6593

6594

2 Timothy 2:20-22

IT IS a very simple, and yet a very important thing, to realize that the path for each of us must be an individual one. Many may, in fact, be in company with us, but to be right it must be the identity of the path that brings us together, not the any wise the desire of companionship, save with One alone. If others walk with Him, then we shall be together; but this is not, and must not be, ever what makes the path for us; this must be before God, and with God alone.

It should be needless to insist upon it, but doctrine and practice, alas! may be widely asunder; and conscience may be at a much lower level than the theory (for it is then really that) of which we have got hold.

And there will be a great many delicate points to consider, which nothing but real nearness to God will enable us to have settled; for are we not members of Christ’s body together, and not mere individuals? And does not this impose limits on the individuality of the path? Here we must answer, No; in no wise. It is by the careful preservation of our individuality alone that the church’s welfare can realized and maintained.

But our dissociations and associations are both prescribed for us in the text which heads this paper; and that in full view of the disorder which so soon came in and disfigured, and has never ceased to disfigure, the church of God on earth, while it has made the path of the true saint only more manifestly individual, as this scripture speaks it. For if “in a great house” (such as Christendom has now become) “there are not only vessels of gold and of silver, but also of wood and of earth; and some to honor, and some to dishonor; it results that only “if a man purge himself from these, he shall be a vessel unto honor, sanctified and meet for the Master’s use, and prepared unto every good work.” Thus our associations, of which it is the fashion of the day to think so lightly, are put in the forefront here, as affecting our own spiritual condition and fitness for being used of God. There may be, and are, vessels to honor, which are mixed up with the vessels to dishonor, as we know, but you cannot say, according to this scripture (and “scripture cannot be broken”), that they are “sanctified and meet for the Master’s use” while in such a condition. Sovereignly he may of course use them, as He can use a vessel to dishonor even, if He will; but that is a totally different thing.

Who can say, then, that a man’s own condition may be godly, while in open-eyed association with ungodliness around? The second Epistle of John is no plainer than the second Epistle to Timothy is here. Both say we are responsible for, and partakers of, the sins of others, with whom we knowingly associate ourselves. Concord between Christ and Belial there cannot be–this will be granted. Then, for half-hearted following, which would in effect unite them, toleration there cannot be. The fiftieth link with evil is as real an one as the first; and to maintain our link of fellowship with Christ, we must refuse the fiftieth as we would refuse the first. Dissociation is the first thing here enjoined, that we may be free to walk in that individual path with God to which the Apostle is here exhorting.

Now as to association on the other side, “Follow righteousness, faith, love, peace, with them that call on the Lord out of a pure heart.” How are we to find these? How are we to test the heart? Why, by their ways. And I find my companions as I walk myself in the path of righteousness, and faith, and love, and peace, to which I am called. Suppose I wanted to find the people going by a certain train to the next town, what’s more simple than to put myself in the train? Ourselves upon the road, we find the people that are upon the road, and it is the only practical way. The individuality of my path is preserved with distinctness, and that path it is which governs my associations, not my associations the path.

Now what am I to follow, if I may not follow people? I am to “follow righteousness, faith, love, peace.” Leaders I may own, and rightly if, and only as, they can shew me that the path they lead in has these marks. But I must be shewn the marks of refuse the path, no matter what else may commend it to me. Nor will it do to take counsel with humility, and walk by the judgment of others, when God is bidding us hearken to His Word.

Now for the marks: the first is “righteousness.” Here, as it is our own path that is in question, we cannot be too rigorously exact. We are under grace, blessed be God, as to our relationship with Him, and to be witnesses of that grace to others, but wherever our own path is in question it is no matter of grace at all; the first and peremptory demand we must make upon ourselves is, is it righteous? This will be as far as possible from leading to hardness as to others; for even from this side of righteousness we must take them into account. Exaction is not this, but its opposite. On the other hand, no real love to others will ever lead me to put my foot down there where I cannot be sure it is of God, or according to Him. “By this we know that we love the children of God, when we love God and keep His commandments.” It must not even be doubtful if we are keeping His commandments; to doubt and do is to make light at least of disobedience; and if we should thus stumble, even in the right path, we should not ourselves be rightly on it.

We are to judge our own ways. If in this the judgment of others becomes necessary, the necessity is its sufficient justification. “Do not ye judge them that are within? But them that are without God judgeth; wherefore put away from among yourselves that wicked person.” He was among themselves, and being among them their association with him gave sanction to his wickedness. Toleration was thus unrighteousness in them, and even to eat a common meal with such was this.

Righteousness is then the first requisite here, and the severity we have to exercise is upon ourselves rather than others. If it be really upon ourselves rather than others. If it be really upon others we are sitting in judgment, we are not really righteous according to the standard of the kingdom of heaven: “I forgave thee all that debt, because thou desiredst me: shouldest not thou also have had compassion on thy fellow servant, even as I had pity on thee?”

Righteousness being secured, there is still further question. Not every righteous way is a way of “faith.” Here then the path becomes still further narrowed. “Faith” supposes a having to do with God as a living God; with Christ the Shepherd of the sheep as a living Guide. It supposes, not a “king’s highway,” such as Israel might have had in passing through the land of Edom (Num. 20), but that trackless desert path which was God’s choice rather for them; there where the pillar led, fire by night and cloud by day, that they might go, independent of nature, by day or by night.

A righteous path merely may, after all, be of the nature of the “fold,” a hemming in between certain limits, outside of which I may not be, but within which I may do my own will. A path of faith is a path which I recognize as God’s for me, not my will any longer, save as following His. This makes it, looking from one point of view, as narrow as it can be. For as there can be but one step at any time, which He really has for me to take–one and no other–there is no permission for self-acting for single moment. This for the legalist would be intolerable legality. Only grace can make it as broad a way as it is safe; for it is always broad enough for another to walk with us, whose presence is all for strength, for comfort, for satisfaction; and our own will means sorrow, defilement, and the ditch. Think of the eye of love never withdrawing its tender interest in the path we take! Would we desire it? Are we wiser, better, or more careful for ourselves, than He Who counts every hair of our heads?

Yet a path of faith is just the one for plenty of exercise and searching of heart. It is one as to which more seldom than we think can one pronounce for another, and when the need for spirituality is absolute and necessary. “The spiritual man discerneth all things.” He “discerns.” It is not internal feeling or blind impulse which controls but the knowledge of one whose mind and ways of thought are formed by the word, and who is in the presence of God, so as to be guided by His eye. This guidance infers present nearness and knowledge of Himself–the instruction of the word; but where the soul waits upon God, and occupies itself with Him, so as to see and interpret every look of His.

Faith then requires God’s word to justify it, in a path whence self-will is absolutely excluded. It thus guards the “love,” of which the Apostle next speaks, from being taken for the liberality,” so miscalled such on every hand. True love finds within the sphere which the word thus marks out for it, its amply sufficient field of exercise. “Seeking not its own,” it teaches no soul to do its own will or to show large-heartedness by setting aside even for a moment, its Master’s constant claim. It supposes no possible accomplishment of good to others by swerving from the good and the right way oneself; and this whether it be in one line of things or in another; “faith” having taught it, there is, and can be, no matter of “ecclesiastical policy,” if you will, or anything else which affects His people in any way which He, who has thought of the covering of a woman’s head, has not thought of and provided for. To swerve from His mind by way of accommodation to others, or for whatever way of accommodation to others, or for whatever purpose, would be but the unseemly “liberality” of a servant in things that appertain to his master–not liberality, but carelessness or worse.

Righteousness and faith however being maintained as to our course personally, “love” is next surely to be followed–safely under these conditions. Our hearts are to embrace not only the brethren, still less only those whom we find walking on the path with ourselves, but, as in “fellowship with the gospel,” all men. There is nothing however in which we are so apt to make mistake as we are with regard to “love:” there are so many and subtle imitations. We like people who please us–who minister to our selfish gratification, and we call that “love.” And if these are the people of God, this may help still more effectually to deceive us. How often does this kind of feeling betray itself by fermenting, on occasion given, into the most thorough animosity! True love, seeking not its own holds fast its objects with a pertinacity of grasp which never fails: “having loved His own which were in the world, He loved them unto the end.” We may be forced to separation, forced to walk alone, forced to judge and condemn the ways of those whom nevertheless we cling to before God with desire which will not admit of giving them up even for a moment. Thus if judgment, where it is not that of an enemy but of a friend; and blessed they who in the spirit of mourners find themselves thus in company with the “Man of sorrows.”

We must be content here to point out the order, and the meaning of the order, in which “love” occurs in connection with our path. It does not form this (divine love has formed it for us, not our own): it is the spirit which is to animate us rather in the path–not the rails, but the motive power–and here, of course, love to God first, as that from which all other springs.

“Peace” closes the catalogue. It is the necessary issue to which all this tends. “The fruit of righteousness is peace.” While love seeks the peace of the objects of it, and satisfies itself with what it finds in blessing for them. Every way peace is reached; and only here as the end of the rest–guarded and defined by what precedes it–can it be true or safe as an object to be sought after. Here it comes in seemly order and due place. May God grant us more attainment of it such as it is here presented.

The purest type of the Lord’s Supper is, of course, the
Passover. Christ is, indeed, our Passover (1
Cor. 5:7).  Let’s consider the
fitness of different ones to partake of the Passover, and then see if there are
New Testament scriptures that show how they apply to the Lord’s Supper.

●
The Passover was for the children of Israel

o Exodus 12:24 – And ye shall observe this thing for an ordinance to
thee and to thy sons for ever.

● The Lord’s Supper is only for believers.

o 1 Corinthians 11:23 – For I have received of the Lord that which
also I delivered unto you (Corinthian believers), That the Lord Jesus the same
night in which he was betrayed took bread:

● No stranger was to partake. This could
include a Gentile, a Gentile proselyte, or even a Jew that was not known to the
company.

o Exodus 12:43 – And the LORD said unto Moses and Aaron, This is the
ordinance of the passover: There shall no stranger eat thereof:

● No stranger should partake in the Lord’s
Supper. He is unknown, so his life, his beliefs, his associations are unknown.
Are the standards for the Lord’s Supper lower than the standards for the
Passover so that we invite strangers to partake?

o 1 Timothy 5:22 – Lay hands suddenly on no man, neither be partaker
of other men’s sins: keep thyself pure.

● A purchased servant, who was circumcised,
could partake. Of course, the only way to know if this was a purchased servant
or a hired servant was to ask.

o Exodus 12:44 – But every man’s servant that is bought for money,
when thou hast circumcised him, then shall he eat thereof.

 

● One who is known to be ‘purchased’ and has
put off the flesh should partake of the Lord’s Supper.

o Acts 20:28 – Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the
flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the
church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood.

o Philippians 3:3 – For we are the circumcision, which worship God in
the spirit, and rejoice in Christ Jesus, and have no confidence in the flesh.

● A foreigner (outsider) and a hired servant
could not partake. Not being bought, the hired servant would not be compelled
to honor the words of the Lord, so he would be one not circumcised. It would
speak of one who is dependent on his own works, rather than the grace of God.
This would be in contrast to a purchased servant.

o Exodus 12:45 – A foreigner and an hired servant shall not eat
thereof. The unsaved have no license to partake of the Lord’s Supper, neither
those who are ‘workers’ (attempting to be justified through their own works)

o John 9:31 – Now we know that God heareth not sinners. ._

o Galatians 5:4 – Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever
of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace.

● A stranger who eventually attaches himself to
the Jewish company would be allowed to partake, after all his servants were
circumcised

o Exodus 12:48 – And when a stranger shall sojourn with thee, and
will keep the passover to the LORD, let all his males be circumcised, and then
let him come near and keep it; and he shall be as one that is born in the land:
for no uncircumcised person shall eat thereof.

● One who has made himself to be known as tree
from doctrinal or moral sin, and no longer a stranger, should partake of the
Lord’s Supper.

o 2 Timothy 2:22 – follow righteousness, faith, charity, peace, with
them that call on the Lord out of a pure heart.

 

● One who had come into contact with a dead
body was considered defiled by association and could not partake of the
Passover.

o Numbers 9:6 – And there were certain men, who were defiled by the
dead body of a man, that they could not keep the passover on that day: and they
came before Moses and before Aaron on that day:

● The association of an otherwise Godly
believer with those who dishonor the Lord by doctrine or lifestyle, can cause
him to be considered unclean. Are we to be so careless as to allow this
‘leaven’ to enter into our assemblies by carelessly allowing someone to partake
of the Lord’s Supper when his associations cause him to be defiled. . .thus
bringing this deiilement into the assembly?

o 1 Corinthians 5:6 – Your glorying is not good. Know ye not that a
little leaven leaveneth the whole lump?

o Galatians 5:9 – A little leaven leaveneth the whole lump.

o 1 Corinthians 15:33 – Be not deceived: Evil companionships corrupt
good morals. (ASV)

 

These Scriptures make it so clear that reception to the
Lord’s Supper is a serious matter and should not be taken lightly. The Lord
gives the assembly the responsibility to make sure those who are identified
together in the breaking of bread with us are known to be living in purity
before the Lord.

It
is heartbreaking that we cannot remember the Lord with everyone that calls upon
the name of the Lord. However, the church is in a state of division,
ungodliness, and ruin. Scripture calls for separation from those things that
dishonor the Lord, and care in receiving those who desire to walk together with
us.

There are two things which must never he
lost sight of in connection with the question
of reception at the Lord’s table, and these
are, first, the grace which will not allow of
the exclusion of any who ought to be
admitted; secondly, the holiness which
cannot allow the admission of any who
ought to be excluded.  -CHM

The central institution of Christianity is expressed by the members of the body of Christ being gathered to His Name at His table to remember Him in His death. “For we being many are one bread and one body…partakers of the Lord’s table.”  “For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do show the Lord’s death till He come.” 1 Cor.10:17,21; 11:26. These high privileges are then accompanied with responsibilities.

In Ephesians 4:1-3 the apostle Paul entreats the saints “to walk worthy of the calling wherewith ye have been called, with all lowliness and meekness, with long-suffering, bearing with one another in love; using diligence to keep the unity of the Spirit in the uniting bond of peace.”

In 1 Corinthians 12:13 we see that “The Unity of the Spirit” is the unity that exists due to the fact that the ONE SPIRIT has united the members of Christ in one body. Ephesians 1:22,23 also teaches us that God has set Christ “to be Head over all things to the Church which is His body, the fulness of Him that filleth all in all.”  It is clear then, that if “by one Spirit we are all baptized into one body,” we must own every one thus united as being a part of that body, or we shall not be keeping the unity of the Spirit. Not keeping the unity of the Spirit would be the case if we held that there are many bodies, or more than one when God says there is but one.

It is of first importance to see that “Keeping the Unity of the Spirit”  is based upon the unchangeable truth, “there is one body and one Spirit” Eph.4:4.  The unity of the Body of Christ, formed and maintained by the Spirit is indissoluble; it cannot be broken because it is God’s workmanship. We are not exhorted to keep that; it belongs to the eternal position of the Assembly, and is outside the responsibility of man.  However, what we are called upon to do, is to use diligence (ie, earnestly labor) to guard or preserve (from loss or injury) the unity of the Spirit by walking according to this unity, that has thus been formed already 1 Cor.12:13. For it was by the Holy Spirit’s baptism on the Day of Pentecost that all believers, both Jew and Gentile, were formed into One Body uniting us to Christ, and giving us our individual place in that one body. Therefore, the only ground upon which “the unity of the Spirit” may be maintained is the ground of the One Body. If there is One Body of believers Eph.4:4, which God recognizes, why not refuse all other man-made bodies and gather together simply as members of His Body? This would not be making another body or unity, but recognizing the unity which the Spirit of God has made among all true believers who have been baptized by one Spirit into the Body of Christ.

Secondly, it is of vast importance that we lay hold of the fact, if we hope to be found faithful in preserving the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace, that this can only be accomplished as those blessed fruits of the Spirit are seen in us which are mentioned in verse two. Bearing with one another in love, really sums it all up as love is ever the divine regulator (1 Cor.13).  How sadly deficient we have often been in this, even in our sincere endeavor to keep (as we thought) the unity of the Spirit!  How much hardness has often been manifested in connection with this very thing!  The Holy Spirit is always careful to guard against extremes: “Speaking the truth in love” Eph.4:15).  There must be no compromise of truth under the plea of unity, yet, where foundation truth is not involved, we surely are to bear with one another, remembering our own weakness and limitations.  It is just here we should be found “endeavoring to keep the unity of the Spirit”, which is the power or principle which keeps the saints walking together in their proper relationships in the unity of the Body of Christ.

But how little is this blessed “oneness” understood!  Consequently various “churches” (denominations) have arisen, whose very existence depends upon ignoring this most precious truth, and is in itself a gross denial of the very ground of the One Body.  If there is “One Body and One Spirit,” we surely are not left to “join” anything.  The believer is already, by the Holy Spirit, joined to, and is a member of, the only Church which Scripture recognizes; and to sanction anything other than this must necessarily be a practical denial of this truth. Whatever the ruin about us and no matter how many denominational bodies there may be around us, it is still true that “There is one body” (Eph. 4:4), and God still sees His scattered people as one body of which He is Head. Therefore, to faith, the truth of the one Body of Christ on earth still remains as the only Scriptural ground of gathering together. In this present day of the outward ruin of the Church on earth, we must readily admit that while no group of believers today could claim to be “The Church of God” in a locality, yet those who recognize and act only upon the truth of the one Body of Christ, can truly say that they meet on the ground of the Church of God in their locality.

Now, some may plead various difficulties, and expediency in view of the outward broken state of the Church in the present day; but in following God’s Word, the path for faith is as plain today as ever, and simple obedience is the path of blessing, and well pleasing to the Lord. Lightly esteeming the divine unity of the Church, and seeking to substitute for it a miserable daubing with untempered mortar (Ezekiel 13:10,15), contenting themselves with an appearance of unity in the presence of evil, only proves the very ruin they seek to justify by their professed expedience.

It is evident from 2 Cor.6:14-18, 2 Tim.2:19-22, and Hebrews 13:12,13 that we are responsible to walk apart, or in separation from all that is inconsistent with the truth connected with the death of Christ and the name of the Lord respectively, whether it be ecclesiastical relationships or worldly associations.

In the early days of the Church, believers were together without distinction of Names: the “one loaf” upon the table, partaken of in the Lord’s Supper, manifested the truth of the one body. “We being many are one loaf, one body, for we are all partakers of that one loaf” (1 Cor.10:17).  This corporate aspect of the Supper is largely lost sight of today.  The Episcopalian formula: “Take this in remembrance that Christ died for thee,” substitutes individual remembrance for what should be collective, and the truth of the one Body is lost sight of.

May it be our constant endeavor to hold “The Head” (Christ), not merely in theory but in practice, “from which all the body, ministered to and united together by the joints and bands, increases with the increase of God, (Col.2).

By some, an attempt is being made to pull down the barriers of truth and make us give up what we have. If the younger men among us, who are soon to take the lead, if the Lord tarry yet a while, are not true in practice to the truth, not only of the Gospel but also of the Church of God, the truth itself will slip away from them. As I see the developments all around, I burn with jealousy for the truth we have. It makes us, in its practice, a peo¬ple rejected by all, but who have the bread that all need. If we keep separated from every movement which leaves out what hurts in the truth, if we just live out in practice what the truth is, we will re¬main, no doubt, a Small, unpopular people, but we will be to the end God’s vessel of truth to His whole Church on earth, and that will be ten thousand times better throughout eternity than to have been on popular lines for greater access to men. Our assemblies, if kept pure, are little fortresses for the defense and sallying out of truth. Let us build them up strong, solid, and faithful. Principles of independency annul the constitution of the Church of God as laid down in Ephesians, and makes it impossible for us therefore to carry out its by-laws, as I may call them, given us in Corinthians.     
P.J.L.
From Things New and Old December 1941

It is told of a preacher who kept a notebook on his desk labeled, “Complaints of members against other members.”

When one of his people called on him to tell him of the faults of another he would say, “Well here’s my complaint book. I’ll write down what you say, and you can sign it. Then when I have to take up the matter I shall know what I may expect you to testify to.”
The sight of the open book and the ready pen had its effect.
“Oh, no, I couldn’t sign anything like that!”
The consequence was, no entry was made.
The preacher said he kept the book for forty years, opened it probably a thousand times, and never wrote a line in it.
Would that we all kept such a book at hand, for I am sure we too would find complaints against others would not be forthcoming. Talebearers and busy bodies in other men’s matters are to be avoided.

From Things New and Old July 1941

And is it so?  I shall be like Thy Son!
Is this the grace which He for me has won?
Father of glory! Thought beyond all thought;
In glory to His Own blest likeness brought.

O Jesus, Lord: who loved me like to Thee?
Fruit of Thy work!  With Thee too, there to see
Thy glory, Lord, while endless ages roll,
Myself the prize and travail of Thy soul.

Yet it must be!  Thy love had not its rest,
Were Thy redeemed not with Thee fully blest;
That love that gives not as the world, but shares
All it possesses, with its loved co-heirs!

Nor I alone; Thy loved ones all, complete
In glory around Thee, with joy shall meet!
All like Thee: for Thy glory like Thee, Lord!
Object supreme of all, by all adored!

And yet it must be so!  A perfect state,
To meet Christ’s perfect love__what we await;
The Spirit’s hopes, desires, in us inwrought,
Our present joy__with living blessings fraught.

The heart is satisfied; can ask no more;
All thought of self is now for ever o’or:
Christ, its unmingled Object, fills the heart
In blest adoring love__its endless part.

Father of mercies, in Thy Presence bright
All this shall be unfolded in the light;
Thy children, all,  with joy Thy counsels know
Fulfilled; patient in hope, while here below.
There are two causes which, as we are taught in the
book of Job, bring trial on the saint.  FIRST, God shows
the transgressions in which man has exceeded, that is,
positive faults.  SECONDLY, He withdraws man from
his purpose, and hides pride from him (Job33:16,17;
36:7-9).  This book gives us full divine instruction as to
God’s ways in trying the righteous.  There we learn
another truth, important to exercised souls, who often
dwell on secondary causes___that God is the cause
and moves in all these exercises.   The origin of all Job’s
trials was not Satan’s accusation, but God’s word,
“Hast thou considered my servant Job?”  God had,
and saw that he needed this.   The instruments were
wicked, or disasters caused by Satan;  but God had
considered His servant, tried the righteous, but
measured exactly the trial__Stayed His rough wind
in the day of the east wind [“in measure debate with”]
and when He had done His own work (which Satan could
not do at all), and shown Job to himself, blessed him
abundantly.

He humbles us and proves us, that we may know what
is in our heart__ feeds us with the bread of faith; but it
is to do us good in our latter end.

When the trial is met in the truth and power of spiritual
life, it develops and brings out much more softness and
maturity of grace__ a spirit more separated from the
world to God, and more acquainted with God.  Where
it is met by of meets the flesh, the will of this__its
rebellion__is brought to light, the conscience becomes
sensible of it before God, and, by the discipline itself,
the self-will is, even insensibly, destroyed.

From “Heaven’s Cure for Earth’s Care”

The child of God may well be happy in old age for his trust is in the One Who has said, “Even to old age I am He; and even to hoar hairs will I carry you. I have made and I will bear, yea, I will deliver!” Isa. 46:4

“WE ALL DO FADE AS A LEAF”; but the leaf is never so beautiful as when it is faded.  No artist ever painted a picture so beautiful as the panorama of woodlands transfigured with the indescribable mingling of gold, crimson, and saffron, as if a flood of Divine glory swept across them.

What is more beautiful than the declining days of a Christian?  The light may fade and the shadows deepen, but there is increasing mellowness, sweetness, and serenity of spirit.

“In the fading leaf we have the pledge and promise of a coming spring, and in the autumn touch and dismantling ‘process of human life there lies the promise of an immortality beyond, which knows no sorrow and no decay. The coming glory is over all.  Its light and peace even here and now pervade the restless spirit, the prelude and the foretaste of that brighter day whose sun will know no setting.”

But age is not only inevitable and beautiful; it is also blessed. Better than anything I can say about it is the testimony of one who experienced this blessedness.  Listen to the words of this aged soul-winner!

“My mouth is full of laughter, and my heart is full of joy.  I feel so sorry for folks who do not like to grow old, and who are trying all the time to hide the fact that they are growing old. If God should say to me: “I will let you begin over again, and you may have your youth back once more,’ I should say O dear Lord, if Thou dost; not mind, I prefer to go on growing old.’

