Rick Shrader

Give to our God immortal praise;

Mercy and truth are all His ways;

Wonders of grace to God belong,

Repeat His mercies in your song.

Isaac Watts

My purpose for this outline years ago was to offer a conservative vote for conservative church music.  Just recently I was criticized anonymously by email for being critical of any worship and especially for speaking at all about music.  As I noted in the first edition of this article, those who can give the technical ins and outs of music composition seldom approve of anyone else critiquing their subject matter.  The same thing happens, of course, in any field where there are experts who have given their lives to that particular field of study.  Theologians’ jealousy of theology is probably the most notable.

The fact of the matter is, however, that God’s people who have the Holy Spirit in their heart and the Word of God in their hand have a right (even an obligation) to speak out about worship, especially when they have ministered long enough to see much harm done to individuals and churches over the years.  After all, it was the lowly herdsman Amos, when prophesying Woe to them that are at ease in Zion (6:1), and Ye that put far away the evil day (6:3), and that lie upon beds of ivory . . . And eat the lambs out of the flock (6:4), who also included, That chant to the sound of the viol, and invent to themselves instruments of music like David; that drink wine in bowls, and anoint themselves with the chief ointments; but they are not grieved for the affliction of Joseph (6:5-6)!  So I suppose if a herdsman can critique the great musicians of Israel, so can pastors critique the musical leaders of our own day.

But my evaluation is mostly of a positive sort.  I have always wanted to extol the virtues of the church music that has been tried and tested over the centuries and let today’s poor offerings pale in comparison.  I have never been against wading pools, I simply choose not to dwell in them very long, especially when deeper water is always available.  I have not advocated banning new music or discouraging the writing of new music or light choruses.  I have been in services where the weightier and richer songs are nicely highlighted by a few lines from newer songs.  But what is better is better.  And the better should never be discarded for the lesser even when many protest.

Here are a few of the observations I made almost ten years ago concerning the great hymns of the church.  My comments are expanded.

This is music obviously produced by the Church, not by the world.

It is better that our music have the distinct sound of the church and not of the world.  It was telling that Joshua, when he heard the sounds of Israel playing around the golden calf, could not distinguish what kind of sound he was hearing.  There is a noise of war in the camp (Exod 32:17) he said.  But Moses was more perceptive and said, It is not the voice of them that shout for mastery, neither is it the voice of them that cry for being overcome; but the noise of them that sing do I hear.  And it came to pass, as soon as he came nigh unto the camp, that he saw the calf, and the dancing; and Moses’ anger waxed hot, and he cast the tables out of his hands, and brake them beneath the mount (Exod 32:18-19).

It is not better but worse that we cannot distinguish the sounds in our churches from the sounds of the world.  It is not better but worse that our leaders are not bothered with the sound of the world in our churches.  Let the world hear us sing Immortal, Invisible, Come We That Love The Lord or Come Thou Almighty King.

They should also know the distinct sound of Zion’s songs.

The language and style of these songs brings you to their level, and seldom the reverse.

Why would a child of God desire to return to the customs and styles of his former life?  Peter admonished the new believer, that he no longer should live the rest of his time in the flesh to the lusts of men, but to the will of God.  For the time past of our life may suffice us to have wrought the will of the Gentiles, when we walked in lasciviousness, lusts, excess of wine, revelings, banquetings, and abominable idolatries (1 Pet 4:3-4).

The great hymns of the faith lift us toward God with a “new song” in our heart.  What worldling could sing Wesley’s Carol without being brought under the searchlight of God’s Holy Spirit?:

Christ by highest heav’n adored,

Christ the everlasting Lord:

Late in time behold Him come,

Offspring of a virgin’s womb.

Veiled in flesh the God-head see,

Hail th’ incarnate Deity!

Pleased as man with men to dwell,

Jesus, our Emmanuel.

Well did the Psalmist observe, many shall see it, and fear, and shall trust in the LORD (Psa 40:3).

These great songs teach us the vocabulary and doctrines of Scripture that will only be comfortable to those who know the Lord.

Someday God’s people will have to get over their embarrassment about their faith before the unbelieving world!  It seems today the worse sin is to cause the lost world to think some negative thought about us.  It’s like hearing conservative political pundits “apologize for living” to an indignant liberal!  The sin in such shame for the church is too obvious to warrant space for verses.

Most of the older hymns assume the worshiper knows his Bible and preemptively brings him along those lofty paths.

‘Worthy the Lamb that died,’ they cried,

‘To be exalted thus!’

‘Worthy the Lamb,’ our lips reply,

‘For He was slain for us!’

(Isaac Watts, Come Let Us Join)

The maintenance of these songs will take diligence by the church, as any other good thing will do.  My generation has opted out of this discipline as they have with most other disciplines.  Better to define this deficiency down than to pay such a high price for high maintenance.  But Paul admonished, Take heed unto thyself, and unto the doctrine; continue in them: for in doing this thou shalt both save thyself and them that hear thee (1 Tim 4:16).

These songs are full of respectful observations and lessons about nature, while prodding and pleading with us to shun the culture.

These songs obviously come from a generation that was closer and more observant of God’s creation than we tend to be today.  If one took time to simply read the first fifty pages of the average hymn book he would be confronted again and again with God’s wonder in creation.

I sing the mighty power of God

That made the mountains rise,

That spread the flowing seas abroad

and filled the lofty skies.

I sing the wisdom that ordained

The sun to rule the day;

The moon shines full at His command,

And all the stars obey.

(Isaac Watts, I Sing The Mighty Power of God)

Unlike worldly thinking, nature is treated as inviolable but culture is what we are commissioned to change!

Jesus calls us from the worship

Of the vain world’s golden store,

From each idol that would keep us,

Saying, ‘Christian, love Me more.’

(C. Alexander, Jesus Calls Us)

These songs place much emphasis on God as the subject of worship and less emphasis on ourselves as the worshipers.

I have a choice to either worship God or talk about worshiping God.  Worship, like prayer, easily drifts into self contemplation rather than divine contemplation.  Therefore, until we escape this frame, worship will involve a struggle between flesh and spirit and as long as we seek the easiest route to worship, the flesh will win out.  Paul warned that in the last days, self-centered worshipers would have a form of godliness (2 Tim 3:5) led by seducing (lit. impersonating) spirits (1 Tim 4:1).

We are far better off to keep our songs in the second and third person:

All praise to Him who reigns above,

than to constantly watch ourselves as we do the worship in the first person:

I bow down, and I worship you Lord.

The key here is to already be worshipers who come together, not those who come together to worship.  The first is for His praise, the latter is too often for our own therapy.

And so . . .

Praise ye the Lord, O let all that is in me adore Him!

All that hath life and breath come now with praises before Him!

Let the A-men sound from His people again: Gladly for aye we adore Him!

 

Click here for more “Senior Saints & Sensibility” articles.
Articles
Leave a Comment
Read More

The Right Time, The Right Place, The Rig...

Written by Rick Shrader

The Right Time, The Right Place, The Right Savior

by Rick Shrader

One of the most concise and powerful explanations of the Christmas history is found in Paul’s letter to the Galatians:

But when the fullness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law, to redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons (Gal. 4:4).

The Chronology:  The fullness of the time.

God knew what He was doing when He sent His Son into the world two thousand years ago!  The middle east has always been the cross-roads of the world, but it was also the cross-roads of the time of the world.  The Lord’s command to take the gospel into all the world is good for every generation, but none has done it so quickly and efficiently as that first Christian generation.  There is no doubt that the human gifts of apostles and prophets helped in the preaching of the message, but the gospel also went around the world best in its purest verbal (and therefore human) form.  The message is meant to be incarnated, not only by the Son of God Himself, but also by the messengers.  Face-to-face, mouth-to-mouth, person-to-person is the way God first sent the message, and it is the best way for effective witness.

The Genealogy:  Made of a woman.

Many of the ancient writers wished that God had said, “made of a virgin.”  But He did!  Not only in the prophets (Isa. 7:14) but also here.  He did not say, “made of a man and a woman,” or simply, “made into a human,” but specifically “made of a woman,” that is, made of a woman only.  What is that but virgin born?  And what is that but sinless in nature?

Though Mary was “highly favored” and “blessed among women” (Lk. 1:28), she also was compelled to confess, “My soul doth magnify the Lord, and my spirit hath rejoiced in God my Savior” (Lk. 1:46-47).  Christ was the Son of God and the Son of Man, fully God and fully man.

The Nomology:  Made under the law.

Jesus was an Old Testament Saint!  But only in time.  He was Lord of heaven and of earth, and of the law also.  Mankind was held captive under the law, in bondage under its elements until the time appointed by the Father.  But Christ came into the time of law to fulfill its every demand and to condemn, not man, but the law itself.  It had no right to judge the Perfect One but it did!  Christ bore the penalty of all mankind in the only dolorous passion possible for our redemption,  being put to death in the flesh, but justified in the Spirit.  In this Christ judged the law for its mistake, nailing it to His cross and eradicating its ordinances that were against each of us.  Therefore, we are no more servants but sons.

The Soteriology:  To redeem them that were under the law.

The true message of Christmas is redemption!  We could not be redeemed with silver or gold or with any works of our own hands, but only with the precious blood of Christ, the Lamb slain before the foundation of the world!  When it comes to being justified before God, the law was powerless, not because it was less than holy, but because man was fallen and unable to keeps its demands.  The law did its job, “For by the law is the knowledge of sin” (Rom. 3:20).

Jesus Christ paid the price for our sins.  “Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us” (Gal. 3:13).  The only way out from under the curse of the law is the admission of our own helplessness and the acceptance of His worthiness:  “That the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe” (Gal. 3:22).

Guilty, vile and helpless we, spotless Lamb of God was He;
full atonement! can it be?  Hallelujah, what a Savior!