“I would not exchange the peace of mind, the abiding rest of soul, the measure of wisdom I have gained from the sweet perplexing experiences of life, nor the confirmed faith I now have in the unfailing mercies and love of God, for all the bright, but uncertain hopes and tumultuous joys of youth. Indeed, I would not!

“These are the best years of my life— the sweetest, and the most free from anxious care.  The way grows brighter; the birds sing more sweetly; the winds blow softer, the sun shines more radiantly than ever before.  I suppose my ‘outward man’ is perishing, but my ‘inward man’ is being joyously renewed day by day.

“Some lessons that I have learned, or partially learned, I here pass on: Have faith in God—in His providence; in His superintending care, in His unfailing love.  Accept the bitter with the sweet, and rejoice in both. The bitter may be better for us than the sweet.  Do not grow impatient and fretful.  If you fall into divers temptations, count it all joy, knowing “that the trying of your faith worketh patience.  But let patience have her perfect work, that ye may be perfect and entire, wanting nothing”.

“Victory is to be attained through the joyful acceptance of annoying trials and petty vexations as a part of God’s discipline (James 1.2-7). Keep a heart full of love toward everybody.  Learn to be patient. If you cannot love them with complacency, then love them with compassion and pity; but love them, pray for them, and do not carry about with you hard thoughts and feelings toward them!

“Do not waste time and fritter away faith by living in the past, by mourning over the failures of yesterday, and the long ago. Commit them to God, and look upward and onward. ‘Forgetting those things which are behind’ said Paul, ‘and reaching forth unto those things which are before, I press toward the mark for the prize of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus.” Phil. 3:14

Do you know that if you’re saved, blood bought, through faith in the
finished work of Christ, you are a worshipper and priest, able to offer up spiritual
sacrifices to the Lord? There’s more….

IS GOD RECEIVING THE WORSHIP

DUE UNTO HIS NAME?

PSALM 29 :2 ,”GIVE UNTO THE LORD

THE GLORY DUE UNTO HIS NAME; WORSHIP THE

LORD IN THE BEAUTY OF HOLINESS.”

I have visited several bible-teaching churches and have found
confusion.

They call a certain service,a worship service but the pastor gives
a gospel

message for the unsaved or he ministers to the believers. Now,

is this w worship? No, it is not. Then what is worship you might
say.

WORSHIP IS THE FRUIT OF OUR LIPS GIVING
THANKS TO HIS

NAME. (Hebrews 13:15). Worship is
praise from us to God, while ministry

is from God to us. There is a difference between a worship service,

a gospel service and a ministry service.

IN JOHN 4:23 “THE FATHER SEEKETH
WORSHIPPERS TO WORSHIP

HIM”. Fellow Christians, please
don’t forget that. The Father is seeking

something. There is a lot going on today. There is a lot of work
and far be

it from me to ever minimize the importance of Christian service,
but it

doesn’t say here the Father seeketh servants to serve Him. It says
here,

THE FATHER SEEKETH WORSHIPPERS, TO WORSHIP
HIM

That’s what He would have-His redeemed people fulfilling this

character of worship which was in His mind from eternity.THINK OF
IT

–REDEEMED CREATURES, PURCHASED AT SUCH A COST BOWING

DOWN BEFORE HIM AND POURING OUT A FULL HEART IN

APPRECIATION FOR WHAT HE HAS DONE.

WORSHIP IS THE HEARTS OVERFLOW TO GOD IN PRAISE AND

THANKSGIVING. (REV. 4:10,11).

Because of His grace, we have the privilege of all being able to
fulfill

the place where God has put us. There is no joy greater than the
place

where God has put us. There is no joy greater than the joy of a
worshipper of

God. Why? Because the soul is occupied with the Divine Being upon

whom our very life depends. There is no really enjoying life unless
you

are a worshipper of God.

WHO CAN WORSHIP?

Now in order to worship Him you must

KNOW HIM. No proper worship can

be rendered to Him unless you know Him. The basis of worship is

redemption. (Rev. 5:8-10) An unsaved person cannot worship God.

“THE SACRIFICE OF THE WICKED IS AN ABOMINATION TO THE

LORD” (PROV. 15:8) “BE YE NOT UNEQUALLY YOKED TOGETHER

WITH UNBELIEVERS; FOR WHAT FELLOWSHIP HATH RIGHTEOUSNESS

WITH UNRIGHTEOUSNESS? AND WHAT COMMUNION HATH LIGHT

WITH DARKNESS?”(2COR.6:14) . Now, I’m not saying if any
unsaved

person should come to a worship

service you should force him to leave, but

his place would be only to observe believers worshipping the Lord,

not as a partaker. So, who can worship the Lord?

BELIEVERS!

And all believers are priests. 1 Peter 2:5
says, “YE ALSO, AS LIVING STONES,

ARE BUILT UP A SPIRITUAL HOUSE, AN HOLY
PRIESTHOOD, TO

OFFER UP SPIRITUAL SACRIFICES, ACCEPTABLE TO
GOD BY

JESUS CHRIST”. When an assembly
of Christians are gathered together for

the purpose of worship, any brother led by the Spirit may be the
mouthpiece

for the assembly in praising the Lord, leading in a hymn, or
reading a portion of

scripture recalling what our precious Lord has done for us. If
there is a

separate class of men set apart by human appointment for this, it
would

deny the priesthood of all. It wou ld not be a sister’s place to be
the vocal

instrument for the assembly. (1Cor. 14:34) Yet her meditations of
praise in

her heart are of great importance to the Lord, also. Israel’s
worship was a

formal worship-an outward worship-only certain ones could
participate in it

directly-the priestly household. It was restricted. Yet, God had
intended in

the Old Testament all were to be priests, a holy nation but they
forfeited this

place by worshipping the golden calf. (Exodus 19:5,6)

OUR OBJECT OF WORSHIP

God the Father (John 4:23) and God the Son (John 5:23) are the
objects

of worship but not God the Holy Spirit. (John 16:13,14). It is only
fitting

during a time of worship that we have the breaking of bread. (Acts
2:42)

The Father and the Son are

the objects of our thoughts and mediations

during this time. This meeting is especially for united praise and
worship

as we remember our Lord . The purpose of the Breaking of Bread
meeting is

“THIS DO IN REMEMBRANCE OF
ME”(1 Cor. 11:26) and “ANNOUNCE

HIS DEATH” (1 Cor. 11:26) and on
“FIRST DAY OF THE WEEK ” (Acts 20:7)

Who administers it?

Any brother led by Spirit to do so. (1 Peter 2:5, 1 Cor.11:25).

How long do we do this? “UNTIL HE COMES” (1 Cor. 11:26).

The Lord’s Supper is instituted in Luke 22:19, expounded in 1 Cor.
11:23-34,

and celebrated in Acts 20:7.

OUR POWER OF WORSHIP

Our power of worship is the Holy Spirit. (Eph. 2:18, Phil. 3:3).
Any ritual

or preplanned order of service denies the power of worship. The
Holy Spirit

has power. “YE ARE THE CIRCUMCISION
WHICH WORSHIP GOD

BY THE SPIRIT, REJOICE IN CHRIST JESUS, AND
HAVE NO CONFIDENCE

IN THE FLESH”. The power for worship is the Spirit of God. He
is quite

competent to furnish every bit of

leadership that is necessary apart from

any precedent of men, or any formal appointment. The Spirit of God
is quite

sufficient. But, dear friends, if you are going to worship the
Father-if I am-it

must be in truth and thus how we need to know the truth about His

person and made known in the Person of Christ. “FOR NO MAN

KNOWETH THE FATHER SAVE THE SON AND HE TO
WHOMSOEVER

THE SON SHALL REVEAL HIM”.

We must know Him in order to know

what is suitable to Him. We must know what our relationship is to
Him, in

order to worship in spirit and truth. If we are not enjoying Christ
and the things

of God the spring of worship will be dried up. You may go on
serving, but I’ll tell

you it’s a lot easier to preach than it is to worship, it’s much
more simple

to teach than it is to worship. But the Father seeks worshippers
and whatever

is of concern of God should be of vital interest to us. And without
exception

every child of God is part of that priestly family and should be
engaged

in worship both individually and collectively.

OUR MATERIAL FOR WORSHIP

Our material for worship is “IN SPIRIT”
and “IN TRUTH”. “In
Spirit” we

can see the contrast with Judaism (2 Chron. 5:12-14) with the New
Testament

scriptures (1 Cor. 14:15, Eph. 5:19, and Col. 3:16). “In
Truth” means we

worship God according to the truth of who He is as revealed in the
Word. (John 14:9)

Worship today is only to be in Spirit and truth.

And so, God does not in that

respect use physical things. Instruments and choirs deny the
material

for worship. It’s a question of the reality of the heart, that
which comes

forth from the heart. I venture to say that you will search in vain
for anything

in the New Testament scriptures that will give you anything formal
and

detailed as to how you should proceed in a Christian service. We
don’t even

read of what the Lord Jesus said when He gave thanks at the time of

the institution of the Lord’s Supper. If we knew, we ‘d all be
repeating is as a

prayer, wouldn’t we? We don’t know a single prayer that the
apostles made

when they gathered together with the Lord’s people to the Lord’s
name. Why?

You see it isn’t constricted within the narrow limits of a formal
system

–IT’S IN SPIRIT AND TRUTH.

WHERE DO WE WORSHIP

When our Lord talked with the woman at the well she said “OUR FATHERS

WORSHIPPED IN THIS MOUNTAIN; AND YE SAY, THAT
IN JERUSALEM

IS THE PLACE WHERE MEN OUGHT TO
WORSHIP”. She knows God should

be worshipped. Now she glories in her fathers. She glories in
antiquity.

Most people follow in what they are brought up in.

But dear friends, just following

what you are brought up in isn’t enough. She doesn’t say a single

word about what was the right place to

worship. All she says is “Ye say that

in Jerusalem is the place where men ought to worship. Are you and I
concerned

about the place where God wants you to worship? It’s not a question
of what

you say or I say or anybody else says.

The whole question is what the

Word of God says. The Word of God is plain. Certainly she could
find no text

of Scripture to indicate that they should have been worshipping in
Mount

Gerizim–the place where Samaritans worshipped..

Oh, you see, how antiquity,that which is ancient,

that which has been handed down from one to another

may get a grip on our hearts. I believe that under similar
circumstances today

you can almost see people using these same words.

Oh, I know that they wouldn’t talk about Mount Geriaim

but they would talk about this

establishment or that establishment -that’s the way I was brought
up and I don’t

intend to change. In all solemnity, God has a place where He wants
men to

worship and His word shows what that place is. Are you concerned
about

the place that He has chosen? Are we sufficiently concerned to
learn what

pleases Him to stay ignorant no longer ? You see there is a guilty
ignorance.

But nevertheless, our God is very gracious and He unquestionably

recognizes all sincerity of heart. OUR PLACE OF WORSHIP IS THE
PRESENCE

OF GOD (HEB. 9:24, HEB. 10:19) NOT IN ANY CONSECRATED BUILDINGS

OR ALTERS.

We are to “WORSHIP THE LORD IN
THE BEAUTY OF HOLINESS”

If God is to be worshipped,

He must be worshipped in the beauty of holiness.

He cannot change those terms. It’s absolutely essential to the
nature of

His being that He be worshipped in holiness

Unjudged sin can

find no place in His presence. And what is holiness as far as we

are concerned. It’s the knowledge of sin and refusal of it. In Psalm 99:9

it says, “EXALT THE LORD OUR GOD, AND
WORSH IP AT HIS HOLY HILL,

FOR THE LORD OUR GOD IS HOLY” He
tells us here not only what the

character of God is, which must be met if we are to worship Him–HE
IS TO

BE WORSHIPPED IN THE BEAUTY OF HOLINESS. You see, God

has left some choices up to us–that is the choice of Where He is
to be

worshipped, He has not. Where are divine worshippers, where is the
place

of worship? In the heavenlies, within the veil. “LET US DRAW NEAR WITH

A TRUE HEART” That’s one of the
most important exhortations in the

New Testament, “LET US DRAW NEAR’ and “IF WE DRAW NIGH
UNTO

GOD, HE WILL DRAW NIGH UNTO US” . And so He would have His
people,

purged worshippers appearing before Him in the heavenlies,
worshipping in His

sphere. But you want to know what earthly place you should go to?
It’s very

striking the Lord never gives any indication in the New Testament
of a physical

location. In Matthew 18:20 He says, “FOR
WHERE TWO OR THREE ARE

GATHERED UNTO MY NAME,THERE AM I IN THE MIDST
OF

THEM”. Dear friends, the only
place that you and I will find out where we

should be worshippers together with the Lord’s people is to follow
Him, according

to the Word. And it should be a place where there is no human
precedence

for worship, a place where the Holy Spirit is free to use
whomsoever He will,

to offer up the praise of His people or to give opportunity for all
to join

unitely in a song of praise, those songs which we are privileged to
sing already

but which will ring throughout eternity, throughout heaven. It will
be the wonder

of the universe, “UNTO HIM THAT LOVETH
US,THAT LOOSED US FROM

OUR SIN,IN HIS OWN BLOOD’.

This is true worship, begun, now and

continued forever. (Rev.5:10)

“GIVING UNTO THE LORD THE GLORY DUE UNTO
HIS NAME”. Are

you doing that? Am I? “THE GLORY DUE UNTO HIS NAME” Oh
what glory

is due to His name! You know He has a glorious Name, a Name beyond
all

competition. Now He says, “GIVE UNTO HIM THE GLORY DUE UNTO
HIS

NAME”. May I say it again? You are not, dear friend,
fulfilling the purpose

of your being here unless you are GIVING UNTO THE LORD THE

GLORY DUE TO HIS NAME!

“I have learned, in whatsoever state I am, therewith to be content” Phil. 4:11.

This is the language of one who knew God as a loving and wise Father who ever has in mind the best interests of His children–those who have been born into the family of the redeemed through faith in that gospel which is the power of God unto salvation to all who believe. Since God has given His Son for our salvation, how can we doubt His goodness and so fret against circumstances which He has ordained for our blessing. We are to give thanks always for all things, knowing that all things work together for the good of those who love God.

From the beginning of Scripture history, two great facts, forming the basis of all God’s dealings with men, have been apparent. First, God is absolutely sovereign. Second, man is an intelligent creature with moral faculties and responsible to his Creator.

But these two facts, the sovereignty of God on the one hand, the responsibility of man on the other, have always presented a difficulty to certain minds, particularly when it is a question of the practical work of preaching the Gospel, and of the reception of it by the sinner. Between the sovereignty of God expressing itself in the election of some for blessing, and the free offer of grace that addresses itself to all, there seems to be some contradiction which it is difficult to avoid, some discrepancy not easily explained.

Of course, if we are at liberty to discard one of these facts in favour of the other, and throw ourselves into the arms of either a hard hyper- Calvinism, or a weak Arminianism, as the case may be, the difficulty may vanish. But this would mean the sacrifice of truth. Since we are not at liberty to do this, but have to accept both these facts (for both plainly lie on the surface of Scripture), we must humbly seek the divine solution, assured that the only real difficulty is the littleness of our minds, and of their ability to grasp the thoughts of God.

We have but to open our Bibles at the beginning to find both these truths. ” In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth” (Gen. 1: 1). Here is declared the one truth. “Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion” (Gen. 1: 26). Here is declared the other. Man was made in God’s image, i.e., as God’s representative in creation. He was after God’s likeness, inasmuch as he was originally a free, intelligent, moral a gent. And though no longer sinless but fallen, his responsibility remains.

It would be difficult to find a finer confession of the sovereignty of God than that made by Nebuchadnezzar, the great Gentile monarch in whom human sovereignty reached its highest expression. He said, “He doeth according to His will in the army of heaven, and among the inhabitants of the earth: and none can stay His hand, or say unto Him, What doest Thou?” (Dan. 4: 35).

Nor can we point to a more striking unfolding of the responsibility of man in his fallen estate than that given by Paul in his powerful argument (Rom. 1: 18 to 3: 19) to prove the complete ruin of the race. If sin and degradation destroyed a man’s responsibility there would be every excuse for his condition, but the most degraded heathen is shown to be ” without excuse,” as is also the polished idolater and the religious Jew.

Thus far all seems plain. The difficulty occurs when we begin to apply these truths. Believers are addressed as “chosen in Him before the foundation of the world” (Eph. 1: 4), as “elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father” (1 Peter 1: 2). To His disciples the Lord Jesus distinctly said, “Ye have not chosen Me, but I have chosen you” ( John 15: 16); and again, “No man can come to Me, except the Father which hath sent Me draw him” (John 6: 44). Shall we reason from these scriptures that since the choice is God’s and no one comes to Christ unless drawn of the Father, therefore all effort in connection with the Gospel is useless; that, in fact, to preach to any except those chosen of God is waste of time?

On the other hand, Peter urged his hearers, when pricked in their heart, ” Save yourselves from this untoward generation” (Acts 2: 40). To careless and rebellious sinners he said, “Repent ye therefore, and be converted” ( Acts 3: 19). Paul tells us that he testified to both Jews and Greeks ” repentance toward God and faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ” (Acts 20: 21).

Shall we disregard these apostolic utterances? Ought they rather to have run something after this fashion: “Men and brethren, you can do absolutely nothing. You are spiritually dead and therefore you must simply wait the pleasure of God. If He has elected you, you will be saved. If not, you will be lost”? Or shall we adopt the opposite view, and do our best to explain away these reference’s to God’s sovereign work in connection with conversion, saying that they only mean that God, being omniscient, knows the end from the beginning, that He has no particular will as regards anybody, that man is an absolutely free agent, quite capable of choosing the right if put before him in a sufficiently attractive way, and that therefore we ought to do everything possible to make the Gospel palatable and win men?

To incline to either set of scriptures at the expense of the other would be, indeed, to expose ourselves to the keen edge of those searching words, ” O fools, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken” ( Luke 24: 25).

Any difficulties we may have as to these things would, we believe, largely vanish if we better understood the true character of the ruin of man and the grace of God.

In what does the ruin of man consist? By sinning he has placed himself under a burden of guilt and has rendered himself liable to judgment. There is more than this, however. He has also become possessed of a fallen nature utterly and incorrigibly bad, with a heart “deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked” (Jer. 17: 9). But even this is not all. Sin has acted like a subtle poison in his veins and has so stupefied and perverted his reason, will and judgment, that “there is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God” (Rom. 3: 11). Even in the presence of grace and the sweet pleadings of the Gospel men reject the Saviour provided, and with perverse unanimity prefer the empty follies of the world. Like the “great herd of swine” they rush madly to destruction, and hence the only hope is a sovereign interposition of God.

The parable of the “great supper” (Luke 14) illustrates this. The well- laden supper-table represents the spiritual blessings resulting from the death of Christ. At great cost all is ready, and yet all seems to have been provided in vain. Something else is needed: the mission of the Holy Spirit, pictured by the errand of “the servant.” Things were brought to a successful issue, and the house was filled, only because of His ” compelling” operations.

If we once realize the full extent of that ruin into which sin has plunged us, we shall be delivered from the “Arminian” extreme, and shall recognize that the sovereign action of God in choosing us and drawing us by the compelling power of His Spirit was our only hope. Instead of quarrelling with this side of the truth, it will bow our hearts in grateful worship before Him.

Poor fallen, self-destroyed man is still, however, a responsible creature. Reason, will, and judgment may be perverted, but they are not destroyed. Hence the largeness of the grace of God.

What is grace? Is it the particular goodness which visits and saves the souls of the elect? No. That is mercy. In Romans 9 and Romans 11, where election is the great subject, mercy is mentioned again and again. Grace is the mighty outflow of the heart of God towards the utterly sinful and undeserving. It shows no partiality. It knows no restrictions. It is a wide and deep sea. “All men” (1 Tim. 2: 3- 6) are its only boundaries, and ” where sin abounded, grace did much more abound” (Rom. 5: 20) is the only measure of its depth.

We hear the accents of grace in the last great commission of the risen Christ to His disciples, “that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in His name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem” (Luke 24: 47). How akin were these instructions to those given by the King in that other parable of a feast, recorded in Matthew 22: “Go ye therefore into the highways, and as many as ye shall find, bid to the marriage.” In this parable we have not “the servant,” as in Luke, but “the servants.” It is not the Spirit of God in His sovereign and secret activities, but saved men who, without knowing aught of these secret things, simply do the King’s business. Do they find anyone in the broad highways of the world? Then without raising questions as to their character, or as to whether chosen or not, they give the invitation. All who listen are gathered in, both bad and good: and the wedding is “furnished with guests.”

Is there any great difficulty in this? Surely not. Knowing that it pleases God “by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe,” the evangelist proclaims the glad tidings far and wide. When men believe his message; he attributes that work to the Spirit of God, and rejoices over them, knowing their election of God (1 Thess. 1: 4).

Nor is there anything to stumble the seeking sinner. The very fact that he is seeking indicates that he is being drawn of the Father. The idea that a sinner may be even in an agony of seeking for the Saviour in this day of grace, and yet be unheard because not elected, is a hideous distortion of truth. The words of the Lord Jesus are as true as ever: “Seek and ye shall find” (Matt. 7: 7).

The fact is, election has nothing to do with the sinner as such. No hint of it is breathed in any recorded preaching of the apostles, though it is frequently referred to, to establish the faith of believers. As a rule, it is only when unbalanced preachers of extreme views take it from its setting in Scripture and thrust it upon their unconverted hearers that it creates difficulty in their minds.

Can it be shown that “election” does really mean anything more than that God knows everything, and therefore knows from the beginning who will believe and who will not?

Most assuredly. In 1 Peter 1: 2 we read, “Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father.” Election, then, is distinct from foreknowledge, though based upon it. God’s election or choice is not a blind, fatalistic casting of the lot. That is a purely heathen conception. There is some such legend in connection with Buddha. When men were created it is said that he cast a lot saying, “These to heaven, and I care not; these to hell and I care not.” But our God and Father does not act like this. He chooses in the full light of His foreknowledge. Hence no sinner, who ever really wants to be saved, finds the door shut against him because he is not one of the elect. His very desire is the fruit of the Spirit’s work. And God’s choice, as in the case of Esau and Jacob, is always justified by results. (Compare Rom. 9: 12, 13 with Mal. 1: 2, 3).

If God must elect at all, why did He not elect everybody?

How can I tell you that? Is it likely that God will tell us, who are but His creatures, the motives that underlie His decrees? If He did explain, would our finite minds be able to grasp the explanation? We may rest assured that all His decrees are in perfect harmony with the fact that ” God is light” and “God is love.” For the rest, if any man be contentious we content ourselves with quoting the inspired words: “Behold . . . I will answer thee, God is greater than man. Why cost thou strive against Him? for He giveth not account of any of His matters” (Job 33: 12, 13). After all, being God, why should He?

If man be morally incapable of going or choosing right, how can he be really responsible?

Let me answer by an analogy. If, in the case of that poor creature making her 201st appearance before the magistrates on the old charge, “drunk and disorderly,” the plea were raised that since she was so degraded as to be morally incapable of resisting alcohol or choosing a better life, she was no longer responsible, or amenable to punishment, would it avail? Of course not. No sane person imagines that one has only to sink low enough into crime to be absolved from responsibility.

Alas! who can measure the depths of perversity and incapacity into which man has plunged himself by sin? Nevertheless his responsibility remains.

Does “free grace” mean that salvation is ours simply by a choice which lies in the exercise of our own free will?

It does not. It means that as far as the intentions of God’s Gospel are concerned, all are embraced. Christ died for all (1 Tim. 2: 4, 6). To all the Gospel is sent, just as freely as if it were certain that all would as naturally receive it, as, alas! they naturally reject it. Multitudes, however, do receive it, and then the righteousness of God which is “unto all” in its intention is “upon all them that believe” in its actual effect ( Rom. 3: 22-24). Such are saved by grace, through faith, and that not of themselves, it is the gift of God (Eph. 2: 8). Their blessing is of God from first to last, and they are entitled to regard themselves as chosen of Him.

Has the sinner to choose Christ?

If we wish to speak with scriptural accuracy, the answer must be, No. He has to receive. Christ; but that is a somewhat different matter. Choose is a word with active force. It implies certain powers of discrimination and selection. To speak of a sinner choosing Christ supposes that he has powers which he does not possess.

Receive is passive rather than active in force. It implies that instead of exercising his powers, the sinner simply falls into line with God’s offer. It is the word Scripture uses.

The children of God are said to be “as many as received” Christ (John 1: 12), and this receiving was the result not of their freewill, but of God’s gracious operation; they were “born . . . of God” (v. 13).

Are we right in urging sinners to repent and believe?