 

Click here for more “Senior Saints & Sensibility” articles.
Articles
Leave a Comment
Read More

The Greatest Obstacle to Bible Knowledge

Written by Rick Shrader

The Greatest Obstacle to Bible Knowledge

by Rick Shrader

The greatest obstacle to Bible knowledge is not culture, nor education, nor any other thing lacking in our lives, but rather it is something existing in our lives that should not be there.  Paul said of the Corinthian church, That in every thing ye are enriched by him, in all utterance, and in all knowledge (1 Cor. 1:5).  He even admitted that ye have ten thousand instructors in Christ (1 Cor. 4:15).  Yet the apostle wrote, And I, brethren, could not speak unto you as unto spiritual, but as unto carnal, even as unto babes in Christ (1 Cor. 3:1).  The greatest obstacle to Bible knowledge never has been a lack of Bible study.  It is and always has been carnality!

Ambrose said, “All are not fitted to teach; would that all were apt to learn.”1 Paul wrote, I have fed you with milk, and not with meat: for hitherto ye were not able to bear it, neither yet now are ye able.  For ye are yet carnal (1 Cor. 2:2-3).  Even if Paul taught with the meat of the Word they could not digest it because of their carnality.  No doubt, in many classrooms across our country today there is much information being given while no learning is taking place, not because the hearers are unintelligent, but because they are carnal.

When I was in High School in the 1960s, chaos was quickly taking over the classrooms, the halls, and the campuses all across America.  I remember the math teacher at my High School offering a suggestion.  He said that they should close the school and go home.  Then when just one student says, “I want to know something,” they should open the doors and begin again!  I’ve wondered if the same wouldn’t work for many churches and Christian education institutions since it is often obvious that learning is not taking place because of carnality.  Instead, however, we continue to load these babes down with Bible studies and discipleship courses.  After all, if they are on milk, don’t they need meat?  That was not Paul’s solution.  Until the carnality problem was solved, they would only choke on the meat, or become puffed up in their knowledge.  Rather, their repentance at Paul’s rebuke brought a thorough cleansing that prepared them for learning (see 2 Cor. 7:8-13).  The answer was in confession first and instruction second.  The need for repentance was manifested in several ways.  Here are a few.

A wrong desire to be great.  Their carnality had caused them to follow men rather than Christ.  Therefore let no man glory in men (1 Cor. 3:21).  Apollos must have been revered in this way by many and he is mentioned several times in this regard.  And these things, brethren, I have in a figure transferred to myself and to Apollos for your sakes; that ye might learn in us not to think of men above that which is written, that no one of you be puffed up for one against another (1 Cor. 4:6).  It is too common (and should not be the desire of the teacher) for the student to idolize the teacher.  Even if the student is sitting under a great man, he needs to realize that greatness didn’t come by a desire to be great.  Tozer said, “The great saints of past eras did not know they were great saints.”2 Rather, great men shunned the carnality of the world and sought the things of God.  Spurgeon wrote, “Many through wishing to be great have failed to be good; they were not content to adorn the lowly stations which the Lord appointed them, and so they have rushed at grandeur and power, and found destruction where they looked for honour . . . A man does well to know his own size.”3

A wrong desire to be worldly.  A major section on worldliness in the epistle ends with that beautiful passage about our body being the temple of the Holy Spirit (1 Cor. 6:19-20).  Paul even reminds them, Know ye not that your bodies are the members of Christ? (1 Cor. 6:15).  We all take up space and this body is the only space we get on this earth!  It is important to God and it ought to be important to us!  Paul wrote, God hath both raised up the Lord, and will also raise up us by his own power (1 Cor. 6:14).  Carnality has to be dealt with in the body and it cannot be shared with demons.  The real “legalists” were right there in Corinth and they complained numerous times, All things are lawful unto me (1 Cor. 6:12).  They wanted spirituality without restraints on their “space.”  J.I. Packer wrote, “The idea that freedom is what you have when you have thrown off all that repressed or constrains you is a false trail which leads nowhere save to puzzlement and disillusioned bitterness.”4 Who wouldn’t be bitter drinking milk all his life?

A wrong desire to be comfortable.  Carnality often manifests itself in our lives in our desire to avoid all conflicts and those things that cause us inconvenience and stress.  The Corinthians would not deal with fornicators, nor with factious persons, nor with fleshly false teachers.  Sadly, the apostle lamented, For ye suffer fools gladly, seeing ye yourselves are wise.  For ye suffer, if a man bring you into bondage, if a man devour you, if a man take of you, if a man exalt himself, if a man smite you on the face (2 Cor. 11:19-20).  In fact, they boasted that the reason they hadn’t dealt with the sin is that they were so broad-minded!  But Paul wrote, Your glorying is not good.  Know ye not that a little leaven leaveneth the whole lump? (1 Cor. 5:6).  A church’s refusal to deal with problems, whether they be doctrinal, worldly or disciplinary is a sign of carnality.  It is much like a lazy parent’s refusal to discipline unruly children.  Spurgeon wrote, “When fathers are tongue-tied religiously with their offspring, need they wonder if their children’s hearts remain sin-tied?”5

Though the list of carnal things could be extended, the Scripture also presents many proper attitudes and actions that bring confession of our carnality and prepare us to learn from God’s Word.  Here are three.

A proper desire to please God.  In his second epistle, Peter is very specific that virtue must follow faith but must come before knowledge.  And beside this, giving all diligence, add to your faith virtue; and to virtue knowledge (2 Pet. 1:5).  It is helpful to see that virtue comes from a word meaning “to please.”  That is, when you fall in love with the Lord (“faith” is just that!) you have a great desire to please Him.  Perhaps you will or won’t, but you have the desire.  Knowledge is the proper direction for that desire, and if followed will direct the desire to its proper end.  Paul complimented the Thessalonian believers that as ye have received of us how ye ought to walk and please God, so ye would abound more and more (1 Thes. 4:1).  The information they had received from Paul fulfilled their desire to please God.  Desire (“virtue”) to please God is a spiritual prerequisite for Bible knowledge.

The meat of the Word can only be chewed, enjoyed and digested by those who truly desire to find out what pleases God.  Without that desire, Bible knowledge is just knowledge for the sake of knowledge, just Biblical information.  In a world where information is valued above wisdom and comes easily from a vast number of sources, it is easy to substitute mere Biblical information for true knowledge and wisdom.  T.S. Eliot asked, “Where is the life we have lost in the living?  Where is the wisdom we have lost in knowledge?  Where is the knowledge we have lost in information?”6 We might ask, “Where is the virtue we have lost in all this Bible study?

A proper desire to read God’s Word.  Peter also reminded his readers that even babes in Christ should have a desire for the milk of God’s Word.  Wherefore laying aside all malice, and all guile, and hypocrisies, and envies, and all evil speakings, as newborn babes, desire the sincere milk of the word, that ye may grow thereby: if so be ye have tasted that the Lord is gracious (1 Pet. 2:1-3).  It is easy to misread that verse by ignoring the necessary comma, thinking it is a description of what babes do.  Rather, the word “desire” is a command that if followed will cause a person to grow “thereby.”  If a person has come into the grace of God, and has a desire to please Him, he will have a natural (i.e. spiritual) desire for the Word of God.  The desire can even be commanded.

But this “desire” in verse two follows the “laying aside” of the carnality in verse one!  And what is this “laying aside” but repentance and confession of that sin?  The new believer has a new nature reinforced by the Holy Spirit that now lives within.  Carnality brings conviction from the Spirit Who creates a desire for better things.  Paul could tell the Thessalonians that God hath not called us unto uncleanness, but unto holiness.  He therefore that despiseth, despiseth not man, but God, who hath also given unto us his Holy Spirit . . . For ye yourselves are taught of God (1 Thes. 4:7-9).  How can a believer despise holiness when he possesses a Holy Spirit Who places within him a desire for the things of God?

A proper desire to follow God’s leaders.  A spiritual babe has a spiritual father in the evangelistic sense.  He has a close and abiding connection with the one who led him to Christ.  This is a wonderful connection that ought to lead the new believer out of the world and into a walk with God.  Paul told the Corinthians, I write not these things to shame you, but as my beloved sons I warn you.  For though ye have ten thousand instructors in Christ, yet have ye not many fathers: for in Christ Jesus I have begotten you through the gospel.  Wherefore I beseech you, be ye followers of me (1 Cor. 4:14-16).  Instructors may “shame” us into learning but our spiritual father can “warn” us.

The Scriptures have no hesitation admonishing us to follow those who are following Christ (e.g. Heb. 13:7, 17, 24).  In Corinth, there were those who assumed this spiritual leadership over others but who corrupted the Word of God (1 Cor. 2:17), and who adulterated the Word of God (4:2), and who gloried in appearance and not in heart (5:12).  No wonder these believers were spiritual babes!  How could they be fed when there were no examples to follow?  Os Guinness is right when he writes, “The Puritans lived as if they had swallowed gyroscopes; we modern Christians live as if we have swallowed Gallop polls.”7

So let us be busy about the study of God’s Word.  But let us also be busy about our own confession of sin.

Notes:
1. St. Ambrose, “Funeral Oration For His Brother,” Orations From Homer To Mckinley, M. Hazeltine, ed. (ew York: P.F. Collier & Son, 1902) 1158.
2. A.W. Tozer, Whatever Happened To Worship? (Camp Hill:  Christian Pub., 1985) 11.
3. C. H. Spurgeon, The Treasury of David, vol I (Grand Rapids:  Baker Books, 1978) 87.
4. J.I. Packer, Truth and Power (Wheaton: Harold Shaw, 1996) 22.
5. Spurgeon, Treasury of David, vol II, 333.
6. By D. Groothuis, The Soul in Cyberspace (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1997) 86.
7. Os Guinness, The Call (USA: W Pub, 1998) 162.