Certainly. Our blessed Lord Himself did so (Mark 1: 15). So did Peter ( Acts 3: 19), and Paul (Acts 16: 31; Acts 20: 21; Acts 26: 20). We have not only to proclaim that faith is the principle on which God justifies the sinner, but we have to urge men to believe. The fact that faith is the result of God’s work in the soul and that all spiritual enlargement for the believer is through the operation of God’s Spirit, in no way militates against the servant of God being much in earnest and persuading men.

Paul preached at Thessalonica “with much contention” (1 Thess. 2: 2)-“with much earnest striving” the New Translation renders it. He speaks of ” persuading men” ( 2 Cor. 5: 11), and with Barnabas he persuaded certain converts “to continue in the grace of God” (Acts 13: 43).

These examples are enough to outweigh any amount of reasoning to the contrary.

How would you answer a person who says, “I can’t believe until God gives me the power”?

I would remark that both repentance and faith are things which do not require power so much as weakness. To repent, is to own the truth as to yourself; to believe, is to lean your poor shattered soul on Christ.

Again I would point out that God’s command is man’s enabling. The man with a withered hand its a case in point (Luke 6: 6-10). The power was there instantly the word was spoken.

Does a sinner wish to insinuate that he is very anxious to believe, but that God will not give him ability to do so because of certain fatalistic decrees? Tell him plainly it is not true. He is leaving sober fact for the nightmare of fallen reason. Never does the smallest bit of desire toward Christ spring up in a sinner’s heart but there is a grace to bring it to fruition in definite faith. Probably the questioner would prove to be a trifler bent on quibbling, in which case we should have to leave him. A really perplexed and anxious soul I would urge (instead of occupying himself about questions as to God’s sovereignty, which are, and must be, above the ken of finite man) to rest with simple confidence in the Saviour, and to give heed to those great verities, which are so plainly declared that “the way-faring men, though fools, shall not err therein.”

“Never let what you do not know disturb what you do know,” said a wise and good man.

Never forget that He who said “All that the Father giveth Me shall come to Me,” immediately added: ” and him that cometh to Me I will in no wise cast out” (John 6: 37).

SOVEREIGNTY AND RESPONSIBILITY

F. B. HOLE

(Extracted from Scripture Truth Vol. 40, 1959-61, page 4.)

That God is sovereign and that man, though fallen, is a responsible creature, are two facts that stand out clearly in the Scriptures. It is when we study these two facts in their implications that we run into intellectual difficulties. It is easy to lay such stress on the one as almost completely to ignore the other. The two extremes are known as Hyper- Calvinism and Arminianism.

Hyper-Calvinism is that system of religious thought that sees little else in Scripture than God’s sovereignty in election. The responsibility of man is so little thought of, if not denied, that he is reduced to a mere puppet. He is a plaything in the hand of fate. If he is elect, he must be saved, come what may; if he is not, he must be damned, and there’s an end of it.

Arminianism, on the contrary, sees little else than the fact of man’s responsibility, often to the total exclusion of God’s sovereign and gracious work by His Spirit in the souls of men. Man is a free and unfettered being in the exercise of his own will: hence anything is lawful that will persuade him to exert the force of his will in the right direction.

The Hyper-Calvinistic spirit is fatal to all zeal and energy in the work of the Gospel. Those who possess it necessarily and logically decry such energy in every possible way. Men are spiritually dead: why preach to dead men? Why say, “Repent!” to men who can’t repent? or “Believe!” to men who can’t believe? Moreover, is not God able to look after His affairs? Does He require our busy interference in the saving of His elect? Supposing we compass sea and land in our zeal for souls, not one more than the elect will be saved; and if we fold our hands and do nothing, not one less than the elect will be saved. Masterly inactivity is then the only possible policy, and all the energy of the servants of the Lord is only so much unprofitable waste of time and breath.

One wonders sometimes why this kind of argument seems to be only used against evangelistic effort. If valid at all, it is just as valid against all forms of Christian service. Is not God able to care for the souls of His elect without our endeavours to edify them? Will not the sovereign work of the Spirit in building up their souls progress without the labours of pastors and teachers, or such small efforts as producing this magazine? The exponents of such ideas seem blind to the fact that they are cutting the ground from beneath their own feet.

At the present time the Arminian extreme is perhaps the more frequently held by truly Christian people. They feel the need of sinners and rejoice in the glad tidings of forgiveness through the crucified and risen Saviour. The great question for them now is, “how best to get at sinners and persuade them into a definite act of their own will, in accepting Christ and choosing life”. The more in earnest such Christians are, the greater the danger of their using questionable or even unscriptural methods. The great end which they feel they must reach, is considered by them to sanctify the means employed.

The practical results of this are very different from those of the other extreme. There all is stagnation: here all is movement and apparent success at the beginning. We are concerned however with the ultimate results. At the close of a large mission in London, a good many years ago, the pastor of a large chapel had over 50 names given to him of people who professed conversion. The pastor was a warm-hearted, evangelical man, but a year or so after he sadly confessed he could only regard one as truly converted. Thank God for the one! But how sad that nearly fifty should be led on to a wrong road in order to direct one into the right.

Let us by the grace of God maintain firmly both these great facts- God is sovereign in His gracious actings: man, though fallen, is a responsible creature and addressed as such. The truth of Divine sovereignty is plainly stated in Scripture. Read such passages as John 6: 37-44; Romans 9: 10-24; Ephesians 1: 4; 1 Peter 1: 2. Equally plain is man’s responsibility Read such passages as John 3: 16-18; Romans 2: 6-16; 1 Peter 4: 5-6, Let us then accept both, even if as yet we do not see far enough to discern exactly how they fit in with each other.

We may however discern this that man’s will, if he is left to himself never turns toward God. The fall has given it a permanent twist away from Him. This is definitely stated in Romans 3: 10-12. It is stated first of all that “there is NONE righteous;” that is, none “right with God.” Yes, we might say, that is true, but surely some people are more sincere and understanding than others, and so these get converted. Not so, for there is “NONE that understandeth.” This makes man’s plight much worse-nobody right, and nobody understands their desperate position. But again we might say, Yes, but surely some will have an innate sense-a kind of intuition- that they need God, and so begin to seek after Him. But once more, not so, for, “there is NONE that seeketh after God.”

This word, “NONE,” thrice repeated, closes every avenue of deliverance if man is just left to himself. God must intervene. In other words, God must exercise His sovereign action on a man’s behalf. He must work by His Spirit in the hearts of men’ if any are to seek after Him and His salvation. This He does, as pleases Him, when the Gospel is faithfully preached, since it pleases God, “by the foolishness off preaching to save them that believe (1 Cor. 1: 21).

If any would say to us, If God in His electing mercy is pleased to save this one and that one, why should He not elect and save all? – we have no answer to give. What lies behind His decisions is not revealed to us, who are but His creatures; but He has revealed Himself to us in Christ, and so we are sure that what He decides is right, and ultimately all will see how right it has been.

Instead of seeking to probe into the secret of the Divine decisions and acts, which are beyond us, let us more diligently and fervently publish abroad the Gospel, since He has revealed that through this He is pleased to save those that believe, as the result of the work of the Spirit of God in their hearts.

I feel constrained to raise my protest against the increasing trend toward intellectuality as “almost necessary” for usefulness in the ministry of God’s Word as we hear of it even among those who seek to live and serve in Christian simplicity.

What is intellectualism? The dictionary defines it as the “theory that knowledge comes wholly from pure reason, without aid from the senses.” Now as long as this is confined to search and research in purely natural and material realms, we’re content to let the intellectual have it his way, but when it intrudes into the realm of spiritual and eternal realities, then intellectualism may become a positive menace and an affront to the God Who hath spoken. To say, or to act, that knowledge in divine things comes wholly from human reason is to deny the truth of divine revelation; it suggests the denial of the authority of the Word of God; it substitutes human reason for divine faith. It results in the sad fact that, when human reason runs counter to God’s truth (and it nearly always does), then God’s Word is discarded and denied.

Most isms have a malodorous aroma, whether it be Socialism, Communism, or Catholicism, or even intellectualism: all isms suggest a particular view or creed or class; and it is practically true that, whenever something becomes an ism, it arraigns itself against God and truth. The believer in Jesus needs to fortify himself against their subtle conceits and deceits. Thank God, we can look forward to that glorious day when all “isms” shall be “wasms”, and God’s Word shall still stand fast. The many hammers will all be beaten and marred, but the divine “Anvil” shall stand unmoved.

Reading the writings of some of the modern intellectualists one gets the impression not, as Job said, “that wisdom will die with them,” but rather that wisdom was born with them. However, as in the case of every other ism, there is nothing new in intellectualism either. It is as old as the hills. If you want an accurate description of the present-day higher critical intellectualism, you can find it in that great verse – 2 Cor. 10:5, which reads: “Casting down imaginations, (the Greek word is “reasoning logical argumentations-) and every high thing that exalts itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ.” Apparently, there were plenty of the intelligentsia in Paul’s day; all the brains weren’t passed out in the twentieth century. Paul encountered some of them when he visited Athens. Those philosophers spent their time in nothing else but either to tell or to hear some new thing. And Paul, who preached the story of man’s guilt and the remedy therefore in a crucified and resurrected Savior was just a babbler. Acts 17:18. And that’s the opinion today of the intellectualist in regard to anyone who preaches the simple story of the gospel.

According to the text just quoted- 2 Cor. 10:5- human reasoning exalts itself against the knowledge of God. The vast majority of intellectuals deny that the Bible is the authoritative Word of the living God, The reason for this is plain, for the Bible states plainly that the truth of God can only be understood as the Holy Spirit reveals it, and that, of course, goes against the grain for the man with brains.

In the above striking verse, Paul, by the Spirit, insists that human reasoning must be cast down. There is an interesting picture in this verse of Scripture. Man’s own thoughts are likened to so many soldiers which constitute the garrison inside a mighty fortress that has high walls and strong redoubts: all bent on keeping the Lord Jesus Christ on the outside. That’s intellectualism in a nutshell. Those walls, those human thoughts must be broken and conquered Christ must enter this strong fortress which is rebellious man. Every thought, like many defeated soldiers, must be captured and be brought into subjection to Chris: Human thoughts are arraigned against God. Says the Scripture: “Let the wicked forsake his way, and the unrighteous man his thoughts and let him return unto the Lord . . . for as the heavens are higher than the earth. so are . . . My thoughts higher than your thoughts-” Isa 55:7,9.

The truth of the matter is that God does not countenance human thoughts except when in conformity with, and in submission to His thoughts, as expressed in His Word. The wisdom of this world is foolishness with God. God knoweth the thoughts of the wise that they are vain- 1 Cor. 3:19.20. “Can man by searching find out God?” Job 11:7. “Every imagination of the thoughts of man’s heart is only evil continually”- Gen. 6:5. “Out of the heart of man proceed evil thoughts…”- Mark 7:21

Whenever the natural, unconverted man thinks, in relation to spiritual matters, he thinks wrong. There are a number of examples of this in the O.T. Scriptures, with their spiritual application to us today. There is Naaman, who comes seeking a cure for his leprosy; said he: “Behold, I thought he will surely come out to me”- 2 Kings 5: 11, but he thought wrong. In Esther 6:6 we read: Now Haman thought in his heart, “To whom would the king delight to do honor more than to myself,” but he was wrong. The rich man in Luke 12:17 thought within himself saying “what shall I do?”, but he thought wrong too. The great apostle Paul (and if there ever was an intellectual he was it) said in those days of his blindness: “I verily thought with myself that I ought to do many things contrary to the name of Jesus of Nazareth”- Acts 26:9, but oh, how wrong he was! You see why these were all off the track, don’t you? It was because they had themselves in the center of their thoughts. To me, said Naaman; to myself, said Haman; the rich farmer thought within himself, and Paul thought I ought to. All these were wrong because human thought exalts itself and dethrones Christ; it sits in judgment upon the Word of God, instead of vice-versa. Hear what the Bible has to say to the intellectual then and now: “The preaching of the Cross is to them that perish foolishness.” Four tremendous ideas are embodied in this pregnant statement:

1. The Cross. It wipes out all human reasoning. Christ was crucified at Calvary-the place of a “skull”. Thus the cross is the death knell of all mere human wisdom, for “after that the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God, by the foolishness of preaching, to save them that believe”- I Cor. 1:21, to the intent that no flesh should glory in His presence- I Cor. 1:29. The Cross proves man’s fearful guilt in that it required the Son of God to die for him as the only possible remedy for his sin. The Cross being reared at the place of a skull (where human brains are OUT) tells the story that man’s wisdom is foolishness.
2. The cross is preached. This eliminates all human reasoning. The gospel is not to be proven, but to be preached. It is a divine proclamation, which leaves no room for argument or reasoning. Let a young fellow receive a notice to report for army induction, it allows no discussion. It is a proclamation, not an invitation for his opinion. You just obey it or else. Even so God’s truth is preached for the obedience of faith. Rom. 16:26. There is no place for human reasoning.
3. The preaching of the Cross is foolishness to many. The preaching of the Cross is foolishness to the intellectualist, while on the contrary man’s wisdom is foolishness with God- 1 Cor. 1:20. You can have your choice. You can have what man thinks is foolish, or what God says is foolish,. Not many wise men after the flesh are called- I Cor. 1:27, simply because they are wise in their own conceits. God has hid these things from the wise and prudent and has revealed them unto babes.
4. The preaching of the Cross is foolishness to them that perish. If anyone rejects the summons the gospel proclaims, then it proves such an one is perishing. Foolish in their wisdom they perish, but to believers, called by divine grace, Christ (crucified and risen) is the power of God and the wisdom of God- I Cor. 1: 18 – I. Cor. 1:24.
It is a sad fact that intellectualism often gives rise to conceit and snobbery. “Knowledge puffs us”, says God- I Cor. 8:1. The philosopher is often vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind- Col. 2:18. Eph. 4:17-18 gives solemn description of the reasoner who usually rejects divine revelation, saying he walks in the vanity of his mind, having the understanding darkened, being alienated from the life of God through the ignorance that is in him, because of the blindness of his heart.” “Such are proud, knowing nothing, but doting about questions and strifes of words, whereof cometh envy, strife. Railings, evil surmising, perverse disputings of men of corrupt minds, supposing that gain is godliness” I Tim. 6:4-5. To the believer who knows the truth their vaporings often are utterly ridiculous, yet so tragic.

Jude speaks of these types of men when he says: “These be they who separate themselves, sensual, having not the Spirit”- Jude 19. They put themselves in a class apart above the ordinary garden-variety of folks. But don’t be deceived or impressed by their bluff. God’s Word says that, in the realm of spiritual verities, they know nothing, for “the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness unto him, neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned”- I Cot. 2:14 They think they know, but “if any man think he knoweth any thing, he knoweth nothing yet as he ought to know”- 1 Cor. 8:2

No man perhaps ever matched the apostle Paul in power of intellect, nevertheless, many of his contemporaries sneered at him because he did not make a display of his tremendous capacities, but he lived, spoke and wrote in humble self-effacement. His preaching was not with “enticing words of man’s wisdom but in demonstration of the Spirit and power”- I Cor. 2:4.

Of our blessed Lord Himself the Jewish leaders said: “How knoweth this man letters, having never learned?”- John 7:15. On another occasion the Jews remarked: “From whence hath this Man these things, and what wisdom is this which is given unto Him that even such mighty works are wrought by His hands; is not this the carpenter?”- Mark 6:2,3. On what possible basis could a carpenter know as much, yea more of the Scriptures than a university graduate or post-graduate? As a matter of fact, Jesus (or a believer in Jesus also) knows more about spiritual things than any unconverted intellectual, no matter if that paragon had as many degrees back of his name as a thermometer has degrees. No unsaved soul knows anything at all of God’s truth; that’s what the Scriptures tell us.

God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; He hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the mighty”- 1 Cor. 1:27. Of Jesus they enquired: “How knows this Man letters, having never learned?” They meant that He had never been to college; He never had had any formal education. so how could He know? Yes, how did He know? He knew, of course, because He was God. But when He became Man. He did what all men do – from birth on He began to learn. How did He know having never learned? The answer is that He did learn, not in a university or seminary, but in God’s school which is the ideal one and open to every Christian. Isa. 50:4-5 tells us about it: “The Lord hath given me the tongue of the learned, that I should know how to speak a word in season to him that is weary. He wakeneth morning by morning, He wakeneth Mine ear to hear as the learner. The Lord God hath opened Mine ear I was not rebellious, neither turned away back.” That’s how He knew. He did two things- He listened and obeyed. That same avenue is open to you and me, without having to go for special religious or academic training. Each morning Christ fed on the Word and, having learned, He obeyed its precepts. He was not rebellious. The reason the intellectual does not understand the Bible is that he is not willing to submit himself to its searching demands- he is rebellious; that’s why he fumbles and stumbles around in the dark.

Furthermore, Christ learned not merely for the sake of knowing, nor to display His vast knowledge, nor to dazzle people with His wide-ranging vocabulary. No, but to speak a word in season to the weary and the heavy-laden. That’s an additional reason why higher religious education can be a menace, for it feeds spiritual pride; it is so apt to magnify man rather than exalt the Person of Christ, or meet the need of sinner or saint.

In Acts 4:13, we read: “Now when they saw the boldness of Peter and John and perceived that they were unlearned (they hadn’t been to the seminary either) and ignorant men (that was altogether too gratuitous a conclusion for the ignorance was on the part of their persecutors; not on the part of those apostles), they marveled and they took knowledge of them that they had been with Jesus.” That’s it, they had not been to college but they had been with Jesus. They astonished their hearers with their knowledge of the Scriptures and their boldness in declaring the truth. And they recognized the explanation consisted in that they had been with Jesus. One may spend many years in acquiring the highest possible training but yet know nothing whatever of the things of God but let one come as a humble disciple and learn in the school of Christ and the world will still be astounded and stirred. There is no substitute for learning in His school. If seminary teaching makes the Word of God more precious and makes one more of a humble servant of Christ, well and good, but the risk isn’t worth the dubious advantage, in my sober judgment.

Our Lord did not use His knowledge to hold theological controversies with His adversaries. When they raised their “how can’s?”, as in John 6:52 when they said: “How can this Man give us His flesh to eat?” Jesus did not go into a lengthy argument to prove the logic of this profound statement, but He merely reiterated it, saying: “Verily, verily, I say unto you, except ye eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood ye have no life in you.” This was not an explanation of His original statement but an emphatic repetition of it. The truth of God is not given for the purpose of convincing unbelievers, but for convicting them; not to give their minds some gymnastic exercise, but to bring their wills into subjection to God’s will. But the natural man loves to reason; it feeds his pride.

The intellectual reasoner should do what the wise men did at the birth of Christ. These came from the East (the East was famous for its boasted wisdom- 1 Kings 4:30). But those magi turned their backs on the East and came and knelt at the feet of a little Babe, in whom were hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge. They worshipped Him (not His mother, of course). The wise religious leaders of the Jews of that day knew the Scriptures (They could tell the wise men where the King was to be born and give scripture and verse for it), but they knew not Him. It was to the lowly, uneducated shepherds that the angelic messengers announced the coming of the Saviour into the world; it is such who saw Him and worshipped. The wise may know much, but generally the humble know Him. God reveals Himself to babes.

Intellectualism loves the use of big words. When you read many of their writings you need a dictionary handy. This again is nothing new; it has always been the hallmark of highbrowism to razzle-dazzle with big words; it sounds so impressive to the ignorant. Such use is really a confession of inferiority on the part of the one using them. He feels he has said so little that he has to throw in a few big words to make up for the lack of thought.

The use of big words is of course un sparingly condemned in God’s Word, both by precept and by example. Hear what Peter says: “They speak great swelling words of vanity”- 2 Peter 2:18; or Jude 16: “These are murmurers, complainers, walking after their own lusts and their mouth speaketh great swelling words, having men’s persons in admiration because of advantage”. You see that the use of many-syllable words is nothing modern; the intellectuals were there 20 centuries ago.

The apostle Paul, God’s specially chosen servant, has not a good word to say for this display of human knowledge. Says he: “Christ sent me . . . to preach the gospel, not with wisdom of words, lest the Cross of Christ should be made of none effect” I Cor. 1:17. He did not use words similar to these, which I recently came across; such as “existentialism”, or “world esuriency”, or (how do you like this one?) the “thaumaturgic Christ”. This fad for polysyllabic bombastic verbosity (please forgive) is laughable were it not so pitiable.

“And I, brethren, when I came to you, came not with excellency of speech or of wisdom, declaring unto you the testimony of God . . . 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. 2:1,4,5. And again he says: “For our rejoicing is this, the testimony of our conscience, that in simplicity and godly sincerity, not with fleshly wisdom but by the grace of God, we have had our conduct in the world and more abundantly to you-ward”- 2 Cor. 1:12.

A mark of true intelligence and education is to preach or teach the Word of God in simple, every-day language, so that even a child can understand. Many may not use the jawbreakers we mentioned a while back but may yet fail to speak simply. I was told long ago that when you want to say spade, say spade. Don’t say “a long instrument employed in the pursuit of agriculture.” We read in Acts 11: 19 that the early believers, scattered by the persecution that then raged, went everywhere preaching the Word. That verb “preach” (Greek-laleo) means ordinary talk; it is the common word in the New Testament translated “speak”. Notice in how simple words Paul speaks. Read his sermons, for instance, in Acts 13 or in Acts 17, or his defense before the Jews in Acts 22, or before King Agrippa in Acts 26. Even a child can grasp what he is saying. Read his epistles and be thrilled by cadences like these: “For by grace are ye saved, through faith, and that not of yourselves it is the gift of God; not of works, lest any man should boast.” Or as in I Tim. 1:15: “This is a faithful saying and worthy of all acceptation that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners, of whom I am chief.”

Listen to the sublime discourses uttered by our blessed Lord; listen to the words of Him Who spake as never man spake; the words of Him in Whom are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge. Here is a sample: “For the Son of Man is come to seek and to save that which was lost.”- Luke 19: 10. Sixteen one-syllable words, yet telling forth the most amazing truths. Read that matchless record the apostle John gives us of Christ’s works and words. He treats of the highest possible themes in the simplest possible language. Here is a style worth imitating.

Are we against higher education; an education for Christians that shall furnish greater capacity for handling the Word of God aright? Indeed, we are not.  Who were more highly educated than our blessed Lord or than his humble servant, Paul? But they used their tremendous capacities, not for display or for theological discussions, but to stoop down to the lowly who needed their ministry of grace. If higher education leads to lower thoughts of self, to a readyness to self-effacement, to humbleness and meekness that Christ may be glorified, more power to such so blessed. But my experience in life has been, I am sorry to say, that with rare exceptions, superior knowledge leads to a superiority complex; leads to class-consciousness even among believers. This the Scripture itself declares when it says that “knowledge puffs up”. Even with true believers, unless knowledge is gained in the school of Christ and is balanced by an ever-deepening sense of one’s own nothingness, it is very apt to lead to spiritual pride. The tenor of Scripture is that growth in knowledge should be preceded by growth in grace- 2 Pet. 3:18. It has been argued that many of our early brethren were highly educated men, and that we need more of those now in order to be able to meet the intellectual on an even keel. Praise God, some of those pioneers were men of learning, but they did not acquire their education in order to be useful in His service, but having great knowledge, they humbly relinquished all earthly glory and prestige and identified themselves with a despised crowd of ordinary humble believers. Of one such the story is told that when someone he wailed the fact that he had associated himself with such an insignificant group of believers when he might have had such a prominent position in the world, he quietly said: “Which world?”

One of our Lord’s glorious titles is the “Logos- the Word.” He, Himself is the Logic; He is “It”. Let Christ Himself be before the soul; let our purpose be to know Him, to exalt Him, and then intelligence cannot become a danger; otherwise it will.

The Scriptures themselves were the argument our Lord Himself ever used. Read His talk with Nicodemus. In that chapter that tells of Nicodemus’ conversation with Christ, we are told that the cause of man’s blindness is not that the Word of God is difficult to understand (and needs a college graduate to make it plain), but that men love darkness rather than light, because their deeds are evil. Said He on another occasion: Ye will not come to me (not: ye cannot). “How can ye believe which receive honor one of another, and seek not the honor that cometh from God only?”-John 5:44. When walking with the two to Emmaus He said: “Oh fools and slow of heart to believe all that prophets have spoken; ought not Christ to have suffered these things and to enter into His glory? And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, He expounded unto them in all the Scriptures the things concerning Himself”- Luke 24:25-27. And again in verse 44 of this same chapter: “These are the words which I spake unto you while I was yet with you. that all things must be fulfilled which were written in the law of Moses and in the prophets and in the Psalms concerning Me.” No wonder those two who walked with Him that day could say afterwards: “Did not our hearts burn within us, while He talked with us by the way and while He opened to us the Scriptures?” Their hearts burned; not their heads throbbed, God would fain reach the heart, while man loves to exercise his mind. In 2 Cor. 4:4, we read that the devil blinds the minds of them who believe not, but in verse 6 we find that God shines into our hearts to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ.