 

Click here for more “Senior Saints & Sensibility” articles.
Articles
Leave a Comment
Read More

Come Up Hither

Written by Rick Shrader

Come Up Hither

by Rick Shrader

After this I looked, and, behold, a door was opened in heaven: and the first voice which I heard was as it were of a trumpet talking with me; which said, Come up hither, and I will show thee things which must be hereafter. 2And immediately I was in the spirit.         Rev. 4:1-2a

 

We “pretribulationists” have always been cautious of equating the rapture of the church with this experience of the apostle John.  With other clearer descriptions of the removal of the church, the picture in Rev. 4:1 need not be pressed beyond what is written.  But neither do pretribulationists need to abandon the teaching of the rapture from this passage! John Walvoord echoes this view:

The invitation to John to ‘come up hither’ is so similar to that which the church anticipates at the rapture that many have connected the two expressions.  It is clear from the context that this is not an explicit reference to the rapture of the church, as John was not actually translated; in fact he was still in his natural body on the island of Patmos.  He was translated into scenes of heaven only temporarily.  Though there is no authority for connecting the rapture with this expression, there does seem to be a typical representation of the order of events, namely, the church age first, then the rapture, then the church in heaven.1

Many other pretribulational commentators also use words such as “typical” and “symbolic” to describe the relation of this verse and the rapture of the church.  If the pretribulational rapture position is right (and I certainly believe it is) then the picture given to us in Rev. 4:1 is an encouragement to the church as well as an instructive passage that coincides with other explicit teachings of the rapture.  If it were the only teaching on the rapture perhaps we could not be so confident, but as an additional picture of the rapture, it radiates with multiple prophetic colors.

Here are ten clear similarities between John’s translation to heaven and the rapture of the church.

The same time.  The translation of John from earth to heaven, though temporary, takes place before he sees the tribulation on earth.  This is fitting because, as Paul writes in this context, God hath not appointed us to wrath, but to obtain salvation by our Lord Jesus Christ (1 Thes. 5:9).  John is told that he will see things which must be hereafter, not before.  The church is not appointed by God to enter the time of wrath.  Paul Feinberg writes, “Pretribulationists agree among themselves on two points relating to the question of wrath, First, it is their contention that the whole, not just a part, of the seventieth week is a time of divine wrath.  Second, the means of protection for the church is removal from this period by the Rapture.”2

The same direction.  God invited John to come up hither.  Luke records of Jesus’ ascension, while they beheld, he was taken up . . . they looked steadfastly toward heaven as he went up (Ac. 1:9-10).  Jesus had told the disciples that He would come again and receive you unto myself; that where I am, there ye may be also (Jn. 14:3).  Paul was caught up to the third heaven (2 Cor. 12:2) as well.  Pentecost lists 17 distinctions between the Rapture and the Revelation of Jesus Christ, the second being that: “The translation sees the saints caught up into the air, and in the second advent He returns to the earth.”3 Deliverance for the believer is away from the confines of this earth and into the presence of God.

The same speed.  We could also add “the same compulsion,” for without ability to resist John says, and immediately I was in the Spirit.  Lehman Strauss wrote, “The translation of John from earth to Heaven was ‘immediately’ (at once).  Even so will the rapture of the Church take place at once, ‘in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye’ (1 Corinthians 15:52).”4 As we will be translated in a moment (atomw, the smallest amount), in the twinkling (riph, a rapid movement), so John was translated immediately  (euqews, instantly; at once).  This is the same speed at which Jesus healed e.g. and immediately his leprosy was cleansed (Mt. 8:3).

The same people.  The first thing John sees around the throne in heaven is a group of 24 elders sitting on 24 thrones.  One of the most common arguments for the pretribulational rapture is the presence of these elders in heaven during the tribulation, and the absence of any mention of the church on earth during the same time.  H.A. Ironside wrote, “From the close of chapter 3, we never see the church on earth again through all the rest of this solemn book.  We read of ‘saints,’ but they are distinct altogether from the church of the present dispensation.”5 These 24 elders have  “crowns” (stefanous, victor’s crowns) on their heads, which they cast only once (in 4:10) before the throne.  This is the church’s unselfish response to their bema seat rewards.

The same place.  Though this is similar to direction, the difference here is the emphasis on the final place of abode, not simply the way to get there.  Pache wrote, “Finally, it is in the heavens, not here below, that God has reserved for us a heritage which cannot be corrupted, or soiled, or withered (1 Peter 1:4).  It is, therefore, natural that our divine Spouse should come to take away His Church from this earth, where she is a stranger and traveler, in order to bring her into His presence forever.”6 Paul concluded, and so shall we ever be with the Lord (1 Thes. 4:17).

The same instrument.  As in chapter one, John hears a voice as it were of a trumpet talking with me.  Paul, in the classic rapture passage writes, For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God (1 Thes. 4:16).  Hoyt writes of Paul’s words, “This well-known trump of God (1 Thess. 4:16), the last trump (1 Cor. 15:52), will be the signal that God is finished with His work during the age of grace and is now ready to resume His work with the chosen nation Israel.”7 Pentecost (Things To Come, 190) lists 9 reasons why this is not the seventh trumpet of 11:15, and E. Schuyler English (Re-Thinking The Rapture, Ch 13) lists many reasons as well.

The same change.  As soon as John was transported to heaven, he was in the Spirit.  This is the heavenly dress code for the saints of God.  When Paul was taken up to the third heaven, he wasn’t sure he was in the body or out of the body, but he definitely came to visions and revelations of the Lord (2 Cor. 12:1).  At the rapture we will all be changed . . . for this corruptible must put on incorruption (1 Cor. 15:51, 53).  Along with this change of our physical existence, there will of necessity be a change of the Holy Spirit’s operational location.  He will be taken out of the way (2 Thes. 2:7) during the tribulation because the church will be removed.  The bodies that only housed the Spiritual, will be in such likeness.

The same action.  John’s translation to heaven has the same appearance as the rapture of the church to heaven.  As Paul was caught up (2 Cor. 12:2) to the third heaven, and we shall be caught up together (1 Thes. 4:17), so John was commanded to come up hither.  E. Schuyler English, along with describing the rapture as a “departure,” calls this action “the up-calling of living believers.”8 Coincidently, the two witnesses in 11:12 are also called to heaven with the same words, although their translation lacks the other characteristics of the rapture of the church.

The same order.  John’s translation to heaven falls between the things which are and the things which shall be hereafter (Rev. 1:19).  Chapters 2 and 3 describe the things of the church age, and chapters 4-19 describe the things of the tribulation.  As the rapture is a promise for the church and the tribulation is a promise for Israel, it is fitting that the rapture take place between these two events and not after the tribulation.  C.I. Scofield has written, “When the church period has been finished and God, according to the passages I have read, begins again to deal with Israel, namely at the beginning of the great tribulation, then the clock of prophecy begins to run again and the seventieth week has its fulfillment.”

The same access.  John looked and saw a door opened in heaven.  A door is a fitting picture for the time of the rapture because there is only one door that leads to heaven.  Jesus said, I am the door: by me if any man enter in, he shall be saved (Jn. 10:9)  And whither I go ye know, and the way ye know . . . I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father but by me (Jn. 14:4, 6).  Of the many writers who noted this, Oliver B. Greene says it best:

‘After this (after the Church has run its course and all things concerning the Church have been fulfilled) I looked . . . and behold, a door was opened in heaven.’  John 10:9 tells us that Jesus is that door.  After His resurrection He ascended to Heaven, and called John (in the spirit) up to where He is.  He opened the door—and John stepped into Heaven to witness the events that were to follow.  This is a true picture of the Rapture.  John experienced in the spirit what we will literally experience when the Rapture takes place (1 Thess. 4:14-18).10

And so . . . .

As believers in the Lord Jesus Christ, our hearts do not have to be troubled.  He has gone to prepare a place to which He will soon call us.  We are not of the night but of the day, and will not be left in the dark when the great tribulation period comes upon the earth.  As John, let us be in the Spirit, for every man that hath this hope in him purifieth himself, even as he is pure (1 Jn. 3:3).

Notes:
 
1. John Walvoord, The Revelation of Jesus Christ (Chicago:  Moody Press, 1974) 103.
 
2. Paul D. Feinberg, “The Case For The Pretribulation Rapture Position,” in The Rapture:  Pre-, Mid-, or Post-Tribulational, Richard Rieter, ed. (Grand Rapids:  Academie Books, 1984) 58.
 
3. J. Dwight Pentecost, Things To Come
 
(Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1969) 206.
 
4. Lehman Strauss, The Book of Revelation (Neptune, NJ: Loizeaux Brothers, 1974) 129.
 
5. H.A. Ironside, Lectures On The Revelation (New York: Loizeaux Brothers, 1953) 80.
 
6. Rene Pache, The Return of Jesus Christ ( Chicago:  Moody Press, 1955) 114.
 
7. Herman A. Hoyt, The End Times ( Chicago:  Moody Press, 1969) 140.
 
8. E. Schuyler English, Re-Thinking The Rapture (Neptune, N.J.: Loizeaux Brothers, 1978) 58.
 
9. C.I. Scofield, Addresses On Prophecy (Greenville, S.C.:  The Gospel Hour, Inc., nd) 102.
 
10. Oliver B. Greene, The Revelation (Greenville, S.C.:  The Gospel Hour, Inc., 1963) 154.

 

Click here for more “Senior Saints & Sensibility” articles.
Articles
Leave a Comment
Read More

There Is Peace In The Storm

Written by Rick Shrader

There Is Peace In The Storm

by Rick Shrader

There’s an old saying that goes, “Whatever you’re overflowing with will spill out when you’re bumped.”  The apostle Paul was bumped all over the world and nothing spilled out but gold, silver and precious stones.  With the jewelry of Roman chains hanging about him he wrote, Be careful for nothing; but in everything by prayer and supplication with thanksgiving let your requests be made known unto God.  And the peace of God, which passeth all understanding, shall keep your hearts and minds through Christ Jesus (Phil. 4:6-7).  Those words have brought comfort and peace to millions of God’s children, suffering for His name’s sake, disappointed over life’s direction, heart-broken by rejection, and nearly crumbling under the burdens of life.  But we have this treasure in earthen vessels, that the excellency of the power may be of God, and not of us.  We are troubled on every side, yet not distressed; we are perplexed, but not in despair; persecuted, but not forsaken; cast down, but not destroyed; always bearing about in the body the dying of the Lord Jesus, that the life also of Jesus might be made manifest in our body (2 Cor. 4:7-10).