Let me briefly sum up what has been said thus far:

The Bible plainly teaches that the unbeliever cannot understand the things of the Spirit of God. Therefore, there is no sense in trying to prove the truth of the Bible to a sinner, it is to be preached, not to be proven. Man loves to argue but when the proud intellectual wants to argue and use human reasoning in divine things, it is wrong to accommodate him, for he knows nothing about it. To reason with him is to pay him a misleading compliment for it suggests he can understand, when the Bible positively states he cannot. It is true we find on several occasions that Paul reasoned with the Jews, but he did not reason about the Scriptures, but out of the Scriptures- Acts 17:2. He wasted not one breath to prove the Bible is the Word of God. In Acts 26, when speaking before King Agrippa, he told this ruler that he had witnessed both to small and great, saying none other things but those which the prophets and Moses did say should come, “that Christ should suffer and that He should be the first that should rise from the dead.” etc.- Acts 26:22-23. Paul preached the Word, accepting its absolute authority and expecting others to do so.

Now, as to the need for higher academic education or religious seminary training in order to make one a more capable minister of God’s Word, I fail to find any warrant for such an idea in the Scriptures; nay, rather the reverse. Moses had had a superior education at the court of Egypt, but he was sent to the backside of the desert to learn to know God; as has been well said: “For forty years in Egypt, he learned to be somebody. and then for forty years in the sticks he had to learn to be nobody,” for those are the kind of ministers God uses. The great apostle Paul had all the degrees going, but he retired to the shadows for many years to get rid of his knowledge and to acquire the knowledge of God. Both these men and many others needed to know self-effacement and to acquire spiritual power; and neither of these are attained in universities, but only in the school of Christ. If one wants the ability to meet the intellectual (who is usually an unbeliever) on his grounds, he is prostituting whatever gift he may have. It has been urged we should be able to meet the college graduate on his own level; to mc that is altogether too low a level; even the humblest Christian lives and knows on a higher plane.

Many will agree that the least educated Christian can understand the Word of God, but it takes some measure of education to enable one to make it known intelligibly. but this too the Bible flatly refutes. God delights to use weak, human vessels that so the excellency of the power may be of Him and not of us. In this connection, I recently came across this gem in a book called “John Bunyan”. It is a comment by a John Burton, a contemporary of John Bunyan and it was written even before John Bunyan wrote his world-famous “Pilgrim’s Progress”. This man writes in 1656 concerning John Bunyan: “This man is not chosen out of an earthly but out of the heavenly university, the Church of Christ, therefore receive this word . . . not as the word of man, but as the Word of God … and be not offended because Christ holds forth the glorious treasure of the gospel to thee in a poor, earthen vessel by one who hath neither the greatness nor the wisdom of this world to commend him to thee . . . through grace he hath received the teaching of God, and the learning of the Spirit of Christ, .which is the thing that makes the man both Christian and a minister of the gospel. He hath, through grace, taken these three heavenly degrees to wit: UNION WITH CHRIST, THE ANOINTING OF THE SPIRIT AND THE EXPERIENCE OF THE TEMPTATIONS OF SATAN, which do more to fit a man for that mighty work of preaching the gospel than all the university learning and degrees that may be had” … I say “Amen” to this with all my heart, Here is a man who had not one whit of formal education, whom God yet used in such amazing fashion. He has been read more than any author in the world’s history.

Preach the Word out of a deep experience of fellowship with the Lord, and God will bless it. Man’s reasonings, philosophies and hypotheses are so much rubbish. The Bible is God’s revelation, and once something is made known it calls for no special mental capacity to understand; just a submissive will to believe and obey. The gospel is preached for the obedience of faith; not for the rational consent of the mind. When Paul left Ephesus he did not commend to the elders a course in mental development, but he commended them to God and to the Word of His grace- Acts 20:32.

It is also being advocated by some that if we are to meet the educated class we must needs study theology, comparative beliefs, philosophies, etc. In other words, we must sample all the poisons being peddled by ignorant or bigoted quacks, in order to be able to refute them. But that’s a risky business, for while some are smart enough maybe to taste and then spit out the stuff before swallowing, others are not so dexterous, and sad experience bears witness that many young Christians have been doped and duped by Satan’s potions and have had their faith wrecked. Personally. I know quite a few younger men who have lost their faith while in institutions of learning. One brokenhearted father told me how his son had gone astray and abused his father because he had only taught him the great truths of the Bible; now he found out that the atheist was right. Said his father to him: “Why don’t you bawl your mother out. too?” “What for?” said the boy. “For giving you pancakes and syrup. and bacon and eggs for breakfast and not garbage once in a while. You want good food for your body, but swill for your soul.”

Don’t waste your time and risk your soul reading up on what Jehovah Witnesses. or Mormons or Christian Scientists believe. Just listen to the voice of the Good Shepherd as it comes to you through His Word, and you’ll instantly know the growl of the wolf when he comes around. If you study the Word in His presence, you can meet every argument Satan may put up.

While the unbeliever cannot understand the truth, on the other hand, the believer often fails to use the capacity God hath given him. Believers – often, young men, waste a lot of time that could and should be given to the serious study of God’s Word. There are many books and commentaries to enable one to grow in a sound knowledge of the great truths of the Scriptures.

There are no classes among believers. Every child of God is perfectly capable of understanding even the deep things of God, while no unbeliever is. And the ability to understand does not depend on mental power or higher education. Unbelievers’ minds are darkened, blinded by the Devil and ignorant – Eph. 4:18. But when a soul gets saved through God’s matchless grace, a mighty transformation takes place. The mind is completely renovated, for the believer gets a “renewed mind”- Rom. 12:2; Eph. 4:23. This miracle is wrought within by the Spirit of God, as we read in Titus 3:5. The Christian, an entirely new man, is now vividly, mentally and spiritually alive and capable of understanding the deep things of God-1 Cor. 2:10; Col. 3:10. Please notice that this is said indiscriminately of all believers, and in addition to this spiritual renewing of the believer’s mind, there is something even more wonderful and which sets the believer apart and above every unsaved person, no matter how great he may be. This lifts the believer to the highest level of true intelligence, enabling him to grasp, appreciate and communicate God’s truth. I refer to the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, who not only has made God’s Word a living power by His inspiration, and Who not only furnishes the believer the illumination he needs but the power of its interpretation as well.

See how this shines out in Acts 4. The Jewish leaders marveled at the apostles and they recognized they had been with Jesus. But that was not the only reason that these men could speak with such power and boldness. They showed no such strength when they walked with the Lord. It was the indwelling and anointing with the Holy Spirit that made them so fearless and empowered them to preach the Word so forcefully; yet, most of them were men of no special education. The secret of spiritual power and the ability to teach and preach Christ is, therefore, evidently not found in higher education, but in a lower estimate of self; in a life yielded to Him with Whom all things are possible. What the Church needs is not more intellectualism, but more spirituality; and colleges do not have that as part of their curriculum. Again, I say- there is not a hint in the Bible that advanced training is a requisite for usefulness in the ministry of Christ, but many statements that do show it can be a serious detriment. The educated intellectual needs the same simple message as the ignorant, uneducated one; he needs the message that a child can understand, namely, that Christ died for our sins and that without Him there is nothing but eternal doom. That’s not what he wants, of course, but that’s what he needs.

It may be true that there is a great lack of ability among us Christians, but this is not due to a lack of education, but to a lack of devotion to Christ. I am afraid of anything that fosters a special “class” among saints; it CAN BE A MENACE TO true Christianity. The only degrees the Bible mentions are degrees in spiritual development- from babes to young men to fathers; not from elementary to high school to college. In Matt. 13:15, we read: “For this people’s heart is waxed gross and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes, they have closed, lest at any time they should see with their eyes and hear with their ears and should understand with their hearts, and should be converted and I should heal them.” But the very things hidden from those worldly-wise ones, Jesus revealed and interpreted in detail to His disciples. God hides these things from the wise and prudent and reveals them unto babes.

Ah, what we need is not education; not the storing of the mind, but the enlargement of the heart; a heart wholly in love with Christ. No matter how much a highly educated speaker might seek to exalt Christ, yet the listener will almost certainly be impressed with the orator rather than with his message. Often the speaker increases and Christ decreases, which is the reverse order. I read once that a Christian went to hear Dr. Joseph Parker speak in London- then a well-known orator and a true Christian. Upon coming out he said: “What a wonderful speaker!” The same evening he went to listen to Mr. Spurgeon and upon leaving the tabernacle he said: “What a Saviour Jesus is!”

Love to Christ- a deep appreciation of Christ’s love to us- is the great need in Christian ministry. Once one of the brains of the country came regularly to hear a famous preacher. At last, he asked permission to say a few words and went on to tell how God had made him aware of his guilt and now he was saved. After the service the famous preacher asked him what message or thought had led him to Christ. “Oh, it was nothing you said,” was the reply, “but as I left the church last Sunday night, a colored woman next to me slipped on the icy steps and would have fallen had not I grasped her and held her up. She turned to me with tears glistening in her eyes and thanked me and then said: “Does yo’ all luv’ mah Jesus?” That’s what saved me”; and it still will. I have listened to a number of educated preachers and most of them left me unmoved and untouched. Very correct, oratorical, but cold as ice, often. Education is bound to make the speaker conscious of himself; it is almost impossible to avoid this snare.

The danger is that seminary training first of all leads to a class-consciousness; to a subtle superiority complex. Next, it will require the giving of a degree and title, for if you know as much as Solomon, if you don’t be a Dr. or Rev., you’d still be in the class of nonentities. We see all this in the religious world in its unscriptural system of the clergy and the laity; in the giving and taking of titles. God’s Word knows nothing whatever of classes among the saints. One is your Master and all ye are brethren; One is the High Priest and all the saints are priests on the same level.

Higher training loads (and often overloads) the mind with a vast accumulation of facts, without the corresponding development of character and the deepening love for Christ that must balance knowledge, if one is not to crash over top-heavy. I have found that academic training may result in correctness of words, expression and facts, but it usually lacks in emotion and passion; it fills the mind but fails to move the soul.

If one is truly spiritual, earnestly desiring to serve the Lord, nothing can hinder such an one from being a student. Going to college does not make one a student; nor failure to go prevent one from being a student. The ideal school is God’s school. Read about it in Mark 3:14,15: “And He ordained twelve that they should be with Him, and that He might send them forth to preach and to have power” … What wonderful three-year university course under the Best Teacher that ever lived! And His school is still in business. Note the divine order: 1. First of all- to be with Him (in His presence to learn both by His words and His ways); 2. thus to be made fit to teach others; 3. as a result, to have divine power.

This method of learning to preach and serve Christ- in a personal walk with the Lord and in fellowship with believers- (as these twelve men did when they walked together during those years) cannot be exaggerated. It is God’s method of teaching and cannot be improved upon. Learning in His school, in association with humble believers in daily fellowship, that’s God’s way. In this way the preacher gets the help, encouragement and often the rebuke, criticism and letdown he needs in order to balance knowledge with humility; and if he is not humble, he is of absolutely no use to God.

One thing that is perfectly obnoxious and unbearable in a servant of Christ is conceit, and yet there is so much of this very thing. And it’s nothing new. Did you ever notice how many, many times the Lord had to rebuke His disciples for their pride and self-seeking? While He spoke of His forthcoming fearful suffering and His death, they were arguing among themselves as to who should be the greatest- read Mark 9:31-37. Read also Matt. 16:23; Matt. 20:24-27, etc. Pride is a subtle sin that no one is impervious to; least of all preachers, since such are so often patted on the back and praised.

It is almost a necessity for a young brother, if he feels the Lord has called him to be a preacher, to learn his “trade” in daily fellowship with an assembly of believers; not in a seminary. He needs criticism, wise or otherwise, from older brethren who have some experience in life. I don’t think seminaries have a course on this, and hence his education would be sadly neglected. He must not get the wrong idea that the service of Christ is a sinecure. Our Lord, in Luke 22:36- taught the twelve to pay their own way through life; not to look to others for support. Money is to have no place in Christian service. It is a path of sacrifice. Every servant of Christ, if he is to be well-balanced, needs the discipline, the trials and frictions that association and contact with fellow-believers bring; the criticism, correction and advice of older and wiser brethren. He needs to learn while he serves, even as the twelve disciples did under Christ’s tutelage. Head knowledge must be balanced with character development and growth in appreciation of the love of Christ. There is nothing glamorous in such a path and so it is not popular. We’d rather be somebody. We need more surrender to the claims of Christ. Theological training is NOT the answer to our problem, but it might well make it worse. Let each one of us learn at the feet of Him Who said: “Learn of Me, for I am meek and lowly in heart.”

1. Deal with men  individually as if only speaking to one person.
2. Deal with men on the grounds of sins committed, show them what these are from the law’s prohibition of them.
3. Keep   one   leading   truth   before  the mind that all said may be round it as a sort of center.
4. Refer more to Scripture,, turning up the passages, and urging that they  are as the very words of God.
5. Urge the awful sin of rejecting Christ and show this from Scripture.
6. Pray in private as long as you speak in public.     Get alone before the meeting.
7. When flurried during speaking, stop and pray for more strength and liberty.
8. Speak more of the Person of Jesus, the joy of being with Him and His second coming. 

From Field and Work October 1909

In Reply to a Letter
EDITED

DEAR _________

Thank you for your letter of the 16th September. Our differences as to Baptism are not vital, such as truths we hold in common.

The Meaning of Baptism

The writer has long felt that the continued conflict as to who are the proper subjects of Baptism has excluded from view what is after all a more important point, viz.: the significance of Baptism itself. In the din and dust created by the controversy over Infant Baptism, people have failed to see that even the champions on either side may after all be very deficient in what is surely a primary requisite, i.e., a knowledge of what Scripture teaches upon Baptism. It may be that half our difficulties and disagreements about who should be baptised would disappear did we understand the first elementary truths concerning Baptism itself. The clamour of several centuries gathers round who is to be the subject, and what is the mode, while the meaning of the rite has become obscured, in our anxiety about the method. But the rite surely ought to stand first.

But how is it Baptism itself—i.e., as to its meaning and spiritual intention—is nearly always placed in the background? We believe the answer is twofold. First, the noise of controversy has attracted attention exclusively to the candidates, until we have come to believe that the subject begins and ends with them. Secondly—and perhaps as a consequence of the other—nearly everyone jumps to the conclusion that he or she knows all about it.

Are you, my friend, to whom this letter is specially addressed, willing to accompany me (and will any others join us?) in a brief, but unbiassed and careful, study of the principal passages where the subject is presented? Can we—specially blot from our minds all thought for the time being of its application, whether to infants or believers only, and just come with open minds to the Scripture itself to learn what it really has to say to us? If we think we already know all about the subject it cannot do us any harm already and if we don’t know, the good it will do us will be immense.

It has often been said that the first mention of any subject in Scripture generally carries with it some special intimation as to its meaning. Let us then turn to Luke iii., where we get the first mention of Baptism historically, though not, of course, as to the order of the books.

It may be well, perhaps, to say a word as to the origin and history of Baptism. These are involved in a good deal of obscurity. The word is not once used in the O.T. But “religious meanings” were early attached to washings with water, both by heathens and Jews; they were among the ordinances of the Jewish law; and it is not necessary to go beyond that law to find the origin of the custom of washing or baptizing proselytes upon their admission into the Jewish system.

Its first mention in the Scriptures, as you are aware, is in connection with John the Baptist; and the very way it is mentioned, without any introduction or explanation, seems conclusive that the rite in some form or other was already recognized and understood.

While some hold that Baptism is immersion, it is clear, however, not only that the verb means “to dip” but also has a wider meaning, viz., “to wash.” And this fact has a most important bearing upon the meaning and significance of the rite. Merely to give two instances: “Arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins ” (Acts xxii. 16), and “Except they wash” (baptize) (Mark vii. 4).

If we are to understand Baptism as set forth in Luke iii. we must carefully note John’s attitude and also his words. He addresses those who come to him as a “generation of vipers.” Yet he does not on this account refuse to baptize them, but he is very careful to tell them the responsibility that attaches to baptism and that nothing less than fruits meet for repentance will suffice. This produced certain questions from three different classes—the people, the publicans and the soldiers. And both the questions and the answers bear upon practical conduct. John answered their questions and then proceeded to baptize them. Two statements seem to indicate that he baptized them all: He says, after having baptized them, “I indeed baptize you with water,” and it is recorded “when all the people were baptized.”

From these plain facts do we not learn: 1. That the baptism signified a renunciation of their old life and a determination to live an amended one. 2. It was certainly not because they had been living an exemplary life, for John addresses them as a “generation of vipers.” Nor are we told that they were sent away to live an amended life and then come and be baptized. The narrative implies that they were baptized there and then, and verse 21 supports this view for they were all baptized before Christ. Consequently there could not have been any interval worth speaking about, if any at all.

From what we are told in this third chapter of Luke is it possible to understand what would be in the minds of John and the people with reference to Baptism? As we read of his denunciation, “O generation of vipers,” as we note his words about “amendment of life,” and as we go over the questions that were put to him, does not this, at all events, stand out with unmistakeable clearness: it meant both to baptizer and baptized a renunciation of the old standing and the old life, and the entrance upon a new.

Baptism with a view to the future

But the great and overshadowing question in it all related to the future. John’s baptism, we are told, was a “baptism of repentance unto the remission of sins.” And the one question staring us again and again in the face and that comes from every class is this: “What shall we do”? All mainly related to the future. That this was so can scarcely be questioned in the light of some other words of John the Baptist and also of what St. Paul says. In John i. 31 we read, “And I knew Him (Christ) not: but that He should be made manifest to Israel, therefore am I come baptizing with water.” And in Acts xix. 4, “John verily baptized . . . saying unto the people, that they should believe on Him which should come after Him, that is, on Christ Jesus.” So should here, at all events, we have people baptized who had not as yet lived an amended life, whose sins were not forgiven, and who had not yet believed in Christ.

In reply to this, do you affirm that this was only John’s baptism and not Christian baptism? Our answer is, we are only concerned for the moment with Baptism itself. If you think that under Christianity it assumed an altogether new significance and became altogether restricted in its application, what I propose to do is to see whether or not the teaching which follows on the subject in the Scriptures supports the view just given. You will agree, I think, that a general consensus of teaching on any subject goes far to confirm a particular view as being the right one. While some require a testimony of the life before they baptize. John baptized there and then in view of an amended life. While some say the rite appertains to no one but a believer. John the Baptist is reported as “saying unto the people that they should believe on Him which should come after him.”

Is baptism simply a looking back (something already true of the believer represented by an outward sign)? To John it was a looking forward. Is the thought of obedience limited to the act itself? John made it a committal to a life-long obedience.

Now, which of these conceptions is the correct one? Which will be favored by the general consensus of Scripture? I hope you will consider this a legitimate way of stating the matter and I will endeavor to conduct the enquiry in a fair spirit.

I would invite you to travel from Luke iii. to Acts xix.—a considerable interval. The question put by St. Paul to these men is surely important. “Unto what then were ye baptized?”

Now whether we render the first word “unto,” “into,” or “to,” matters little as far as the point before us is concerned. For surely whichever word is used it represents something taking place at the Baptism, and not the Baptism representing something that had already taken place. Notice the reply to the question. They virtually said, “We were baptized into John’s baptism.” Which means, that baptism itself stands for something.

Take the order of the words in Mark xvi. 16: “He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved.” Does it say “He that believeth and is saved shall be baptized”? This is not, however, what our Lord said. The order of the words here indicates that Baptism itself is in someway connected with salvation, and does not simply represent that a person is saved. To be saved, in the sense meant here, he must not only believe but be baptized. Not because he is saved but to be saved. The reason why Baptism is omitted in the second clause is easy to understand. Damnation has to do with the future. But Baptism has only to do with the present course of things, and salvation too has a present aspect.

Acts ii. 38. “Repent and be baptized every one of you in the Name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins.” The revised version has “unto the remission of your sins,” and Weymouth translates the word for “unto” as, “with a view to.” Have we not here the same thought? Not Baptism merely retrospective, but in view of something. And this even after Christ’s ascension to glory and the coming of the Holy Ghost.

In Acts viii. we find instances of believers being baptized, and this before they had received the Holy Ghost. But further on we come across the instance of the eunuch, and Philip’s words “If thou believest with all thine heart thou mayest.” As to this instance, it is well known that the words last quoted are disputed. But even supposing them to be true they would not invalidate the Scriptures already referred to. They lay down no doctrine as to Baptism. They were a challenge to a heathen man as to his sincerity, a course which we would be prepared to follow. The point before us at present is not, to whom does Baptism apply, but the meaning and significance of the rite. We all admit the baptism of believers; but our view is not limited to that.

Let us pass to Acts xxii. 16, leaving any intervening passages to be considered when we come to the question of the application of the rite. We have already seen, by an allusion to this very Scripture, that Baptism is a washing. Now why do we wash? Because we are clean, or to be made clean? Surely we do not wash as a kind of public demonstration that we were clean before? Did this apply only to Saul of Tarsus because he was such an exceptional sinner. Someone has told me that this is “calling on the Name of the Lord.” But what correspondence is there between “washing” and “calling?” whereas there is a perfect correspondence between washing and water. The calling on the Name of the Lord was evidently an adjunct to the washing. And as to this statement having become obsolete because it applied to one particular case, and one only, I have yet to learn that Scripture anywhere teaches that Divine institutions have a special meaning to particular individuals, or that it anywhere says that Saul needed a special baptism. Is there a word to this effect in the Lord’s instruction to Ananias? No. It was evidently ordinary water baptism, and it was a washing away of sins.

But it may be asked, “Were not the Apostle’s sins already gone?” Yes, they were gone from before God. This was a washing away from before men and as a demonstration that he renounced his former ways and was entering upon an entirely new life. And notice particularly, it does not say, “Arise and be baptized because your sins are forgiven.”

The meaning of Romans VI

If we come now to Rom. vi. 3-4, we learn something more. The matter of the believer’s relation to sin (not sins merely) is in question. The Apostle declares they have died to sin (ver. 2). How and when? The answer in ver. 3 is by and at their baptism.

Is it not important, in this case, as in every other, to notice exactly how the truth is stated? It is not said to these believers at Rome: “You died when you believed in Christ and you were baptized as an outward and visible sign of what was already true of you.” The Apostle says nothing at all about believing, though, of course, they had believed. But in what sense does faith set forth death with Christ? There is not the slightest analogy. But Baptism has a very strong resemblance to death; and so we find the writer of this epistle grounding his whole argument upon the fact that these believers had been baptized.

“Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized unto Jesus Christ, were baptized unto His death. Therefore we are buried with Him by BAPTISM unto death; that like as Christ was raised up front the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.”

May I not ask you again which view of Baptism this Scripture supports? Is Baptism treated here as if it were applied because everything was already true; is it treated as an act of obedience merely? In one word is Baptism only a backward look? It seems to me the teaching here is in perfect harmony with what we have seen it to be all through, viz.: that Baptism is in view of something, and that Baptism instead of standing in relation to faith, something like the obverse to the reverse of a coin or pattern, stands for itself and means something which faith, from the very nature of things, cannot mean. I have quoted the text as “unto” and not “into.” But whether the one or the other be the exact force of the original both are alike material to the discussion in hand. For the text does not present Baptism as an outward sign of something already done, but as doing something: “Buried with Him by Baptism.” So that we are bound (if we are to adhere to Scripture), it seems to me, to admit that Baptism is its own sign and significance, and not a mere outward sign of what is true already of one who has never been baptized. Yet this last is surely what Baptists largely make it. Thus, if language means anything, one who has not been baptized could not say he had been buried with Christ; and therefore it cannot be true that Baptism is only the outward sign that he was already buried.

We are told in Scripture that Baptism represents or stands for many things: death, burial, separation from the old life, &c., but I cannot recall one passage which asserts that it is an outward sign of a person’s faith. Does not Romans vi. bring before us that to which we are baptized; to Jesus Christ; to His death; and in view of newness of life? And therefore, again, is it not clear that Baptism is prospective, closing the door upon one condition of things, and opening it upon another?

We are said to be baptized unto Christ’s death. Consequentl^y, further down the chapter the Apostle goes on to shew the significance of that death. “For in that He died, He died unto sin once; but in that He liveth, He liveth unto God.” And, seeing we have been baptized unto that death, he adds, “LIKEWISE RECKON YE ALSO YOURSELVES TO BE DEAD INDEED UNTO SIN, BUT ALIVE UNTO GOD THROUGH (OR IN) JESUS CHRIST OUR LORD.”

This reckoning is continuous; not only on the day of my baptism, but always. As we were baptized unto Christ and unto His death, so we are to reckon ourselves constantly dead unto sin and alive unto God. In other words, I am to be true all along to my baptism. In the light of this, what a significant thing baptism becomes.

But let us pass to 1 Cor. x. 1-2. Is not this a very striking passage? Does it not teach us that the truth of Baptism is found in the Red Sea? Speaking of Israel as a nation, St. Paul says, they “were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea.” Now what did this mean to them? Is it wrong to say the cloud was for their guidance, and the sea, while it separated them for ever from Egypt, brought them into another scene, and introduced them into a new place altogether? Did not their baptism mean that they professedly accepted the guidance of the cloud and that they had left Egypt for ever? and were not both connected with Moses ? They accepted his leadership.

We cannot fail to see at once the remarkable correspondence between this passage and the one we have just been looking at. There it was, baptized unto Christ and unto His death. Here it is, unto Moses, in the cloud and in the sea. Surely the sea, in their case, did not represent something that had already happened. Is it not clear that it stood for something in itself? Could they be said to be dead to Egypt until they had crossed it?

I do not dwell longer on this passage as I may have occasion to return to it, and my object at the moment is not to give a full exposition of the subject in all its bearings, but simply to shew the meaning and significance of the rite itself. For it is surely evident that if we do not hold correct views as to this we cannot as to all that correlates with it.

What has Galatians iii. 27 to say to us on the subject? “For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.” Baptism, here, is said to be putting on of Christ. Again it does not say it is a public confession of faith, or that Baptism is an act of obedience or represents something already true (though of course it may involve all these). But is it not important to observe that the inspired writer affirms with all the clearness conceivable that the act of Baptism itself effects something? And does not this view of it add tremendously to the significance of Baptism? The fact is as astounding as it is true, that, Baptists, with all their glorying in Baptism, have shorn it of nearly all its meaning! “Baptized unto Christ.” “Put on Christ.” Here is the grand conception of the rite the Bible presents to us. And surely the Bible knows more about Baptism than any of us. Does everything depend upon personal faith. Does everything need to be true before the rite is administered? Neither John the Baptist nor Paul confined their view to these limits, but John baptized the multitude after telling them what they ought to be ; and Paul says, ” Buried with Him (Christ) by Baptism.” “As many as have been baptized unto Christ have put on Christ.” If there is only one way of being in Christ and that through believing, in what way could you be Baptized into Christ; and by Baptism “put on Christ?” But if there is a recognized outward sphere of profession, then one can understand the terms.

Does not our next passage—Ephesians iv. 4-6—make plain why we are said to be “baptized into Christ?” “There is one body and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling.” This statement, manifestly applies only to true believers. A mere professor is not in the one body; he does not possess the Spirit; the calling spoken of is not his.

But ver. 5 is different: “One Lord, one faith, one baptism.” A professor can say, “Lord, Lord,” and outwardly acknowledge Christ as such. (1.) He can profess to accept the faith; and he can be baptized. These three things belong to an outer circle, compared with the first three. While ver. 6 brings us to a wider circle still. Compare 1 Cor. viii. 6; Eph. iii. 15, and Acts xvii. 28. Baptism, then, as presented here, clearly has to do with profession. And this is easy to understand, for it has to do with earth, not with heaven, and with the position a man takes publicly before men, not so much with his faith before God. When Saul washed away his sins in Baptism, it was before men, not before God. This latter had been done already.

In Colossians ii. 12 you will remember we have some important teaching on Baptism. “Buried with Him in Baptism, wherein also ye are risen with Him through the faith of the operation of God, Who hath raised Him, from the dead.”

When were we buried, i.e. put out of sight? When we believed? The Apostle does not put it in that way; for the simple reason, it seems to me, that there is nothing in faith to represent it; but he immediately introduces Baptism. “Buried with Him in Baptism.”

 (1.) Notice, this is different from I Cor. xii. 3. The one is saying “Lord, Lord,” with the lips (see Matt. vii. 21), the other is a confession by the Holy Ghost that Jesus is the Lord.

The Consistency of Scripture

Do we not see what a consistency there is in the entire teaching of Scripture on the subject? Almost every verse we have looked at presents Baptism as an act having its own meaning and as having something in view. It not merely closes the past but introduces to that which is entirely new. For I think you will agree with me that risen with Christ is in full view here.

You may reply, this verse is all against you, for it distinctly speaks of faith. I know, and have not any wish to escape from it. As I have said before in this letter, I believe in the baptism of believers as much as you do. I fully go with it. I was baptized myself as a believer. But you cannot get away from the fact that the burial with Christ is in Baptism, and moreover, it is worthy of notice that faith is connected with resurrection, and not with the being buried with Him at all. I am thinking of the way in which it is presented in this verse. Neither this passage nor any other we have looked at presents Baptism as a public declaration of a man’s faith. I am not saying it may not be so incidentally, but no verse presents Baptism in that way.

Moreover, it is not necessary that everything should be true of a person before he is eligible for an outward rite; and the same rite may be performed upon two people under quite different conditions. May I trouble you to turn to Romans iv. 11? Here we are told that Abraham received the sign of circumcision, as a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had yet being uncircumcised.” Does this imply that “Since circumcision was a seal of Abraham’s faith, that precludes all children of a few days old from being circumcised. There can only be believers’ circumcision”? This logic seems irresistible. But, Isaac was circumcised when only eight days old, too young by far to have the same faith as his father Abraham! So that in that day there was believers’ circumcision and the circumcision of the children of believers; and why there should not be at this day believers’ Baptism and the Baptism of their children? Is there a text that prohibits it?

That Baptism and circumcision are very closely allied, surely admits of no question. Both are outward rites, and the Apostle brings them into close juxtaposition in the very passage we are considering. Both become the formal recognition of being introduced into outward relationship with God. The outward exists today as truly as then. But this I will endeavor to shew later.

Saved by Water

I will trouble you with only one more passage at this point, but it is a remarkable one. It occurs in St. Peter’s first epistle, chap. iii. v. 21: “The like figure whereunto even Baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God), by the resurrection of Jesus Christ.”

The Apostle has just affirmed that at the time of the flood “eight souls were saved by water.” This is a remarkable statement, because naturally we should have expected him to say, “eight souls were saved by the Ark.” How then was Noah saved by water? The water destroyed the old world, with all its violence and corruption, separated the occupants of the Ark entirely from it, and introduced them, at length, into a new world. Baptism is a figure of precisely the same thing. (2.) It separates me from the world, for it is a figure of death, and in the sense of Col. ii. 20, I no longer live in it, and it is in view of a new world, with which all my hopes and associations are bound up. And what a world it is—a world where Christ is, and where He is supreme: “WHO IS GONE INTO HEAVEN, AND IS ON THE RIGHT HAND OF GOD; ANGELS AND AUTHORITIES AND POWERS BEING MADE SUBJECT UNTO HIM” (ver. 22).

What a solemn rite is Baptism! For in it I declare that I have done with a doomed world—a world full of corruption through lust: and I am seeking another, where all is in subjection to Christ. It is not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, as in Noah’s day (and here there is a difference—the world remaining as it is) but the answer of a good conscience toward God by the resurrection of Jesus Christ. If it be asked, how can a babe have a good conscience? I have already anticipated that objection. The message to Noah was, “Come thou and all thy house into the ark”: and baptism is a like figure.

But I would now ask you a question. How do you and others find room for this view of Baptism which St. Peter presents to us? In what sense do you attach salvation to Baptism? Another question I have is does not 1 Peter iii. 21 harmonize with the other Scriptures we have considered? For it attaches some meaning and significance to Baptism itself.

(2.) It saves by bringing us into a new place.

Taking now a glance backward at the passages that have come before us, what have we learned?

We have seen that John the Baptist did not send his hearers away telling them to come when they had given sufficient proof of amendment of life, but He baptized them in view of that, We have seen again and again that certain things are predicated of those who have been baptized. They have washed away their sins; they have put on Christ; they have been buried; and all this is said to have been done by the act of Baptism. More than once, salvation is connected with the rite, (Mark xvi. 16, and 1 Pet. iii. 21). In Acts ii. 38, Baptism is said to be “for (or unto) the remission of sins,” not because their sins were forgiven.

Who that carefully and impartially considers these facts can help arriving at the following conclusions:—

1. Baptism is in view of something and not merely because of something already true: John baptized in view of an amended life, and of Christ’s coming.

2. Certain things are not properly true of us until we are baptized: “Buried with Him by Baptism.”

3. Baptism has a place and purpose of its own. Baptism doth also now save us.” It was Baptism at the Red Sea that separated Israel from Egypt and introduced them to all the privileges connected with their wilderness journey.

4. It is with a view of what shall be true, not necessarily what is true. John did not send the multitude away, he told them what they ought to do and baptized them: “Disciple all nations, baptizing them, and teaching them to observe alt things” (Matt. xxvii. 19, JND translation). “We also should walk in newness of life” (Rom. vi. 4).

In the light of the above I would now briefly consider certain statements in your letter.

In the introduction you affirm Baptism to be “an ordinance only to be administered to those who confess their faith in the Lord Jesus Christ.” Where have we seen this laid down as a condition in any of the foregoing passages? It never says anywhere that Baptism is only to be administered to those who confess their faith. And on your principle John the Baptist could not have baptized anyone.

On the second page of the introduction you state, “There is no case in the New Testament of an infant being baptized.” It is, I believe, true that there is no actual mention of an infant being baptized. This may mean that the thing was so in the ordinary and understood course of things that it was taken for granted. When you say, “The whole drift of Scripture teaches and favors believers’ Baptism,” I would here quote from another:

“But of one thing we may be sure: had the acceptance of Christianity involved anything so startling to the Jewish or the Gentile mind as a distinction between the religious standing of the father of a family and his children, the historian would have recorded it, or the Apostles would have found themselves called to explain and defend it. For such a distinction would have been in direct contradiction to the most deeply rooted conviction of Jew and of Gentile alike. From the time of Abraham onwards the Jew had felt it a solemn religious obligation to claim for his sons from their earliest infancy the same covenant relation with God as he himself stood in. There was sufficient parallelism between Baptism and circumcision (cf. Col. ii. 11) for the Jewish-Christian father to expect the Baptism of his children to follow his own as a matter of course. And among Gentile converts a somewhat different but equally authoritative principle, that of patria potestas would have the same result. In a home organized on this principle, which prevailed throughout the Roman Empire, it would be a thing inconceivable that the children could be severed from the father in their religious rites and duties, in the standing conferred by Baptism.

Thus it is because to the mind of Jew and Gentile alike, the Baptism of infants and children yet unable to supply the condition for themselves was so natural that St. Luke records so simply that when Lydia believed, she was baptized “with her household;” when the Philippian jailer believed he was baptized and all those belonging to him. If there were children in these households, these children were baptized on the ground of the faith of their parents.”

How you can assert that, “the whole drift of Scripture teaches and favors believers’ baptism,” I am at a loss to understand. Have you forgotten the word to Noah, “Come thou and all thy house into the ark,” with not a word said, either in the O.T. or the New, as to the faith of his sons? Do you fail to remember Abraham, and how he circumcised Isaac, and even Ishmael? In Exodus xii. at the Passover it was to be “a lamb for an house!” And immediately Christianity reaches Europe we find distinct reference to the household again. Is it true that the whole drift of the Old Testament, at least, is in favour of Household Baptism, and that if this principle had not been incorporated into Christianity, from the very nature of the case, we should have assuredly heard of it; and thus the silence of the New Testament becomes the strongest testimony to the truth of Household Baptism. The fact that the household was connected with the head of the house was ingrained upon the Jewish mind. “Thou and thy house,” runs like a thread all through their history as God’s people, and this becomes the strongest presumptive evidence in favour of Household Baptism. If this principle has been abrogated, shew us where. You seem to argue as if Christianity stood in complete isolation from all that preceded it. And you therefore claim that without a special command to baptize Christian Households, it ought not to be done. The truth is just the other way. Christianity has its roots deep in the past. Baptism itself is a proof of it, for it existed before Christianity and was incorporated into it. Paul in his epistle to the Galatians traces the gospel back to Abraham. The Messiah revealed in the New Testament was promised in the Old. The Gospel was proclaimed to the Jew first. And therefore it is perfectly lawful as well as reasonable to maintain that divine principles which operated in the old dispensation, obtain equally in the new. Where it is otherwise, the fact is plainly asserted. Now the principle as to associating children with the parent is nowhere set aside. If it is, it is easy for you to quote the text of Scripture which says so. Until you can do so, I would ask, what right have you to denounce us for maintaining a Divine institution?

The children of believers

It may be well here, while on the subject, to conclude the argument for the Baptism of the children of believers.

1. I suppose you will admit that all children who die before the age of responsibility, however young, go to heaven. If so, it follows that they are saved in virtue of Christ’s death, quite apart from their own faith. I am thinking of children who have not reached the age of responsibility. Now if the death of Christ can thus apply to children, apart from faith, is there any conceivable reason why Baptism should not? Is the water more sacred than the blood? Is the outward rite to be withheld while the efficacy of the death is not?

Infants may be baptized and afterwards grow up to be wicked men and women. Some think that this in itself is sufficient to discredit the teaching of Household Baptism.

An individual that would have been saved as an infant (saved in the sense of what we learned in 1st Peter 3:21 where baptism brings us into a new place, from the world which is judged, into the kingdom of Christ), may grow up and be lost.  But if this discredits the teaching of household baptism, then Christ’s death would be discredited also. If an individual made a profession of being saved, and was baptized, then later in life their fruits said that they were lost.  Would this throw discredit upon the death of Christ? Of course not!  The fault is found not with baptism or with salvation but with the individual in both cases.

It has been said that Infant Baptism is the cause of the worldliness and formality in Christendom, but nothing could be more contrary to the truth. It is because children have not been taught to live in accordance with their Baptism, and their parents have not true to their own children that we see around us all the evils. The real truth is that we would be saved from such evils had Baptism been understood and acted upon by the parents by counting baptism as a responsibility to disciple the child.

2. If circumcision applied to children of eight days old even, why should not Baptism? Is there anything in the   nature of Baptism to prevent it? To say that the latter is done in the Name of the Trinity is no argument, for        the other was done equally in the Name, and with the sanction, of God. That there is a very close analogy             between circumcision and Baptism is proved by Col. ii. 11. I speak of the spiritual significance of each. Both introduce into outward relationship with God and into a sphere of outward privilege. Circumcision was unto something and so is Baptism. To conclude that circumcision might apply to children, but Baptism not, is simply to do violence to the whole bearing of Scripture, and to break up its continuity.
   



3. I have just said that Baptism introduces into outward relationship with God and into a sphere of outward privilege. Some assert there is no such outward place, but I will deal with that under a separate head. I merely wish now to prove from Scripture that, if there be such a place, Baptism is the rite by which we are admitted. I ask you to look with me again at 1 Cor. x. 1-2. Here we find Baptism distinctly linked with the Old Testament. The passage of the Red Sea is said to be the baptizing of all Israel unto Moses. Yet this included children. How then can you say there is no Scripture for the Baptism of infants? So truly did the Red Sea set forth this ordinance that the Word of God unhesitatingly describes it as Baptism. And as you yourself very correctly remark, in your note to p. 7 “There are no ‘different views’ of Baptism in the Scriptures.” If     that is so then here we have the truth as to Baptism itself and to whom it applies. One often hears the argument how can you baptize children—infants—when you don’t know how they are going to turn out? If people knew what Baptism is they would never advance such a reason. Did everybody know how these children were going to turn out? As a matter of fact, many of them turned out very badly. But that was not because of their Baptism, but because they forgot it. The fact remains that they were baptized, and it is no less a person than St. Paul, the special minister of the Church, who tells us so; and this long after Christianity was established.

In this last fact we have a proof then that Christianity has not altered Baptism. Writing in the full blaze of Christianity this servant of God, more enlightened perhaps than any other, can go right back to the Exodus and say, “That is Baptism.” For as you say, there are no different views of Baptism; and that being so, on your own showing, I have done perfectly right in baptizing my children.

The Apostle adds, “Now these things were our examples.” You will object, perhaps, “but does it not say, they did all eat the same spiritual meat—children and all; and therefore, to be consistent, you ought to allow infants to partake of the Lord’s Supper.” But does the Apostle call the spiritual meat the Lord’s Supper? I do not see it. It is true, further on he refers to the Table and the Supper, but he carefully abstains from bringing in either term here. But I do see that he calls the Red Sea Baptism. But the manna is not a type, in any sense, of the other ordinance. How much we learn then from this Scripture!

We learn (1) that Christianity cannot be cut adrift from the past; (2) That Baptism is the same always, the same now as at the Red Sea ; and therefore (3) if children were baptized at the Red Sea they can be baptized today, for the Apostle does not intimate any change, either in the rite or its application; (4) If the Apostle can go back to an incident in Israel’s history, and call it Baptism, and this Baptism undoubtedly included children, then it is beyond controversy that at some period in the history of God’s people children have been baptized quite apart from their own faith. (For surely no one will try to make a point of the fact that we do not appear to have the exact ages of all the children). If it was right then, why is it so awfully wrong now? Do you reply that we have to do now with Christianity? My answer is (1) Was not St. Paul a Christian when he penned this passage? and was he not writing to Christians? and (2) you yourself say “there are no different views of Baptism in the Scriptures.”

The case of Lydia and the Jailer

But let us come to two passages of Scripture having a direct bearing upon the subject of Household Baptism, and upon which the above incident may throw some light. I refer to Acts xvi., and the cases of Lydia and the Jailer. Is it not a little remarkable that on the very threshold of Europe, when the Gospel is about to enter, you should have two cases almost at one and the same moment of households being baptized? Especially when, as we have seen already, the Romans were accustomed to associate their children with the privileges they themselves enjoyed. Bearing in mind the teaching of 1 Cor. x. all seems as clear as daylight. It tells us that Lydia was baptized and her household. Just what we should expect from Old Testament analogy. And it was so well understood that children were associated with their parents, that it would have been accounted strange for anyone to have drawn special attention to the fact that the household contained young children. The whole point is “her household” was baptized, whether there were young children or not.

So that, here we have “household” distinctly connected with Baptism. I have seen it argued that the Baptism of Households is in the Bible, but Household Baptism is not. Which is like saying that the Baptism of believers is in the Bible, but Believers’ Baptism is not. For you cannot find the expression “Believers’ Baptism.” If Households were baptized then there was certainly Household Baptism. But it does not mention children, you say. It does not mention anything. What the Bible teaches everywhere is that the “Household” is always identified with the head of the house.

Let me ask you, before passing from this point, if believers only ought to be baptized, how do you account for the repeated use of “Household” in connection with Baptism? If this rite is only administered on the ground of what is individual, the use at all of the term “Household” is not only entirely superfluous, but altogether mystifying. It would have been so easy and natural to have said a certain number of people believed and were baptized, if Believers’ Baptism was all that was known and recognized. On the other hand, does not the reiteration of “Household” reveal what was in people’s minds at that time? The way people have of expressing themselves will sometimes tell us what is in their minds as definitely as could the most clearly worded formula.

What about the case of the Philippian jailer? In the Greek, at all events, and I suppose that is to guide us? Nothing of the kind! The Authorized Version does not in this instance faithfully represent the original. No other translation to which I have referred (and I will quote three), supports it.

Ver. 32 says: “And they spake unto him the Word of the Lord, and to all that were in his house.”
The Revised reads: “And they spake the Word of the Lord unto him, with all that were in his house.”
Weymouth renders it            : “As well as to all who were in his house.”
J.N.D.: “With all that were in his house,” supporting the Revised.

From this it evidently means that the whole household was present when the word was preached. The difference of translation is not unimportant, because the A.V. would almost make it appear as if St. Paul might have spoken to the household separately, or even to each individual apart. But preached unto him, with all that were in his house, would ordinarily mean when they were all together.

But the next alteration is more to the point.
Ver. 34 A.V. reads: ” . . . and rejoiced, believing in God with all his house.”
Revised: ” . . . and rejoiced greatly, with all his house, having believed in God.”
Weymouth: ” . . . and was filled with gladness, with his whole household, his faith resting on God.”
J.N.D.: ” . . . and rejoiced with all his house, having believed in God.”

Now here, no less than three recognized translations (and the Englishman’s Greek N.T. supports them) agree in separating “faith” from the household and connecting it with the head of the house. Weymouth actually inserting the pronoun “his,” which the others of course imply. So that it was a genuine case of Household Baptism after all. For it is the faith of the head of the house that is alone spoken of.

In the light of these three translations (and is anyone prepared to dispute their accuracy?) the case stands thus:

St. Paul begins with the announcement “Thou shalt be saved, and thy house.” Could he tell (even though an Apostle) that there would be personal faith on the part of everyone in the house before ever he had preached to them? Did he know of whom the household was composed? For as yet he had never entered it. Then the Apostle spake unto him the word of the Lord in the presence of his household, and being convinced of the man’s faith, baptized him and his household. “And was baptized, he and all his.” What an expressive term: “HE AND ALL HIS.” Here we have our warrant for Household Baptism. “He and all his” represents with a conciseness which leaves nothing to be desired, the divine and gracious principle that runs all through God’s dealings with His people. In the light of this interpretation, the words “and thine house,” become quite easy of explanation. In paragraph 7 of your introduction you wrote [How can all such teaching as “unity,” “holiness,” the “Christian position,” and “the answer of a good conscience towards God,” be thrown away” if others than believers are eligible for baptism?”] Are not children baptized in view of all that? At the opening of this same paragraph, [“the apostles base much important teaching to the saints on the fact that they had been baptized.”] If an infant of Christian parents is baptized, does it not follow that all that important teaching is for him? If important teaching is based upon baptism—as you assert, and correctly—then how can you apply it until a person is baptized. A baptized child is precisely the one to whom the teaching does apply. That Baptism is with reference to the future has been shewn from passage after passage. But take another. In  John i. 31, John the Baptist says of our Lord. “I knew Him not, but that He should be made manifest to Israel, therefore am I come baptizing with water.” In other words,” I baptize with water in view of Christ’s coming.” Could anything be more clear as to the intent of Baptism? On what possible ground, then, can there be any valid objection to children being baptized in view of becoming Christians and walking in newness of life? You will say that Baptism itself cannot effect this. No. Nor could John’s Baptism make people believe on Christ. Nevertheless he baptized all who came to him, in view of that. And as you yourself admit there are not different views of Baptism in Scripture, surely a child of Christian parents, with all its life before it, is just the one who should be baptized, and then trained accordingly. To say that a child must be trained first, and then, when everything is supposed to be true of it, baptized, is to put the cart before the horse.

It is quite true that some who had been baptized with John’s Baptism were afterwards re-baptized in the Name of the Lord, but this does not touch the question of the significance of Baptism itself. There was evidently a personal reason for Paul’s action, for, as far as we know, the Apostles and others who had submitted to the Baptism of John were never baptized a second time.

Infant and Household Baptism—some differences

On page 6 you say that Household Baptism “is Infant Baptism and something worse thrown in.” What the “worse thrown in” may be, you do not tell us. Household Baptism is far removed from the teaching of the Church of England Prayer Book as to the Baptism of infants.[3.] Though even in the Prayer Book there are certain things said of Baptism which are perfectly in keeping with God’s Word. But we do not believe that through Baptism a child is “regenerate and grafted into the body of Christ’s Church.” Baptism is never said, in the Scriptures, to confer anything inward and spiritual. But it does introduce a child outwardly to inestimable benefits, and it is an initiatory rite admitting to external privileges of which it should avail itself on coming to years. Baptism does not indicate a change of state but a change of place.

Between Baptismal Regeneration and Household Baptism there is nothing in common. The fact is, the truth as to Baptism lies between the Ritualistic standpoint and the Baptist. The former makes the rite carry more than it will bear; the latter makes it carry scarcely anything. It becomes a mere adumbration. The one makes it mean too much, the other too little. In Scripture it initiates a person into a place where Divine privileges are enjoyed; as at the Red Sea (1 Cor. x.). It becomes a burial, in view of newness of life (Rom. vi.) it washes away sins (Acts xxii.); it saves (Mark xvi. and 1 Pet. iii.). When a parent therefore baptizes his child he brings it into an outward place of privilege, and does it in view of that child’s future, and trains it in the nurture and admonition of the Lord. It may be asked cannot this be done without baptizing it? Have not hundreds of parents endeavored to bring up their children under the Lord’s authority without exercising the rite? That is quite possible, but nevertheless the divine institution remains. No doubt there are those who seek to remember the Lord without partaking of bread and wine; nevertheless the Lord’s Supper is the appointed way. The same thing is true of Baptism. God ordained that everybody, children as well as grown up people, should be separated from Egypt by Baptism at the Red Sea that He might dwell among them (for the Tabernacle was in the wilderness).