The book of Philippians was written to comfort the believers in that city who continued in the storm that Paul had begun.  For unto you it is given in the behalf of Christ, not only to believe on him, but also to suffer for his sake (1:29).  The book is a catalogue of situations in which the peace of God comes to believers and they find Him to be the God of peace.  The centerpiece is the example of Christ Himself in chapter two.  Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus (2:5).  In the midst of His eternal existence, the Son of God left His throne in glory to take upon Himself the form of a servant and to humble Himself to the death of Calvary’s cross.  For this, God exalted Him to the highest of heavenly positions, there to intercede for those who will follow Him through the storms of this world.  Only those who have trusted Him with their eternal souls can find the peace of God in the temporal storms of this life.  And there is no peace that calms the restless sea like that peace.

When disappointment comes (1:12-18)

Even in prison, Paul found many of his friends and acquaintances preaching his message with the wrong motive (in “pretense,” vs. 18).  Their only motivation was that they might be seen of others as great preachers.  But it did not discourage the apostle.  “If thou will be endured, learn to endure others.”1 Noel Smith once wrote, “A man ought not to permit what his enemies are doing to have greater weight with him than what he ought to be doing, and he should never be so foolish as to sacrifice his dignity to his indignation.”2

The apostle found that good people were made confident by his own steadfastness (vs. 14); that others manifested the love of the brethren because he remained set for the defense of the gospel (1:17); that he could rejoice in the knowledge that the gospel was being preached, even if by wrong motives (the wrong gospel, or demonic messengers, Paul never tolerated).  Many good men are discouraged today because their godly efforts are being overshadowed by those who glory in appearance and not in heart (2 Cor. 5:12).  But the peace of God brings benefits that cannot be hid.

When death comes (1:20-24)

What if Paul died in that first Roman imprisonment?  Would that mean defeat?  Not at all!  For to me to live is Christ, and to die is gain (1:21).  It was Paul’s desire to depart, and to be with Christ; which is far better (1:23).  Only a man whose conversation is in heaven (3:20) could have such a victorious view of possible death.  How can you defeat a man like that?  Calvin wrote, “Let men do their utmost, they cannot do worse than murder us!  And will not the heavenly life compensate for this?”3 In describing the terrible persecution of Christians in the 14th century, and the record of it by John Foxe, Bruce Shelley wrote, “Aside from the Bible, his book probably did more to shape the mind of Englishmen than any other single volume.”4 The apostle’s letter to the Philippians accomplished the same for those believers.

It may not be death in Christian martyrdom, but any death is the last enemy for mortal believers.  Paul could see that death to this life was “gain” of the heavenly life (1:21); he knew that if God gave him more time on this earth it was for a purpose (24); and he realized that whatever God allowed was His will and Paul could, therefore, do either with “confidence” (1:25).  David Cummins wrote, “Thank God for these wonderful men who had their feet on the ground but their hearts in heaven!”5

When sickness comes (2:25-30)

In the midst of everything else that Paul was handling at this time, a life-threatening illness came upon one of his most dear and trusted assistants, Epaphroditus.  For indeed he was sick nigh unto death (2:27).  Because for the work of Christ he was nigh unto death, not regarding his life, to supply your lack of faith (2:30).  For Paul, this was not on him only, but on me also, lest I should have sorrow upon sorrow (2:27).  In like situation Job said, But now he hath made me weary: thou hast made desolate all my company (Job 16:7).   Caring for sick loved ones can be one of the most tiring and stressful acts of service one can perform.

In his own battle with cancer David Jeremiah wrote, “The heat of suffering is a refiner’s fire, purifying the gold of godly character and wisdom.  Wouldn’t we rather it be a simpler, more comfortable process?  But we know life simply doesn’t play out that way.  Everything worthy in this world comes at a price.”6 Paul learned that God’s mercy becomes the sweetest at such times (2:27); that our struggles can be a testimony of encouragement to others (2:28); and that faithfulness in times of distress will hold such an one in “reputation” (2:29).  No wonder C.S. Lewis could write, ”God whispers to us in our pleasures, speaks in our conscience, but shouts in our pains: it is His megaphone to rouse a deaf world.”7

When heresies come (3:2-3; 17-20)

The selfish preaching of believers was tolerated by Paul but the false preaching of unbelievers drew his severest criticism and, in Paul’s ministry, no heresy was more costly than the legalism of a works salvation.  Beware of dogs, beware of evil workers, beware of the concision (3:2).  They are enemies of the cross of Christ: whose end is destruction, whose God is their belly, and whose glory is in their shame, who mind earthly things (3:18-19).  Until Christ comes, we will not be free from the false teaching of those who would hate the very cross of Christ.