On p. 7 you say that our view of Baptism introduces an intermediary class “which is not quite the world and not quite the Church.” But have you read the Scriptures for so long and never discovered that this class existed in our Lord’s Day, and in the Apostles’? The disciples we read of in John vi. who went back and walked no more with Jesus belonged to this class. Simon Magus, for the time being, belonged to it. The very term “disciple” distinguishes this class. For a disciple is not necessarily a believer. The primary meaning is simply “learner.” And a person can take the place of a learner and never come to be a genuine believer at all. And in this connection it is of all importance to notice that in Matt. xxviii. 19-20, there is not a word about believing, though, of course, it was all done with that in view. But the instructions are, “Go ye therefore and make disciples of (literally disciple) all nations, baptizing them . . . teaching them.” This is the divine order. Some read it as if the Lord had said, “Go and make genuine believers of all nations and then baptize them.” But the whole drift and wording of the commission is against such an interpretation. Our Lord uses the word disciple (learner) not believer; then He says baptize ; and then teach. A learner needs a teacher_, and a teacher needs learners; and moreover “faith cometh by teaching” (Rom. x. 17 means “teaching” as well as hearing—the Greek  word including both ideas). Evidently faith was not necessarily present when Baptism took place, so that these verses do not teach believers’ Baptism, but disciples’ Baptism.

(3.) Let it be said, that, Household Baptism and Infant Baptism are not convertible terms. The former is the baptism of infants belonging to Christian households only, and of no others.

An outward sphere of privilege

I come now to page 11 where you state, “But we have done with all ‘folds’ and circles of privilege. The only circle that the sinner needs to be in, where the grace of God may reach him, is the circle he was born in—a circle 7,000 miles wide.” (?)

Has God, then, really established nothing upon the earth? Are His children houseless and homeless; worse off than the man we read of in Luke x., for he was brought to an inn? Is there not a shelter for us on all this 7,000 (?) miles wide of earth? Why, then indeed, we are worse off than the Jews, for they had a visible dwelling place of God. We, according to you, have nothing. Somewhere in the New Testament it says that believers are “builded together for a habitation of God through the Spirit.” Must that not be a place of privilege?

In Rom. xi. it speaks of an olive tree and of the Gentiles having been grafted into it. Has that no reference to us? Is not the whole treatment of this subject to show that there is today an outward place of privilege? Is not a tree something to be seen? The Apostle speaks of being “grafted in,” and also of being “cut off.” Does not all this necessarily imply an outward sphere of profession and also of privilege? Who are “cut off,” and from what are they “cut off “? This cannot refer to genuine believers, cut off from Christ or deprived of their eternal salvation. The fact is, this passage has no meaning from your point of view; yet the Apostle is addressing Gentiles and using what he says as a warning to those who had professed Christianity. But if there is an outward place of privilege, and the entry to it is by the rite of Baptism, then the meaning of the passage becomes clear at once. From such privileges mere professors may be “cut off.”

St. Paul says, “take heed lest He also spare not thee.” Such words can have no meaning, if there are only the truly saved and the lost, as you teach. But if there is a place today where the Holy Ghost dwells and God’s goodness is manifest and people are in this and yet not truly affected by it—professors without being possessors—then we can understand such terms as “cut off ” and also such passages as Heb. vi. 4-8, which have profession in view.

I come now to your statement on p. 13, that “Israel were (figuratively) a redeemed people and their little ones correspond not to literal infants in the flesh, but to newborn babes in the family of God.” If Israel are to be taken figuratively in this way then they all represented “newborn babes in the family of God,” for they had everyone of them been sheltered by blood only a few days. So that if you make such an application of their history you must include fathers as well as children, for all were sheltered at the same time (and, moreover, all sheltered by households). In the matter of redemption the children were as old as their parents. Were not actual children baptized at the Red Sea?

Having stated the truth as to Baptism from the Scriptures, and also answered the points raised in your pamphlet, the following conclusions seem to have been reached:-‑

1. THE VIEW OF SOME ALTOGETHER TOO LIMITED.

(a)     This view is almost entirely confined to that which is supposed already to have taken place. This is shown to be defective in two ways. First, it deprives Baptism of its real significance, for nothing is made to depend upon it. Second, it confines the act to a representation of something already true, or to one of obedience. The future is almost entirely lost sight of; yet in Scripture, as we have seen, the future is the prominent idea.

(b)     The Baptist position forces those who adhere to it to divorce the New Testament from the Old; isolates Christianity from all that went before; refuses the teaching of some of the types; and would have us think of one of the greatest privileges the Jews possessed as being entirely abrogated ; and this without one word in the New Testament to that effect.

(c)     We have looked in vain for any text in the Bible to tell us that Baptism is to be administered to none but believers only. If you can produce such a text, it will settle the matter.

(d)     Moreover the Baptists can find no room in their theory for quite a number of most important statements in the Bible bearing upon Baptism. Eight persons were saved by water at the Flood; and the faith of only one out of the eight is ever mentioned. Baptism is a “like figure,” we are told, and saves us. Yet Baptists rob this of all its meaning by first of all excluding all thought of children being associated with their parents, as was the case with Noah and his family; and then by affirming, not that Baptism saves, but that it only represents that a person is already saved. It is impossible, in the very nature of things, for a Baptist to give an intelligent interpretation of 1 Pet. iii. 21. Nor can he explain satisfactorily Acts xxii. 16 and 1 Cor. x. 1-2. Whenever they are confronted with these Scriptures instead of explaining them, they attempt to explain them away.

2. AS TO HOUSEHOLD BAPTISM.

While the Baptist theory finds no place for much of the teaching on Baptism recorded in the Word of God, the truth of Household Baptism harmonizes and embraces it all. It emphasizes the prospective aspect of Baptism, for a child is therein committed to Christ and His death: with a view to his whole future. It maintains the Divine principle concerning parents and children—”He and all his”; so that instead of there being an utter want of continuity between God’s past and present dealings, as is the case with the Baptist theory, they are seen as one harmonious whole. For we have shown that the truth as to the “Household” is bound up with the very warp and woof of revelation; and the counterpart of Noah and his family; “a lamb for an house”; Abraham and his Household, is found in Lydia “and her household”; and the Jailer “and all his.”

While, in addition to these concrete instances, the very phraseology of the New Testament proves that the theory of the “Household” is incorporated into Christianity. The very mention of Households being baptized; of the Apostle Peter connecting Baptism with Noah and his family (eight persons); and the terms of the commission at the close of Matthew’s Gospel, prove this.

In conclusion, do these views of Baptism lower our thoughts of the rite or raise them? They are enhanced a hundredfold. How much more real and solemn Baptism would become if it were regarded from the proper point of view, viz., an act carrying with it its own meaning, and in view of the future. By that act an identification with Christ and His death; a renunciation of the world, sin and the flesh; and a walking henceforth in newness of life. And, instead of looking upon Baptism as one act of obedience, regarding it as a most solemn committal to a life-long course of obedience.

It will be seen therefore that my views of Baptism give it a scope and meaning which yours do not; and they are, I believe, far more Scriptural than yours. Can this disqualify anyone for ministering the Word, as you suggest? Surely the ban you would place upon us is as unreasonable as it is unwarranted. You seem to me to be in the position of having only half-a-loaf. Now while half-a-loaf may be better than no bread, I have yet to learn that half-a-loaf is better than a whole one.

The whole position can be put in a nutshell : (1) There is not a single text of Scripture which states that none but believers only are to be baptized; (2) There is not a single text which prohibits children being associated with their Christian parents by Baptism; (3) Had this principle of association, which runs all through the Old Testament, been set aside there must, in the very nature of things, have been some reference to it, for such an alteration involved nothing short of a revolution; the overturning of all the prevailing ideas and customs both in the Jewish and Gentile world; whereas not so much as a single sentence is penned upon the subject.

Is Household Baptism, after all, very wide of the mark?

I remain,
Yours sincerely,

RUSSELL ELLIOTT.

 

Editors Notes:

In the new testament Baptism was done immediately after one was saved (and to the Household of a believing Head). Some see that it should be done AFTER the believer sees the importance of it and is willing to be obedient by submitting to baptism. As this article brings out, the meaning and significance of baptism is that baptism should be done right away so the believer and his household can leave the old ground that they occupy for the new position of blessing in the kingdom here on earth. And as some writers have pointed out, baptism really isn’t a command to those who are to be baptized; rather, it is a command to the “baptizers” to disciple (Matthew 28:19, 20).   As a question to the reader, “Why do some people in the present time wait to be baptized, some times for years after they are saved, when souls were baptized immediately in the early church as recorded in the book of Acts?”

Hebrews 10; Hebrews 13: 9-16.

 

The power of our path — of our walk in this world, is the understanding, through the Holy Ghost, of our identification with Christ in all our ways, and our being set in the world to manifest Him, not merely to know that we have salvation, and the purging of our consciences through His most precious blood. The testimony of a Christian bears this character, he is treading in the footsteps of Christ. “To me, to live is Christ:” again, “I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave Himself for me.” That puts each of us in the place of responsibility as to our ways, our habits, our feelings, and objects. Are we realizing the responsibility of living Christ? That is really what the Church of God is set in the world for — to be the expression of Christ in His absence. A Christian’s conscience often satisfies itself with handing to the unconverted man the Bible, so that he may read what Christ was; but this is not the object for which Christ has left us here. — “Ye are the epistles of Christ, known and read of all men.” Are we such an epistle as persons can read? It is not a person’s coming to me, and saying, What is your creed? What views do you hold? and the like. If I am not an expression of the ways and feelings of Christ, I am a stumbling-block, rather than otherwise. The Christian should be the living, breathing expression of Christ — of the principles, features, graces, of the character of Christ. Alas! the whole of Christianity is often made to consist in a set of opinions: one gets his place and is characterized by what opinions he holds. We are called upon necessarily to live the Christ in whom we believe; we are one with Him, and are called to show forth what He is. But the whole power, by which I am to act and to show that, is the understanding that I am one with Him.

 

There are two great stages of Christ’s path, and of the believer’s, as identified with Him, presented to us in the Epistle to the Hebrews. The first ends (Heb. 10) where the soul is set in “the holiest.” Up to that the Holy Ghost is conducting us along, step by step; there He sets us down in this blessed place, “having boldness to enter into the holiest, by the blood of Jesus, by a new and living way, which He hath consecrated for us, through the veil, that is to say, His flesh.”

 

The power of intelligent devotedness is the understanding of the perfect purging of our consciences. Many do not understand this; they are aiming at getting it, and that is a complete reversing of God’s order. I have a purged conscience; I go on, not to obtain it, but because I have it. How do I get it? Not by anything that I have done, by my frames or feelings, as a matter of attainment or experience; the Holy Ghost teaches us that it is by the blood of Jesus.

 

He shows the glory of the person of Christ, as contrasted with angels and with Moses; that of His priesthood as contrasted with Aaron’s; that of His sacrifice, as contrasted with the sacrifices under the law. And what is the result? We have a purged conscience. He has set us down within the veil. It is not what one Christian has, and what another is struggling after, but the common platform of all — we all have a purged conscience. Some suppose that the blood of Christ has put away our sins before conversion; and then, as to what becomes of those after, they are met by the priesthood of Christ; but this is not what He says: it is by the blood of Christ; we are within the holiest with a perfectly-purged conscience, with “no more conscience of sins.” It is just worthy of the sacrifice of Christ to put me in possession of this, and nothing short of it; all my sins, not some of them, blotted out. There, where the High Priest could go in once every year, and only then, the simplest believer is set down.

 

 

When one comes to deal closely with souls, one discovers what doubts, clouds, fears, and anxieties, have possession of and distress them. If the blood of Christ does anything for us, it sets us there without spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing. “Having, therefore, brethren, boldness to enter into the holiest by the blood of Jesus …. let us draw near,” etc. There is no difference here between apostle and others; the apostle Paul and the thief on the cross: in other words, all alike have a common place within the veil.

 

The priesthood of Christ comes in to maintain me practically where the blood of Christ has set me. As in the expression in the Epistle of John, “If any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous [Jesus Christ is at God’s right hand on all principles of righteousness], and He is the propitiation [the mercy-seat] for our sins.” “If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.” It is a much easier thing for a child to ask for pardon for some fault than to confess it. We may be asking for pardon for any special sin, and we have no Scripture warrant to know that it is put away; but when we confess it, it is a matter of faith to know that it is put away. I am speaking now of a believer: were it the question of an unconverted person, the blood of Christ meets that. God is “faithful and just (not gracious and merciful merely), to forgive us our sins,” etc. The moment I have judged myself about it, I am entitled to know that it is gone.

 

What a very wondrous place to set the believer in at the very outset of his course of discipleship! — washed from his sins, his conscience purged, set down in the unclouded sense of the light of God’s own countenance! But what to do? to rest there? No; that is the foundation on which the superstructure of practical devotedness is based. Legalism and antinomianism are alike met. What does the system of legalism say? You must work yourself up into this place of acceptance. The gospel says, Christ has put me there. I never could get there; the law has proved that. When God gave the law, what was He doing? “You shall do this,” “You shall not do that,” brought out what man’s heart was; it was impossible he could do what God was telling him he ought to do, and impossible he should not be what God was telling him not to be: — “As many as are of the works of the law are under the curse.” I can never, by works of law, get into the holiest of all. I am put there as the result of what Christ has accomplished for me on the cross; and this is stated at the very outset of the epistle: “When He had by Himself purged our sins, He sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high ” (Heb. 1: 3). Why does it say “sat down”? To evidence the completion of the work. Aaron never sat down; there was no seat prepared for the priest, either in the tabernacle or the temple.

 

What does antinomianism lead men to say? “I have it, I possess it all in Christ,” and there it ends. But no! the gospel puts me there, to run the blessed race that is set before me, in ardent, earnest breathing of the soul to become like Christ.

 

If the first division sets me down within the holiest, the second places me without the camp. I find Christ, as it regards my conscience, “inside the veil.” I find Christ, as it regards my heart, “outside the camp.”

 

It does not become us to take only the comfort which flows from our knowing Christ to be within the veil — the comfort His sacrifice gives us, I must seek practical identification with Him without the camp. Christ within the veil tranquillizes my  conscience. Christ outside the camp quickens, energizes my soul to run more devotedly the race set before me. “The bodies of those beasts, whose blood is brought into the sanctuary by the high priest for sin, are burned without the camp. Wherefore Jesus also, that He might sanctify the people with His own blood, suffered without the gate. Let us go forth, therefore, unto Him without the camp, bearing His reproach” (ver. 11-13). No two points are morally more remote than inside the veil and outside the camp, and yet they are brought together here. Inside the veil was the place where the shekinah of God’s glory dwelt; outside the camp the place where the sin-offering was burned — no place gives such an idea of distance from God as that. It is blessed to know that the Holy Ghost presents to me Jesus filling up all that is between these two points. I have nothing to do whatever with the camp. The camp was the place of ostensible profession (in type, the camp of Israel; in antitype, the city of Jerusalem). Why did Christ suffer without the gate? in order to show the setting aside of the mere machinery of Israel‘s outward profession.

 

We may be clear as to the work of Christ being done for us (and God forbid there should be a cloud cast across the blessedness of that), knowing the conscience to be made perfect; but is tranquility of conscience all I want? is there no responsibility? is Christ’s voice from within the veil all? has He no voice outside the camp? It will be found that, after all, the joy, peace, liberty, flowing from our hearing Christ’s voice inside the veil, is very much dependent on our listening to His voice outside the camp. Those who know most of suffering with Him, and bearing His reproach, will know most of the blessedness of His place within the veil. Our conduct, our ways, our path through the earth, must be tested by Christ. — “Would Christ be there? would Christ do this?” The Holy Ghost must be grieved if the saint pursues a course contrary to that which Christ would have pursued; and then the soul must be lean. How can a grieved Spirit testify of Christ — how can He give the soul the comfort and joy and peace of His testimony to Him? How can I be enjoying Christ if I am not walking in company with Him? We know that we cannot enjoy the company of a person unless we are where that person is — where then is Christ? “Outside the camp.” — “Let us go forth, therefore, unto Him without the camp, bearing His reproach.” This is not to go forth to men, or to opinions, to a church, or to a creed, but to Christ Himself. We are not of the world — why? Because Christ is not of the world; the measure of our separation from the world is the measure of Christ’s separation. “For here have we no continuing city;” do our hearts seek one? — some set of circumstances or the like, a something on which to lean? Are we saying, as it were, “Oh do leave me something”? like Lot pleading for Zoar, “Is it not a little one?” do not take it all away, “is it not a little one; and my soul shall live!” Lot‘s was a heart going out after a little of the world still. When the heart is filled with Christ it can give up the world, there is no difficulty in doing it then. The mere saying, “Give up this,” or “give up that,” to one loving the world, will be of no avail; what I have to do is to seek to minister to that soul more of Christ.

 

I am outside the camp, I am seeking a city that is to come, I am waiting for Him who is to come. In this condition, of dislodgement from the world and from its system, I find myself in two positions — one towards God, and the other towards man. The first, “By Him, therefore, let us offer the sacrifice of praise to God continually, that is, the fruit of our lips, giving thanks to His name” (ver. 15). The second, the lovely development of the spirit of active benevolence of the next verse, “But to do good and to communicate forget not; for with such sacrifices God is well pleased” (ver. 16).

 

I am within the veil with Christ, — outside the camp in the world, “bearing His reproach;” and, whilst thus delivered from the profession around me, that is not of Him, I am engaged in worship and doing good to all.

 

In regard to my hope, it is not, as people say, the “holding the doctrine of the second advent,” but “waiting for God’s Son from heaven.” This is not a dead, dry doctrine. If we are really waiting for God’s Son from heaven, we shall be sitting loose to the world.

 

I have Christ for my soul’s need, and I am only “waiting for God’s Son from heaven,” for Christ to come from heaven to take His Church unto Himself, that where He is we may be also, and that may be this night. I am not looking for antichrist, for signs, for movements amongst the nations, but for this one holy, happy thing, I am waiting for God’s Son from heaven. Oh do not let us be inconsistent, do not let us contradict that —seeking to grasp Christ with one hand, and hold fast the world with the other. If we know our position “within the veil,” we must know our position “outside the camp,” reproached, it may be, scorned, hated, suspected, of all who are not outside, but in the joy of fellowship with Him. “When Christ, who is our life, shall appear, we also then shall appear with Him in glory.”

A Word to believers as to fellowship with Christians

 

INTRODUCTORY REMARKS

 

As long as the solemn question of the soul’s eternal salvation is left in dark uncertainty there will be little, if any, freedom of spirit to think of that which interests Christ or concerns His glory, apart from the bare matter of the sinner’s peace and safety. On the other hand, when one who professes to have the knowledge of this great salvation gives evidence in walk and ways of cold indifference to those interests, it manifests either a very shallow work in the soul, or no real work at all. For be sure of this, that the work of the spirit in a soul is as great a reality as the work of Christ for that soul, and that in whomsoever He (the Spirit) dwells, His activity will always tend to the glory of Christ. ” He shall glorify Me,” said the blessed Lord; “for He shall receive of Mine, and shall show it unto you,” John 16:14. In case this should fall into the hands of a troubled soul, it may well be to add here, for his comfort, that peace does not depend upon our being satisfied with the work of the spirit in us, but upon God’s satisfaction in the work of Christ for us, and as this rests eternally the same, the ground of our peace is unchanging too. “Christ also hath once suffered for the sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God.” I Peter 3:18. But it is for those who have been recently been brought to the knowledge of salvation that this little book is intended, though it is the earnest prayer of the writer that its pages may graciously be used to the exercise and blessing of every reader who loves our Lord Jesus Christ in sincerity. How should I like, before we proceed further, to fill your heart (if it is not already full) with the warm and heavenly rays which shine forth from that little sentence in John 13:1-“Having loved His own which were in the world, He loved them unto the end!” ” His own!” What a precious thought! His, not only by Creator-right and redemption- titles, but His by gift form the Father-“Thine they were, and Thou gavest them Me,” John 17:6. And so precious is this thought to His own heart, that seven times over in that remarkable out-breathing of His soul to the Father (John 17) He makes mention of it. Is this not enough to fill your heart, dear reader? ‘Tis true you are left for a little while in this cold, dark world, but you are “loved” by Him, and loved through everything, right on “to the end.” Never dream, I pray you, of asking Him to increase His love toward you. He never could love you more, and He never will love you less. Blessed be His name, His love is like Himself-infinite and eternal.

 

“Love that no tongue can teach,

Love that no thought can reach;

No love like His.

God is its blessed source,

Death ne’er can stop its course,

Nothing can stay its force;

Matchless it is.”

 

Now I need not say that you are not the only one in this poor world loved by Christ and saved by His precious blood. There are other joint-heirs, “many sons,” that have God’s eternal glory as their bright destiny; and I am desirous of saying a few simple words to you about your path in connection with these, your fellow-Christians-” His own” -left with you in the world. But I would first say,

 

BE RIGHT WITH GOD IN SECRET,

 

And would earnestly press upon you the deep importance of personal piety, and the wholehearted devotedness to Christ, apart from the question of any other saint on earth. May the Holy Spirit of God make this plain to you. Depend upon it; to be right with God in your closet is of equal importance to being right with Him in public, among your fellow-Christians. Take a simple illustration. Will not a good servant see to the proper condition of the glasses, etc., before he puts them in their places on the master’s table? And will not he soldier look well that his accouterments are in a bright and worthy state before he steps into rank with his comrades? Mark, I am not going to say a word against right order, but rather to urge its importance. Yet I do see the necessity of pressing upon you a prior thing. What would any master care for the most exact order of laying a table if the knives and forks, etc., were in a dirty and unsatisfactory sate, and the servant himself in a disgraceful untidiness? Or what captain is satisfied with the punctuality and regularity of his men, if their rifles were foul and their bayonets rusty? Of course, a servant who cared for the approval of his master would neglect none of these things. Now pause here a moment, and let me ask myself and you a practical question: Is there anything in your heart which you are well aware would not have a place there for an instant if your blessed Lord and Master had it all His own way with you? Let us honestly face that question, and be very jealous lest there be a single selfish reserve in our hearts from Him. A Christian who cherishes such a reserve is virtually saying, “Lord, I can trust Thee with my safety, but cannot trust Thee with my happiness.” Oh, let us consider Him more, dear reader! “He sold all that He had,” and gave His precious lifeblood too, for the joy of making us “His own”; and having done and suffered all this for us, He now gives everything to us, and makes a feast for His own heart in doing it. What a Giver! What a Lover! Blessed, thrice blessed Savior! Help me praise Him, and let us exalt His name together. Well, the more you become at home with Him, to use a familiar expression, the more you will joyfully anticipate being with Him at home, and the greater heavenly glow and fervor will your testimony have until you get there. No amount of effort will bring about this state; but in keeping His company, and beholding Him in glory, where He now is, you will be “changed into the same image from glory to glory,” and thus reflect His moral beauty here below. The more practically we become like Him, the louder our lives speak for Him. Whenever you find that your appetite for Him is diminishing, you may be pretty sure that one or more of the “little foxes that spoil the vines” are finding an undisturbed lodging-place in your heart. Therefore, search diligently, and spare them not, or else bid farewell to your joy and spiritual prosperity. But go at once to Him, and say, with full surrender of your own will,” search me O God, and know my heart: try me, and know my thoughts: and see if there be any wicked way in me (margin, way of pain or grief), and lead me in the way everlasting.” Ps. 139:23,24. Ever may it be-“Our only grief to give Him pain, our joy to serve and follow Him.” What a luxury it is to one that loves the Lord to have the consciousness in his soul that he is ministering pleasure to the heart of Christ! I t is then that the brightest offer the world can make you but crumbles into dust and ashes at your feet.

 

STEPS RIGHTLY DIRECTED, A FALSE WAY DETECTED.

 

It is well at the commencement of your Christian career to be fully alive to the fact that it is the word of God, which must be the touchstone for everything in your path, whether personally or relatively. Look at Psalm 119:104, ” Through Thy precepts I get understanding: therefore I hate every false way “; and again, verse 128, ” therefore I esteem all Thy precepts concerning all things to be right; and I hate every false way.” Notice how the Holy Spirit speaks through the Psalmist. It is either a right way because according to the word, or it is a false way to be hated. Man naturally loves to tone things down to keep his conscience quiet. God in creation “divided the light from the darkness,” and morally He does so still. Man would blend them together in a kind of dim twilight; but beware of these subtle compromises, and like David, say, “The double-minded have I hated, but Thy law do I love.” v.113. Now do not let this apply only to the question of your salvation and personal state, but to that also which I now desire briefly to dwell upon; viz.,

 

YOUR GROUND OF FELLOWSHIP WITH OTHER CHRISTIANS; OR, IN OTHER WORDS, YOUR CHURCH POSITION.

 

One of the first things, I believe, which the renewed heart craves for is fellowship with God’s people. He finds himself no longer at home in the world, and naturally seeks “his own company.” But amidst all the names and divisions of disordered Christendom, a newborn soul may well inquire, “Where shall I turn to be right?” My answer is, ” To God, and to the word of His grace,” Acts 20:32. Whoever is wrong, God and His word are right. Get that well grounded in your soul, and “cease from man, whose breath is in his nostrils.” A few years ago two Christians, hitherto strangers to each other, were traveling together in a railway carriage, when, after some conversation about the Lord and His interests, one of them leaned forward and said,” May I ask what denomination you belong to?” “Well, that is a common enough question,” replied the other, “but will you first say what you think is to guide me in my path as a Christian?” He agreed at once that it was the word of God alone that could with certainty direct him. “Then, if you will allow me,” said his fellow-traveler, “I will answer your question by proposing another; viz.,WHAT DENOMINATION DOES THE WORD OF GOD PUT ME INTO?”After some silent deliberation he said, “Why, none at all.” “Then I can’t belong to one at all,” replied the other; “for if I did (upon your own showing), I should clearly be in a position where the word of God had not placed me” “But,” replied the first speaker, “does not the word of God exhort us not to forsake the assembling of ourselves together, ‘and so much the more, as we see the day approaching’?” Heb.10: 25. “Yes, it does. But a Christian need not belong to a denomination to obey that word; for the Lord Jesus said, “Where two or three are gathered in My name, there am I in the midst of them.” Matt.18: 20. Now, dear reader, if you look at 2 John 6, you will find that he exhorts the elect lady, and those with her, thus: “And this is love, that we walk after His commandments. This is the commandment. That, as ye have heard from the beginning, ye should walk in it.” Now John had seen the Lord in His wondrous life; had seen Him die upon the cross; and was a witness of His resurrection; beheld Him taken up into Heaven; and was present when on the day of Pentecost the Holy Spirit came down from an ascended Christ to baptize believers into one body, and thus form the Church. He had lived long enough to see evil come into the circle of the professing Church; but what is the remedy? Is it, “Begin afresh with a new and purer sect of a more improved constitution?” Listen to his reply by the Holy Spirit: “This is the commandment, that, as ye have heard from the beginning ye should walk in it.” so that the Spirit of God makes it plain that He suffers no innovation of man’s to trespass upon the sacred principles of God’s word for the guidance of His people, whatever their exercises may be, or whatever the date of their history. Now apply this principle today, and you must find yourself in one of two positions-either on God’s ground of gathering the disciples at the beginning, or on some ground that man, in his fancied wisdom or mistaken zeal, has set up since the beginning.

 

THE ONE BODY AND ITS MEMBERS.

 

In Acts 2:42, it is said of the early disciples “they continued steadfastly in the apostles’ doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers.” After the conversion of Saul of Tarsus an entirely new revelation was made to the Church through this once champion persecutor of the saints; namely, that every believer on earth was united to Christ by the Holy Spirit (see Acts 9:4; I Cor. 6:17; I Cor. 12:12-27); that “as the body is one, and hath many members and all the members of that one body, being many, are one body: so also is (the) Christ. For by one spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit,” I Cor. 12:12,13. Then in fact plainly stated-“There is one body,” but we are exhorted to “endeavor to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace”; that is, we are to maintain practically what the Holy Spirit has formed spiritually. There are two classes of Christians in the world. One practically says, “Man has formed many bodies, and I being a member of one of these (the best according to my opinion), desire to serve its interests in every possible way I can.” The other says, “God has formed one body and made me a member of it, and now I desire by His grace to serve the interests of the Head of that body, according to the principles laid down in His Word who formed it.” Now, dear reader, to which of these classes do you belong? Alas! How many a precious saint of God is represented by the first! Do you not often hear a Christian talk about “joining” this or that body? Surely such as one forgets (if he ever knew) that the only body which God in His word recognizes is the “one body” of which Christ Himself is the Head, and of which every true believer is a living member. If saved, therefore (to use a common expression), you are already a “joined member.” “He that is joined unto the Lord is one Spirit,” I Cor. 6:17. And in I Cor. 12:18, using the figure of the human body, the apostle says, “GOD HATH SET the members every one of them in the body AS IT HATH PLEASED HIM.” What sad confusion then to talk of joining some other body. Why not be content with the place God has given you in the “body of Christ,” and seek through grace to fulfill the responsibilities of such a place? Now the Holy Spirit certainly never baptized believers into a ‘sect’ or denomination. Look at I Cor. 1:12,13, and chapter 3:3, and you will see that He meets in the very threshold, so to speak, the incoming of sectarian spirit in Corinth with a most withering stroke of condemnation. “Are ye not carnal, and walk as men? For while one saith, I am of Paul; and another, I of Apollos; are ye not carnal?” But you may inquire, “If it is wrong to stand upon or uphold a sectarian position, is there any definite way laid down in God’s word of expressing the truth of the one body?” To answer this we must look at what Scripture says of

 

THE LORD’S TABLE

 

If you turn to I Cor. 10:16, you will find that just as twelve loaves on the table of showbread expressed what Israel was; viz., twelve tribes (Lev. 24:5,6), so the one loaf of the Lord’s supper is the symbol to express the truth of what the Church on earth is: viz., one body. We being many are one bread (or loaf) and one body: for we are all partakers of that bread (or loaf),” v.17. So that in partaking of the one loaf, the divinely taught Christian owns his union with all true believers on the face of the whole earth, whatever their ignorance, weakness, or Christ-dishonoring divisions may be. But while he does this, he can only have fellowship with those who are seeking to walk in obedience to the word, and in separation from manifested evil. The Holy Spirit of God would certainly never seek to maintain outward unity at the expense of inward holiness.* (Read I Cor. 5:6,7,8,13.) I would just add here, that while the tenth chapter of this epistle speaks of the Lord’s Table, the eleventh speaks more particularly of

 

*The fellowship in the Church of England is much broader than Scripture owns, because every moral-living baptized and confirmed parishioner is admitted to the Lord’s supper, whether he be converted or not; while, on the other hand, that owned in all the dissenting bodies is much too narrow, because in them only those are recognized as “members” who hold the views of this or that particular sect or denomination.

If Scripture therefore is to be your guide, you must be on a ground wide enough to include every member of the body of Christ, whose walk and ways are according to holiness and truth, and narrow enough to exclude all that scriptural discipline would shut out.

 

THE LORD’S SUPPER

 

Here our divine affections are called forth in remembrance of the blessed worthy One Himself, and whilst doing this together we “show His death until He come.” Then we shall no longer need such symbols, but see Him face to face. But is it not sad to think of the cold-hearted neglect of this blessed privilege by many of those whose redemption cost Him His precious blood? Think you, is it nothing to His heart that those whom He loves so tenderly should manifest such disregard for what may be called His farewell wish, expressed, as it was, on the night of His betrayal, and re-expressed from His place of exaltation in glory? “As often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do show the Lord’s death till He come,” I Cor. 11:26. And we find, in Acts 20:7, that the disciples, in loving response to this their Lord and Master’s wish came together “on the first day of the week, to break bread.” Yet in our day some consider the first Sunday in a month sufficiently frequent, others once a quarter, and many even allow a still longer time to elapse without granting Him this special desire of His heart. Now which of us would not freely acknowledge that it was deplorable ingratitude on the part of Pharaoh’s butler, when, after Joseph had turned his sadness into joy, it was said, “Yet did not the chief butler remember Joseph, but forgot him,” Gen. 40:23. And this too, after Joseph’s touching appeal, in which he said, “When it shall be well with thee, think on me.”

 

But still Joseph only ministered joy to his fellow-prisoner for three days, and even this cost him no more than the mere utterance of a few short sentences. While for us the spotless Son of God has purchased eternal blessings, and joys that know no end, at such cost as only He who can fathom the depths of Calvary’s bitterness and woe can rightly estimate. Now what shall be said of him (with whom it is well indeed), who, without a single merit or the slightest cost, receives these infinite and blood-bought blessings at His hand, and the words of eternal; life from His lips, and yet can hear Him say, “This do in remembrance of Me,” without the least apparent response of heart to it? What must the angels who look on (I Cor. 11:10) think of such unexampled ingratitude? Nay, let us ask ourselves, what must the blessed One Himself think of it? Not long ago we were told that a few Christians in a country village were often kept, for more than a year together, from eating the Lord’s Supper, just because a certain preacher could not go over to “administer it to them.” This was truly a grievous mistake; for there is no such thing even hinted at in Scripture as any man (not even an apostle) being set apart for such a thing. “The disciples came together to break bread.” It might be well to say here that, according to God’s words, all true believers are now priests (Rev. 1:6; I Pet. 2:5,9), and as such they have the privilege of entering the holiest with boldness, bringing their praises to the Father and to the Son with glad and worshipping hearts. How sadly has human interference set aside the simplicity of divine order, robbing the Lord of His glory, His people of their blessing, and dragging the highest heavenly privileges of Christianity down to the earthly level of Judaism? May the Lord deliver His own from such a state of things so contrary to His mind. But, returning to our subject, let us never forget that the Lord’s Supper must be received in the spirit of self-judgment. (See I Cor. 11:28-31.) Having judged ourselves, and spared nothing about us that is unworthy of Him, we come together, with grateful and undistracted hearts, to think of all the worthiness that is in Him who went down into death for us. What a soul-absorbing privilege it would ever be if our practical state were no hindrance to the Holy Spirit leading us into the true enjoyment of such a heavenly feast! May the frequency of it never rob us of the freshness of it. But there is another feature of

 

THE HOLY SPIRIT’S PRESENCE ON EARTH

 

Which is important to be clear about. The Lord Jesus promised that the Comforter, even the Spirit of Truth, when He came, should not only be in them (individually) but with them (corporately), John 14:16,17. And without going into the matter now, it is evident from such scriptures I Cor. 14 that in the beginning of the Church’s history His presence was owned and His guidance & operation looked for, both in public meetings and with individuals. Alas, how human arrangements have set aside the word of God in this matter, robbing His people, and quenching His Spirit! And so widespread in Christendom has this evil become, that, look where you will, from St. Peter’s in Rome down to the smallest dissenting chapel, you can see it. Instead of believers, when assembled together for worship or edification, depending on the Lord alone for the guidance of His Spirit, why, even a prayer meeting can scarcely be held without the appointment of someone to “conduct” it. This one or that, whether led of the Spirit or not, is called upon to “engage in prayer,” while the “prayer leader” is supposed to “open” the meeting and “close” it, whatever his state of soul may be. What is all this but man usurping the place of the Holy Spirit, the sad fruit of unbelief as to His personal presence? Some believers even go so far as to pray for Him to be sent, or to Him to come, and this notwithstanding the plain word of the Lord-“He shall give you another Comforter, that He may abide with you FOR EVER,” John 14:16. It should, however, be borne in mind that there is a wide difference between a meeting for preaching the gospel to the unsaved (when the individual servant, according to his measure of gift, is solely responsible to deliver His Master’s message), and a company of God’s redeemed people, coming together for worship or edification.

 

YOUR POSITION TESTED

 

Now, with these simple facts before us, suppose the Peter, James, and John, with a few others of the early disciples, should have lives until the present day, say in one of our English towns, and that they were still meeting in the simplicity of divine order as at the beginning; i.e. gathered together in the name of the Lord Jesus (compare Matt. 18:20 with John 20:19), remembering Him in the breaking of bread in the first day of the week, and waiting for His coming again (examine Acts 20:7; I Cor .11:23-26); maintaining scriptural discipline (see I Cor. 5:9-13; I Tim. 5:20; 2 Thess. 3:6,14, 15; I Thess. 5:14; 2 Tim. 4:2;Titus 2:15; Gal. 6:1); endeavoring to maintain the truth in practice that “there is one body” (Eph. 4:3,4); and recognizing the presence and authority of the Lord Jesus Christ in the midst to guide by the Holy Spirit, whom He will, whether in worship or ministry, thereby ignoring, of course, all human rules and every vestige of what is merely man’s usurped authority. Now calmly pause for a moment and ask yourself the question just referred to: “To what denomination would THEY belong?” It will surely not take much spiritual discernment to answer that question with a very decided negative; and, “Of course,” you will say, “none at all.” But, to bring the question somewhat nearer home, if you were living in that very town yourself, would not you like to have the apostles’ fellowship? I am sure you would. Well, then, in order to get it, you must first leave every kind of sectarian ground set up by man since the beginning of the Church’s history upon earth and accept, with its consequences, the “apostles’ doctrine.” Then, having got upon their ground of “fellowship”, you would have the privilege of expressing it with them in the “breaking of bread.” “The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the fellowship of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the fellowship of the body of Christ?” I Cor. 10:16. But you may say, perhaps, that the apostles are not living on earth now. Well, but, thank God, their doctrine is-“the word which liveth and abideth forever”; and that puts me in this day on the same ground of fellowship that they were upon in that day; i.e., if I submit to be guided and governed by it.

 

OBJECTIONS ANSWERED

 

This may perhaps fall into the hands of some older Christian, who says, “Well, I see that the ground I have been upon has no warrant in Scripture; but I am not capable of putting the thing right.” Probably not; but your responsibility is to put yourself right. “If a man therefore purge himself from these (vessels to dishonor), he shall be a vessel unto honor, sanctified, and meet for the Master’s use, and prepared unto every good work. Flee also youthful lusts: but follow righteousness, faith, love, peace, with them that call on the Lord out of a pure heart.” 2 Tim. 2:19-22 To Jeremiah of old, who stood valiantly for God amidst a sinful and rebellious people, it was said, “If thou take forth the precious from the vile, thou shalt be as My mouth: let them return unto thee; but return not thou unto them.” Jer. 15:19 “But” reasons another, “ought I not to stay in the place and among the people where my soul was converted?” Well, I think you will see at once that such a principle could not possibly apply to every Christian. Some are converted amid the gross darkness of Romanism: would you have them stay there? -Saul of Tarsus on the roadside amongst the haters of Christ? One is saved on the battlefield; and only tonight I heard of a young man brought to God while tempest-tossed and well-nigh driven to despair in the Bay of Biscay. In all such cases God is sovereign (“The wind bloweth where it listeth.”); He can convert a soul anywhere, and by any means. But from the moment he is converted he is no longer his own, nor has he any right to choose his own path, or do his own will; he must henceforth consult the wishes of another-even his own precious Lord and Master, and seek His all-sufficient grace and power to carry those wishes out. A man may enlist for a soldier in the common dram-shop, in the public market, or wherever the recruiting sergeant can prevail upon him to join the colors, but as you are aware, from that day he is no longer his own master: he must prepare himself to obey the wishes of His Majesty. Now what would you think of a recruit who insisted upon staying where he was enlisted, or even with the recruiting staff? Such a course might possibly suit him, but he must now yield to other and higher authority. There may be another who says, “Nearly all my Christian friends are in such a sect; and, besides, is it not right to go where you can get the most good?” Well, I have no doubt that Jonathan might have reasoned thus when, in David’s days, he chose rather to think of his own good with his own relations in Saul’s court than of following one who so dearly loved him in a pathway of suffering, loneliness and rejection. But had poor, lamented Jonathan consulted David’s interests instead of his own, had he devotedly cleaved to him, hated and hunted though David was, he would probably never have fallen, as he did, on the mountains of Gilboa. Ah, dear fellow-believer, depend upon it, neither the opinion of your friends, nor your own judgment of what is most for your good, can guide you in these matters! The truth of God alone can direct you in a Christ-honoring path, and the God of truth alone can sustain you in it. The Scripture which makes you wise unto salvation furnishes you unto all good works; i.e., with all needful instruction for your path (2 Tim. 3:15-17). And since this is so, you ought to be as sure of one as the other. There can surely be no shadow of uncertainty to faith when God has spoken His mind; but how sad that so many, even of His professed people, should glibly speak of “essentials” and “nonessentials” in the things of God, which usually means that whatever concerns their own safety and blessing is essential, and all the rest, no matter how closely connected with the glory of the blessed Son of God, is to be treated with comparative indifference as nonessential! Oh, what miserable selfishness does this manifest! What a different state of things characterized the dear apostle! The earnest desire of his heart was, that Christ should be “magnified in my body, whether by life or by death;” his one motto was-“To me to live is Christ, and to die is gain.” Phil. 1:20, 21 But there is yet another objection which is sometimes raised against leaving a human for a divine ground of association and fellowship; viz., the failures and inconsistencies of those who professedly occupy this ground. Most sorrowfully, though frankly, do I own that those who, through grace, have clearly seen the place to be of God, and sought to occupy it, have very painfully and disgracefully failed; while some, no doubt, who professedly took the ground, never saw what they were doing, nor had any depth of godly exercise about it; so that when their faithfulness to the principles which professedly separated them were put to the test, they either in practice denied those very principles or else forsook them altogether. This, however, no more proves the position wrong than the failure of His Majesty’s Ministers in the House of Commons proves that it is not the true House of Parliament, or Uzziah’s failure in the temple, or, still worse, that of king Ahaz, prove that it was not God’s center of gathering for all the thousands of Israel (2 Chron. 26: 16-20; 2 Kings 16:10-17); while, on the other hand, the most spotless morality in those assembled by Jereboam at Dan or Bethel, the most ardent zeal, the most unexampled self-denial, coupled with the greatest popularity and the voice of the majority (ten tribes against two), could not possibly make those altars the right centers, justify Jereboam in setting them up.

 

CONCLUDING REMARKS

 

God has ever claimed the right to fix a gathering center for His people, and to settle the order of priestly service & worship; and surely this not less true of the Church than of Israel. But let it be well remembered that He never regarded mere correct outward order as sufficient to satisfy Him. (See Isaiah 1:11-17.) In the future history of His ancient people there will be, according to prophecy, a great re-gathering to God’s center-Jerusalem. But what a sifting will they have to pass through ere their state is suited to the holiness of Jehovah! And they will be sifted, too, by what is false among themselves. What a solemn thought for us, since a similar state of things in Church history has been foretold by the apostle Paul in Acts 20:30, “Also of your own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them.” But, as already noticed, the apostle at once carries them to the resting-place of the faith of the faith of His chosen in all ages; viz., “God, and the word of His grace.” Whatever sifting may come, blessed be His name, we shall ever find in Him and in His word all that we need until the Lord Himself shall descend from heaven, and with His “shout” bring about, “in the twinkling of an eye,” that great gathering around Himself spoken of in 2 Thess. 2:1. “Then all that grieves shall pass away, And saints shall see a glorious day.” Not a division among them, nor a stain upon them! Till then “every one that hath this hope in Him purifieth himself, even as he is pure.” 1 John 3:3 “Watching and ready may we be, As those that wait their Lord to see.” Amen Earnestly do I entreat you, dear reader, in view of that day when His eyes shall surely meet yours in glory, to test your church position as well as the ground of your peace and safety by the Lord’s own question to some in the days of His flesh; viz., “Is it from heaven, or of men?” Luke 20:4. Does it bear the unmistakable stamp of divine and scriptural authority? Or is it merely endorsed by the hand of human expediency or mere religious opinion? Never, never rest until you can say, without a doubt, “I am, through grace, in a position where my gracious Lord would have me, because I am where the word of God has placed me”; and then with purpose of heart and fervor of spirit seek to adorn it by a holy, separate, and devoted walk, and so when He comes you will not only be ready to “go in to the marriage” through faith in Him, but get His approving “well done” for faithfulness to Him. Difficulties you may have, will have, but if in the path that pleases Him, you may with all confidence count upon His sympathy and succor; and even though the misunderstandings of your fellow-Christians add bitterness to your cup, yet the sense of His smile will more than recompense you. “Them that honor Me I will honor , and they that despise Me shall be lightly esteemed,” 1 Sam. 2:30 “If any man serve Me, him will My Father honor.” John 12:26 May such “honor” be yours, dear reader, now and “till He come.”  

“Which Class Are You Travelling?”

What an oft-repeated question! Let me put it to you; for travelling you most certainly are, travelling from time into Eternity; and who knows how very, very near you may be at this moment to the GREAT TERMINUS?

Let me ask you then, in all kindness, “Which class are you travelling?” There are but three. Let me describe them, that you may put yourself to the test as in the presence of “Him with whom we have to do.”

• 1^st Class – Those who are saved and know it.


• 2^nd Class – Those who are not sure of salvation, but anxious to be sure.


• 3^rd Class – Those who are not only unsaved, but totally indifferent about it.

Again I repeat my question, “Which class are you travelling?” Oh, the madness of indifference, when eternal issues are at stake! A man came rushing into the railway station and, while scarcely able to gasp for breath, took his seat in one of the carriages just on the point of starting.

“You’ve run it fine,” said a fellow-passenger. “Yes,” replied he, breathing heavily after every two or three words, “but I’ve saved four hours, and that’s well worth running for.”

“Saved four hours!” I couldn’t help repeating to myself; “four hours” well worth that earnest struggle! What of Eternity? What of Eternity! Yet are there not thousands of shrewd, far-seeing men today, who look sharply enough after their own interests in life, but who seem stone-blind to the Eternity before them? In spite of the infinite love of God to helpless rebels, told out at Calvary; in spite of His pronounced hatred of sin; in spite of the known brevity of man’s history here; in spite of the terrors of judgement after death, and of the solemn probability of waking up at last with the unbearable remorse of being on hell’s side of a “fixed” gulf, man hurries on to the bitter, bitter end as careless as if there were no God, no death, no judgement, no heaven, no hell! If the reader of these pages be such an one, may God this very moment have mercy upon you; and while you read these lines, open your eyes to your most perilous position, standing as you may be on the slippery brink of an endless woe!

Oh, friend, believe it or not, your case is truly desperate! Put off the thought of Eternity no longer. Remember, that procrastination is like him who deceives you by it, not only a “thief,” but a “murderer.” There is much truth in the Spanish proverb which says, “The road of ‘By-and-by’ leads to the town of ‘Never’.” I beseech you, therefore, to travel that road no longer; “NOW is the day of Salvation”.

“But,” says one, “I am not indifferent as to the welfare of my soul. My deep trouble lies wrapped up in another word – UNCERTAINTY. I am among the second-class passengers you speak of.”

Well, both indifference and uncertainty are the offspring of one parent – unbelief. The first results from unbelief as to the sin and ruin of man, the other from unbelief as to God’s sovereign remedy for man. It is especially for souls desiring before God to be fully and unmistakably SURE of their salvation that these pages are written. I can in a great measure understand your deep soul-trouble, and am assured that the more you are in earnest about this all-important matter, the greater will be your thirst, until you know for certain that you are really and eternally saved. “For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul?” The only son of a devoted father is at sea. News comes that his ship has been wrecked on some foreign shore. Who can tell the anguish of suspense in that father’s heart until, upon the most reliable authority, he is assured that his boy is safe and sound?

Or, again, you are far from home. The night is dark and wintry, and your way is totally unknown. Standing at a point where two roads diverge, you ask a passer-by the way to the town you desire to reach, and he tells you he thinks that such and such a way is the right one, and hopes you will be all right if you take it. Would “thinks“, and “hopes,” and “may be’s” satisfy you? Surely not. You must have certainty about it, or every step you take will increase your anxiety. What wonder, then, that men have sometimes neither been able to eat nor sleep when the eternal safety of the soul has been trembling in the balance!

“To lose your wealth is much,
To lose your health is more,
To lose your soul is such a loss
As no man can restore.”

Now, there are three things I desire, by the Holy Spirit’s help, to make clear to you; and, to put them into Scripture language, they are these:-

• The Way Of Salvation. Acts 16:17


• The Knowledge Of Salvation. Luke 1:77


• The Joy Of Salvation. Psalm 51:12.

We shall, I think, see that, though intimately connected, they each stand upon a separate basis; so that it is quite possible for a soul to know the way of Salvation without having the certain knowledge that he himself is saved; or, again, to know that he is saved, without possessing at all times the joy that ought to accompany that knowledge.