Though this heresy of Jewish legalism was largely responsible for Paul’s Roman imprisonment, the apostle could contrast their false position with our own true position in Christ (3:3); he could recall his own background in that same heresy and testify to the resignation of any confidence he once had “in the flesh” (3:4); he took the opportunity to uphold and praise those brothers who were godly examples during this time (3:17); and he could remind the believers that our own conversation is in heaven, from whence also we look for the Saviour, the Lord Jesus Christ (3:20).  A.J. Gordon reminded us that, “It is the man who stands who moves the world.”8

When suffering comes (1:29; 3:10)

In addition to opposition, a possible death sentence, sickness ,and heresy, the apostle and his converts in Philippi were physically suffering for their faith.  This is not the same thing as sickness, which comes to all, but suffering that comes specifically for his sake (1:29).  Peter said it was to be reproached for the name of Christ . . . . if any man suffer as a Christian (1 Pet. 4:14, 16).  To Paul, this was the avenue to both fellowship with Christ and power for ministry:  That I may know him, and the power of his resurrection, and the fellowship of his sufferings, being made conformable unto his death (3:10).   As one wrote, “We fellowship Christ’s sufferings when we suffer for his name’s sake, when the hatred that struck him strikes us because of him.”9

One doesn’t have to read far into the biographies of great men of God to find the source of their power that came through fellowshipping with Christ in times of persecution.  Bunyan was confined for eighteen years in the Bedford jail for merely preaching in the fields without the government’s permission.  Knox was put to rowing in the galley of a French  merchant vessel for teaching citizens of St. Andrews the gospel instead of the Roman mass.  Men like that had powerful preaching and writing ministries after such baptisms of fire.  “It is often said that suffering colors life; but when we meet life with the ‘upomone [patience] which Christ can give, the color of life is never grey or black; it is always tinged with glory.”10

When poverty comes (4:10-14)

No one can doubt the sincerity of Paul in giving up a comfortable life for the near destitution of an apostle’s life.  But what things were gain to me, those I counted loss for Christ (3:7).  Unfortunately, the most pointed verse regarding his ability to live in whatever state God placed him in, has been used by many as a means to gain:  I can do all things through Christ which strengtheneth me (4:13).  Paul knew both how to be abased, and I know how to abound (4:12).  In any situation Paul was content which of course, is greater gain than all the world’s riches.  Paul looked at the times of poverty as “instruction” (4:12) or, literally, “to be initiated.”  Having passed that test, he could “do all things” that his Lord called on him to do.

This man of little means was, consequently, trusted by the churches with the greatest of their possessions as he took their offering to Jerusalem.  Alexander Maclaren wrote, “But this is always true — that the people who do not make worldly good their first object are the people who can be most safely trusted with it, and who get the most enjoyment out of it.”11

When help comes (4:15-19)

With the greatest of missionary hearts, Paul thanked the Philippian church for their financial support of him and his ministry.  It was, he wrote, an odor of a sweet smell, a sacrifice acceptable, well-pleasing to God (4:18b).  Missionaries and others who depend on the gifts of God’s churches and people find themselves in the difficult position of both seeking and receiving help.  Not that I desire a gift: but I desire fruit that may abound to your account (4:17).  This humbling aspect of ministry molds some of God’s greatest servants.

Paul could see that their gift was a means of fruit in the lives of the believers (4:17); that it created within himself a satisfaction to accept, as from God, whatever came his way (4:18); that it generated many thanksgivings both on his part as well as theirs for the success of this endeavor (4:18); and that it opened the channel for God to replenish their generosity through His riches in glory by Christ Jesus (4:19).  As Hudson Taylor said, “The Lord’s work done in the Lord’s way will never fail to have the Lord’s provision.”12

And so . . . .

There is truly the peace of God in the storms of life for those who know the God of peace.  He is the same God who promised to Israel:  When thou passeth through the waters, I will be with thee; and through the rivers, they shall not overflow thee: when thou walkest through the fire, thou shalt not be burned; neither shall the flame kindle upon thee (Isa. 43:2).

He giveth more grace when the burdens grow greater,

He sendeth more strength when the labours increase;

To added affliction he addeth His mercy,

To multiplied trials, His multiplied peace.

 

When we have exhausted our store of endurance,

When our strength has failed ere the day is half done;

When we reach the end of our hoarded resources,

Our Father’s full giving is only begun.

Notes:
1.  Thomas á Kempis, The Imitation Of Christ (Chicago:  Moody, 1984) 95.
2.  Noel Smith, “The Abdication of Mental Integrity”, Baptist Bible Tribune, May 17, 1957.
3.  John Calvin, “On Enduring Persecution,” Orations (New York: Collier, 1902) 1374.
4.  Bruce Shelley, Church History In Plain Language (Dallas:  Word, 1995) 294.
5.  E. Wayne Thompson & David L. Cummins, This Day in Baptist History (Greenville:  BJU, 1993) 24.
6.  David Jeremiah, A Bend In The Road (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 2000) 9.
7.  C.S. Lewis, The Problem Of Pain (New York: MacMillan, 1962) 93.
8.  Quoted by J. Oswald Sanders, Spiritual Leadership (Chicago:  Moody, 1971) 64.
9.  R.C.H. Lenski, Interpretation of First Peter (Minneapolis:  Augsburg, 1966) 203.
10.  William Barclay, Revelation, vol I (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1976) 62.
11.  Alexander Maclaren, Exposition of First Kings (Grand Rapids: Eerdman’s, 1959) 159.
12.  Quoted by Francis Schaeffer, True Spirituality (Wheaton: Tyndale, 1971) 65.

 

Click here for more “Senior Saints & Sensibility” articles.
Articles
Leave a Comment
Read More