First, then, let me speak briefly of

The Way Of Salvation

Please open your Bible, and read carefully Exodus 13:13; there you find these words from the lips of Jehovah: “Every firstling of an ass thou shalt redeem with a lamb; and if thou wilt NOT redeem it, THEN THOU SHALT BREAK HIS NECK: and all the firstborn of man among thy children shalt thou redeem.”

Now come back with me in thought to a supposed scene of 3,000 years ago. Two men (a priest of God and a poor Israelite) stand in earnest conversation. Let us stand by, with their permission, and listen. The gestures of each bespeak deep earnestness about some matter of importance and it is not difficult to see that the subject of conversation is a little ass that stands trembling beside them.

“I am come to inquire,” says the poor Israelite, “if there cannot be a merciful exception made in my favour this once. This feeble little thing is the firstling of my ass, and though I know full well what the law of God says about it, I am hoping that mercy will be shown, and the ass’s life spared. I am but a poor man in Israel, and can ill afford to lose the colt.”

“But,” answers the priest firmly, “the law of the Lord is plain and unmistakable: ‘EVERY firstling of an ass thou shalt redeem with a lamb; and if thou wilt not redeem it, then thou shalt break his neck.’ Where is the lamb?

“Ah, sir, no lamb do I possess!”

“Then go, purchase one, and return, or the ass’s neck must surely be broken. The lamb must die, or the ass must die.”

“Alas! then all my hopes are crushed, ” he cries, “for I am far too poor to buy a lamb.”

While this conversation proceeds, a third person joins them, and after hearing the poor man’s tale of sorrow, he turns to him, and says kindly, “Be of good cheer, I can meet your need,” And thus he proceeds: “We have in our house, on the hill-top yonder, one little lamb, brought up at our very hearthstone, which is ‘without spot or blemish.’ It has never once strayed from home, and stands (and rightly so) in highest favour with all that are in the house. This lamb will I fetch.” And away he hastens up the hill. Presently you see him gently leading the fair little creature down the slope, and very soon both lamb and ass are standing side by side.

Then the lamb is bound to the altar, its blood is shed, and the fire consumes it.

The righteous priest now turns to the poor man, and says, “You can freely take your little colt in safety; no broken neck for it now. The lamb has died in the ass’s stead, and consequently the ass goes righteously free. Thanks to your friend.”

Now, poor troubled soul, can’t you see in this, God’s own picture of a sinner’s salvation? His claims as to your sin demanded “a broken neck”, i.e., righteous judgment upon your guilty head; the only alternative being the death of a divinely-approved substitute.

Now you could not find the provision to meet your case; but in the Person of His beloved Son, God Himself provided the Lamb. “Behold the Lamb of God,” said John to his disciples, as his eye fell upon that blessed, spotless One, “Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world” (John 1:29).

Onward to Calvary He went, “as a lamb to the slaughter,” and there and then He “once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that He might bring us to God” (1 Pet. 3:18). He “was delivered for our offenses, and was raised again for our justification” (Rom. 4:25). So that God does not abate one jot of His righteous, holy claims against sin when He justifies (i.e., clears from all charge of guilt) the ungodly sinner who believes in Jesus (Rom. 3:26). Blessed be God for such a Saviour, such a Salvation!

“DOST THOU BELIEVE ON THE SON OF GOD?”

“Well,” you reply, “I have, as a condemned sinner, found in Him One that I can safely trust. I do believe in Him.”

Then I can tell you that the full value of His sacrifice and death, as God estimates it, He makes as good to you as though you had accomplished it all yourself.

Oh, what a wondrous way of salvation is this! Is it not great, and grand, and Godlike, worthy of God Himself – the gratification of His own heart of love, the glory of His precious Son, and the salvation of a sinner, all bound up together? What a bundle of grace and glory! Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has so ordered it that His own beloved Son should do all the work, and get all the praise, and that you and I, poor, guilty sinners, believing on Him, should not only get the blessing, but enjoy the blissful company of the Blesser for ever and ever: “O magnify the Lord with me, and let us exalt His name together” (Ps. 34:3).

But perhaps your eager inquiry may be, “How is it that since I do really distrust self and self-work, and wholly rely upon Christ and Christ’s work, that I have not the full certainty of my salvation?” You say, “If my feelings warrant my saying that I am saved one day, they are pretty sure to blight every hope the next and I am left like a ship storm-tossed, without any anchorage whatever.” Ah! there lies your mistake. Did you ever hear of a captain trying to find anchorage by fastening his anchor inside the ship? Never. Always outside.

It may be that you are quite clear that it is Christ’s death alone that gives SAFETY; but you think that it is what you feel that gives you CERTAINTY.

Now, again, take your Bible; for I wish you to see from God’s word how He gives a man

The Knowledge Of Salvation

Before you turn to the verse which I shall ask you very carefully to look at, which speaks of HOW a believer is to KNOW that he HAS Eternal Life, let me quote it in the distorted way in which man’s imagination often puts it. “These happy feelings have I given unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God; that ye may know that ye have eternal life.” Now open your Bible, and, while you compare this with God’s blessed and unchanging Word, may He give you from your very heart to say with David, “I hate vain thoughts: but Thy law do I love” (Ps. 119:113). The verse just misquoted is 1 John 5:13, and reads thus in the Bible, “These things HAVE I WRITTEN unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God; that ye may KNOW that ye HAVE eternal life.“

How did the firstborn sons of the thousands of Israel know for certain that they were safe the night of Passover and of Egypt’s judgment?

Let us pay a visit to two of their houses, and hear what they have to say.

We have in the first house we enter that they are all shivering with fear and suspense.

What is the secret of all this paleness and trembling? we enquire; and the firstborn son informs us that the angel of death is coming round the land, and that he is not quite certain how matters will stand with him at that solemn moment.

“When the destroying angel has passed our house,” says he, “and the night of judgment is over, I shall then know that I am safe; but I can’t see how I can be quite sure of it until then. I hear they ARE sure of salvation next door, but we think it VERY PRESUMPTUOUS. All I can do is to spend the long, dreary night HOPING for the best.”

“Well,” we enquire, “but has the God of Israel not provided a way of safety for His people?”

“True,” he replies, “and we have availed ourselves of that way of escape. The blood of the spotless and unblemished first-year lamb has been duly sprinkled with the bunch of hyssop on the lintel and two side-posts, but still we are not fully assured of shelter.”

Let us now leave these doubting, troubled ones, and enter next door.

What a striking contrast meets our eye at once! Peace rests on every countenance. There they stand, with girded loins, and staff in hand, feeding on the roasted lamb.

What can be the meaning of all this tranquillity on such a solemn night as this? “Ah,” say they all, “we are only waiting for Jehovah’s marching orders, and then we shall bid a last farewell to the taskmaster’s cruel lash and all the drudgery of Egypt!”

“But hold! Do you forget that this is the night of Egypt’s judgment?”

“Right well we know it; but our firstborn son is safe. The blood has been sprinkled according to the wish of our God.”

“But so it has been next door,” we reply; “but they are all unhappy, because all uncertain of safety.”

“Ah!” firmly responds the firstborn, “but WE HAVE MORE THAN THE SPRINKLED BLOOD; WE HAVE THE UNERRING WORD OF GOD ABOUT IT. God has said: ‘When I see the blood, I will pass over you’. God rests satisfied with the blood outside, and we rest satisfied with His word inside.”

The sprinkled blood makes us SAFE.

The spoken word makes us SURE.

Could anything make us more safe than the sprinkled blood, or more sure that His spoken Word? Nothing, NOTHING.

Now, let me ask you a question. “Which of these two houses, think you, was the safer?”

Do you say number 2, where all were so peaceful? Nay, then, you are wrong.

Both are safe alike.

Their safety depends upon what God thinks about the blood outside, and not upon the state of their feelings inside.

If you would be sure of your own blessing, listen not to the unstable testimony of inward emotions, but to the infallible witness of the Word of God.

“Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on Me HATH everlasting life” (John 6:47).

Let me give you a simple illustration from everyday life. A certain farmer in the country, not having sufficient grass for his cattle, applies for a nice piece of pasture land which he hears is to be let near his own house. For some time he gets no answer from the landlord. One day a neighbour comes in, and says, “I feel quite sure you will get that field. Don’t you recollect how that last Christmas he sent you a special present of game, and that he gave you a kind nod of recognition the other day when he drove past in the carriage?” And with such like words the farmer’s mind is filled with sanguine hopes.

Next day another neighbour meets him, and in course of conversation he says, “I’m afraid you will stand no chance whatever of getting that grass-field. Mr. _____ has applied for it, and you cannot but be aware what a favourite he is with the Squire – occasionally visits him,” etc. And the poor farmer’s bright hopes are dashed to the ground and burst like soap-bubbles. One day he is hoping, the next day full of perplexing doubts.

Presently the postman calls, and the farmer’s heart beats fast as he breaks the seal of the letter, for he sees by the handwriting that it is from the Squire himself. See his countenance change from anxious suspense to undisguised joy as he reads and re-reads that letter.

“It’s a settled thing now,” exclaims he to his wife. No more doubts and fears about it; “hopes” and “ifs” are things of the past. “The Squire says the field is mine as long as I require it, on the most easy terms, and that’s enough for me. I care for no man’s opinion now. His word settles all!”

How many a poor soul is in a like condition to that of the poor, troubled farmer – tossed and perplexed by the opinions of men, or the thoughts and feelings of his own treacherous heart; and it is only upon receiving the word of God as the word of God, that certainty takes the place of doubts and peradventures. When God speaks there must be certainty, whether He pronounces the damnation of the unbeliever, or the salvation of the believer.

“For ever, O Lord, Thy word is settled in heaven” (Ps. 119:89); and to the simple-hearted believer HIS WORD SETTLES ALL.

“Hath he said, and shall He not do it? or hath He spoken, and shall He not make it good?” (Num. 23:19).

“I need no other argument,
I want no other plea,
It is enough that Jesus died,
And that He died for me”
The believer can add:
“And that God says so“
“But how may I be sure that I have the right kind of faith?”

Well, there can be but one answer to that question, viz., “Have you placed your confidence in the right person; i.e., in the blessed Son of God?”

It is not question of the amount of your faith, but of the trustworthiness of the person you repose your confidence in. One man takes hold of Christ, as it were, with a drowning man’s grip. Another but touches the hem of His garment; but the sinner who does the former is not a bit safer than the one who does the latter. They have both made the same discovery, viz., that while all of self is totally untrustworthy, they may safely confide in Christ, calmly rely on His Word, and confidently rest in the eternal efficacy of His finished work. That is what is meant by believing on Him. “Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on Me HATH everlasting life” (John 6:47).

Make sure of it then, that your confidence is not reposed in your works of amendments, your religious observances, your pious feelings when under religious influences, your moral training from childhood, and the like. You may have the strongest faith in any or all of these, and perish everlastingly. Don’t deceive yourself by any “fair show in the flesh.” The feeblest faith in Christ eternally saves, while the strongest faith in aught beside is but the offspring of a deceived heart – but the leafy twigs of your enemy’s arranging over the pitfall of eternal perdition.

God, in the gospel, simply introduces to you the Lord Jesus Christ, and says: “This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.” “You may,” He says, “with all confidence trust His heart, though you cannot with impunity trust your own.”

Blessed, thrice blessed, Lord Jesus, who would not trust Thee, and praise Thy Name?

“I do really believe on Him,” said a sad-looking soul to me one day, “but yet, when asked if I am saved, I don’t like to say yes, for fear I should be telling a lie.” This young woman was a butcher’s daughter in small town in the Midlands. It happened to be a market-day, and her father had not then returned from market. So I said, “Now suppose when your father comes home you ask him how many sheep he bought today, and he answers ‘ten’. After a while a man comes to the shop, and says, ‘How many sheep did your father buy today?’ and you reply, ‘I don’t like to say, for fear I should be telling a lie.” “But,” said the mother (who was standing by at the time), with righteous indignation, “that would be making your father the liar.”

Now, don’t you see that this well-meaning young woman was virtually making Christ out to be a liar, saying, “I do believe on the Son of God, and HE says I have everlasting life, but I don’t like to say I have it, lest I should be telling a lie.” What daring presumption!

“But,” says another, “how may I be sure that I really do believe? I have tried often enough to believe, and looked within to see if I had got it, but the more I look at my faith, the less I seem to have.”

Ah, friend, you are looking in the wrong direction to find that out, and your trying to believe but plainly shows that you are on the wrong track.

Let me give you another illustration to explain what I want to convey to you.

You are sitting at your quiet fireside one evening, when a man comes in and tells you that the station-master has been killed that night on the railway.

Now it so happens that this man had long borne the character in the place for being a very dishonest man, and the most daring, notorious liar in the neighbourhood.

Do you believe, or even try to believe, that man?

“Of course not,” you exclaim.

“Pray, why?”

“Oh, I know him too well for that!”

“But tell me how you know that you don’t believe him. Is it by looking within at your faith or feelings?”

“No,” you reply, “I think of the man that brings me the message.”

Presently a neighbour drops in, and says, “The station-master has been run over by a goods train tonight, and killed upon the spot.” After he has left, I hear you cautiously say, “Well, I partly believe it now; for to my recollection this man only once in his life deceived me, though I have known him from boyhood.”

But again I ask, “Is it by looking at your faith this time that you know you partly believe it?”

“No,” you repeat, “I am thinking of the character of my informant.”

Well, this man has scarcely left your room before a third person enters and brings you the same sad news as the first. But this time you say, “Now, John, I believe it. Since YOU tell me, I can believe it.”

Again I press my question (which is, remember, but the re-echo of your own), “How do you KNOW that you so confidently believe your friend John?”

“Because of who and what JOHN is,” you reply. “He never has deceived me, and I don’t think he ever will.”

Well, then, just in the same way, I know that I believe the Gospel; viz., because of the One who brings me the news. “If we receive the witness of men, the witness of God is greater: for this is the witness of God which He hath testified of His Son. He that BELIEVETH NOT GOT HATH MADE HIM A LIAR; because he believeth not the record that God gave of His Son” (1 John 5:9-10). “Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness” (Rom. 4:3).

And anxious soul once said to a servant of Christ, “Oh, sir, I can’t believe!” To which the servant wisely and quietly made reply, “Indeed, WHO is it that you can’t believe?” This broke the spell. He had been looking at faith as an indescribable something he must feel within himself in order to be sure he was all right for heaven; whereas faith ever looks outside to a living Person, and His finished work, and quietly listens to the testimony of a faithful God about both.

It is the outside look that brings the inside peace. When a man turns his face towards the sun his own shadow is behind him. You cannot look at self and a glorified Christ in heaven at the same moment.

Thus we have seen that the blessed PERSON of God’s Son wins my confidence. His FINISHED WORK makes me eternally safe. GOD’S WORD about those who believe on Him makes me unalterably sure. I find in Christ and His work the way of Salvation, and in the Word of God the knowledge of Salvation.

“But, if saved,” you may say, “how is it that I have such a fluctuating experience, so often losing all my joy and comfort, and getting as wretched and downcast as I was before my conversion?” Well, this brings us to our third point, viz.,

The Joy Of Salvation

You will find, in the teaching of Scripture, that while you are saved by Christ’s work and assured by God’s word, you are maintained in comfort and joy by the Holy Ghost, who has come to indwell every true believer.

Now you must bear in mind that every saved one has still “the flesh” within him, i.e., the evil nature he was born with and which, perhaps, showed itself while still a helpless infant on his mother’s lap. The Holy Ghost in the believer resists the flesh and is grieved by every activity of it, in motive, word or deed. When he is walking “worthy of the Lord,” the Holy Ghost will be producing in his soul His blessed fruits – “love, joy, peace,” etc., see Gal. 5:22. When he is walking in a carnal, worldly way the Spirit is grieved, and these fruits are wanting in greater or less measure.

Let me put it thus for you who do believe on God’s Son:

Christ’s Work and Your Salvation stand or fall together .

Your Walk and Your Enjoyment stand or fall together.

When Christ’s work breaks down (and, blessed by God, it never, never will), your salvation will break down with it. When your walk breaks down (and be watchful, for it may), your enjoyment will break down with it.

Thus it is said of the early disciples (Acts 9:31), that they were “walking in the fear of the Lord, and in the comfort of the Holy Ghost.”

And again in Acts 13:52: “And the disciples were filled with joy, and with the Holy Ghost.”

My spiritual joy will be in proportion to the spiritual character of my walk after I am saved.

Now do you see your mistake? You have been mixing up enjoyment and your safety, two widely-different things. When, through self-indulgence, loss of temper, worldliness, etc., you grieved the Holy Spirit, and lost your joy, you thought your safety was undermined. But again I repeat it:-

Your safety hangs upon Christ’s work FOR you.

Your assurance upon God’s Word TO you.

Your enjoyment upon not grieving the Holy Spirit IN you.

When, as a believer, you do anything to grieve the Holy Spirit of God, your communion with the Father and the Son is, for the time, practically suspended; and it is only when you judge yourself, and confess your sins, that the joy of communion is restored.

Your child has been guilty of some misdemeanour. He shows upon his countenance the evident mark that something is wrong with him. Half an hour before this he was enjoying a walk with you round the garden, admiring what you admired, enjoying what you enjoyed. In other words, he was in communion with you; his feelings and sympathies were in common with yours.

But now all this is changed, and as a naughty, disobedient child he stands in the corner, the very picture of misery.

Upon penitent confession of his wrong-doing you have assured him of forgiveness; but his pride and self-will keep him sobbing there.

Where is now the joy of half an hour ago? All gone. Why? Because communion between you and him has been interrupted.

What is become of the relationship that existed between you and your son half-an-hour ago? Is that gone too? Is that severed or interrupted? Surely not.

His relationship depends upon his birth.

His communion depends upon his behaviour.

But presently he comes out of the corner with broken will and broken heart confessing the whole thing from first to last, so that you see he hates the disobedience and naughtiness as much as you do, and you take him in your arms and cover him with kisses. His joy is restored because communion is restored.

When David sinned so grievously in the matter of Uriah’s wife, he did not say, “Restore unto me Thy salvation,” but “Restore unto me the joy of Thy salvation” (Ps. 51:12).

But to carry our illustration a little farther. Supposing while your child is in the corner there should be a cry of “house on fire” throughout your dwelling, what would become of him then? Left in the corner to be consumed with the burning, falling house? Impossible!

Very probably he would be the very first person you would carry out. Ah, yes, you know right well that the love of relationship is one thing, and the joy of communion quite another.

Now, when the believer sins, communion for the time is interrupted, and joy is lost until, with a broken heart, he comes to the Father and confesses his sins.

Then, taking God at His Word, he knows he is again forgiven; for His Word plainly declares that “If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness” (1 John 1:9).

Oh, then, fellow-believer, ever bear in mind these two things: There is nothing so strong as the link of relationship; and nothing so tender as the link of communion.

All the combined power and counsel of earth and Hell cannot sever the former, while an impure motive or an idle word will snap the latter.

If you are troubled with a cloudy half-hour, get low before God, consider your ways. And when the thief that has robbed you of your joy has been detected, drag him at once to the light, confess your sin to God your Father, and judge yourself most unsparingly for the unwatchful careless state of soul that allowed the thief to enter unchallenged.

But never, never, NEVER, confound your safety with your joy.

Don’t imagine, however, that the judgement of God falls a whit more leniently on the believer’s sin than on the unbeliever’s. He has not two ways of dealing judicially with sin, and He could no more pass by the believer’s sin without judging it, than He could pass by the sins of a rejecter of His precious Son. But there is this great difference between the two, viz., that the believer’s sins were all known to God, and all laid upon His own provided Lamb when He hung upon the cross at Calvary, and that there and then, once and for ever, the great “criminal question” of his guilt was raised and settled, judgment falling upon the blessed Substitute in the believer’s stead, “who His own self bare our sins in His own body on the tree” (1 Pet. 2:24).

The Christ-rejecter must bear his own sins in his own person in the lake of fire for ever. But, when a genuine believer fails, the “criminal question” of sin cannot be raised against him, the Judge Himself having settled that once for all on the cross; but the communion question is raised within him by the Holy Ghost as often as he grieves the Spirit.

Allow me, in conclusion, to give you another illustration. It is a beautiful moonlight night. The moon is at full, and shining in more than ordinary silver brightness. A man is gazing intently down a deep, still well, where he sees the moon reflected, and thus remarks to a friendly bystander: “How beautifully fair and round she is tonight! How quietly and majestically she rides along!” He has just finished speaking when suddenly his friend drops a small pebble into the well, and he now exclaims, “Why, the moon is all broken to pieces, and the fragments are shaken together in the greatest disorder!”

“What gross absurdity!” is the astonished rejoinder of his companion. “Look up, man! The moon hasn’t changed one jot or tittle. It is the condition of the well that reflects the moon that has changed.”

Apply the simple figure yourself. Your heart is the well. When there is no allowance of evil the blessed Spirit of God takes of the glories and preciousness of Christ, and reveals them to you for your comfort and joy. But the moment a wrong motive is cherished in the heart, or an idle word escapes the lips unjudged, the Holy Ghost begins to disturb the well, your happy experiences are smashed to pieces, and you are all restless and disturbed within, until in brokenness of spirit before God you confess your sin (the disturbing thing) and thus get restored once more to the calm, sweet joy of communion.

But when your heart is thus all unrest, need I ask, Has Christ’s work changed? No, no. Then your Salvation is not altered.

Has God’s Word changed? Surely not. Then the certainty of your Salvation has received no shock.

Then, what has changed? Why, the action of the Holy Ghost in you has changed, and instead of taking of the glories of Christ, and filling your heart with the sense of His worthiness, He is grieved at having to turn aside from this delightful office to fill you with the sense of your sin and unworthiness.

He takes from you your present comfort and joy until you judge and resist the evil thing that He judges and resists. When this is done communion with God is again restored.

The Lord make us to be increasingly jealous over ourselves lest we grieve “the Holy Spirit of God, whereby ye are sealed unto the day of redemption” (Eph. 4:30).

However weak your faith may be, rest assured of this, that the blessed One who has won your confidence will never change.

“Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and FOR EVER” (Heb. 13:8).

The work He has accomplished will never change.

“Whatsoever God doeth, it shall be FOR EVER: nothing can be put to it, nor any thing taken from it” (Eccl. 3:13).

The word He has spoken will never change.

“The grass withereth, and the flower thereof falleth away: But the word of the Lord endureth FOR EVER” (1 Pet. 1:24-25).

Thus the object of my trust, the foundation of my safety, and the ground of my certainly, are alike ETERNALLY UNALTERABLE.

“My love is oft-times low,

My joy still ebbs and flows;

But peace with Him remains the same,

No change Jehovah knows.

I change, He changes not;

God’s Christ can never die;

His love, not mine, the resting-place,

His truth, not mine, the tie”

Once more, let me ask, “WHICH CLASS ARE YOU TRAVELLING?” Turn your heart to God, I pray you, and answer that question to Him.

“Let God be true, and every man a liar” (Rom. 3:4).

“He that hath received His testimony hath set to his seal that God is true” (John 3:33).

May the joyful assurance of possessing this “great salvation” be yours, now and “till He come.”

Ques.—Did Judas Iscariot ever partake of the Lord’s Supper?
Ans.—It seems quite plain from John 13:30 that Judas was not there when the Lord instituted His supper, which took place only at the end of the Passover Supper, The sop was given while the Passover Supper was going on.

In Matt. 26, Judas’ exit would be between vers. 25, 26; in Mark 14, between vers. 21, 22. Luke alone presents a little difficulty by speaking of Judas (chap. 22:21) after mentioning the Lord’s Supper (vers. 19, 20) There need be no difficulty, however, as in all kinds of narratives cer¬tain details which occurred between the great facts are often mentioned at the end only, when all the facts them¬selves have been told.

We may  therefore conclude  from  John   13:30  that   our Lord’s words in Luke 22:21-23 were uttered somewhere during the Passover Supper, before He instituted the re¬membrance of Himself in what is called “the Lord’s Supper.”

We would add, in warning, that some have sought to place Judas at the Lord’s Supper as a precedent for the unholy, yet sadly frequent, practice of allowing evil men to partake of that Supper. All Scripture condemns this; I Cor. deals expressly with it (chap. 5) ; Christian holiness revolts against it. Besides, even if it could be shown that Judas participated in the Lord’s Supper, it would be no precedent for this evil practice, for Judas was not yet manifested, and it is when manifested the Lord requires ex¬pulsion of the evil out of His house.

(H. and F Vol. 26, p. 280 as published in Things New and Old November 1942