tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-70032994522912912222024-02-23T05:40:21.592-08:00The Shorter Writings of Dr D M Lloyd-JonesGary Bradyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08171450135496647908noreply@blogger.comBlogger47125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7003299452291291222.post-22486625048376303042020-02-25T11:03:00.001-08:002020-02-25T11:03:21.532-08:00Medicine and the "whole man"<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b>Being the substance of an address given at the Annual Breakfast of the CMF, during the BMA Annual Meeting, Brighton, 12 July 1956.</b></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
A new phrase has become increasingly common in current medical literature. We are reminded that we must no longer think in the old departmental terms, but that we must more and more learn to treat 'the whole man'. Yet this phrase may mean little or it may mean much. It depends upon its context and the occasion on which it is used. In the majority of instances, however, one fears that it is just one more expression of that loose and sentimental thinking, which has become so characteristic of the present time.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
We are all familiar with the prevailing vagueness and looseness of speech. There will be no need for illustration. It is simply the outcome of those fashions in education and those subtle changes which, in the interests of self-expression, have allowed many young people to grow up with no feeling for accurate definition nor appreciation of sound principle. Whilst there may be a credit side to this, in that some of the older dogmatic instruction allowed little room for self-expression, many would contend that the gains have been at too great a cost. So much so that wherever we look in Church or State we find vague sentimental thinking which would have appalled our forefathers. Consider for instance the correspondence in the daily newspapers at the height of the discussions concerning the abolition of capital punishment. For every letter which sought in a judicial manner to weigh up the facts and to consider the great principles which are involved in such a decision, there were numbers of others which, no matter how attractively they were expressed, consisted in little more than emotion or prejudice on one side or the other. In all aspects of our national life we need to rediscover the sound guiding lines which were widely followed in the greatest hours of our history. In spite of all the achievements of painstaking research and new treatments, Medicine itself stands equally in need of a reconsideration of its first principles.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b>The whole man</b></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Let us look, for example, at this phrase 'the whole man'. How are we to define it? What do we mean by the word 'whole'? The department of psychosomatic medicine has popularised the phrase, but it has not adequately described it. Originally, at least, the phrase 'the whole man' appears to have been introduced from Christian sources and notably from the literature of medical missions. But here again there does not seem to have been adequate thought given to the implications of the phrase nor to the alteration of meaning which occurred as soon as it was removed from its original setting. As soon as we look into the matter, the first surprise which must come to all of us is the realisation of the ease with which we accept such phrases and build upon them, imagining that both we and those to whom we speak know precisely what is meant. In what follows, I wish to call for closer scrutiny of this phrase. I would also seriously suggest that, of all available sources, we have the best definition of it in the Christian Gospels. Our Lord is constantly described as making those who came to him 'perfectly whole' and the contexts in which such facts are recorded suggest that the statements were more than justified.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Perhaps the best account of this matter is found in Luke 17:12-19 (KJV).</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
'And as he entered into a certain village, there met him ten men that were lepers, which stood afar off: And they lifted up their voices, and said, Jesus, Master, have mercy on us. And when he saw them, he said unto them, Go shew yourselves unto the priests. And it came to pass, that, as they went, they were cleansed. And one of them, when he saw that he was healed, turned back, and with a loud voice glorified God, And fell down on his face at his feet, giving him thanks: and he was a Samaritan. And Jesus answering said, Were there not ten cleansed? but where are the nine? There are not found that returned to give glory to God, save this stranger. And he said unto him, Arise, go thy way: thy faith hath made thee whole.'</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Let us proceed at once to the important point of the statement. Ten men were cured of their leprosy, but only one of them turned back, recognising the divine source of the healing powers, and gave thanks to the Benefactor. There is more than an element of irony in the two asides - 'and he was a Samaritan' … 'save this stranger'. That is, the grateful patient was a foreigner, deriving from a race which was despised and disliked by the Jews. It is only this single sufferer that our Lord declares to have been made 'whole'. A distinction is made between the nine and the one. It is true to what the Bible means when it speaks of a man as having been made 'whole'.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b>Psycho-somatic medicine</b></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I do not overlook the fact that through numerous articles in the Medical Journals, the Profession as a whole has been made aware of much that it overlooked during the course of the development of scientific research and its application in various forms of modern treatment. Though there may still be, in some branches of Medicine, workers who are hidebound in their departmentalisms, and their materialist philosophies, there are few who have not given some thought to the claims of psycho-somatic medicine. Most doctors, however little they may adjust themselves practically to it, make theoretical allowances for the subjective, psychological and the spiritual in treating their patients. Yet it would be premature to be too optimistic. For occasional stories from the out-patients' departments and, also, the wards of well-known hospitals, make it clear how easy it is for all of us to use appropriate phrases and neglect their obvious implications. The busy practitioner has scarcely been more than mildly interested, though in his case there are compensating factors. Fortunately, long experience of contact with suffering, interest in persons as persons, and the frequent necessity to take into consideration the situation of the whole family - all unconsciously predispose to an adoption of the psycho-somatic approach.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Yet when all is said and done, is psychosomatic medicine itself a fully adequate response to what is basically required? Is it not itself another of those partial views which have been made to do duty for the whole? Is its application greatly in advance of the other attitudes which have done duty during the development of anthropology? Again and again definitions of the nature of man have been given, which on further examination prove to be too narrowly based. The Communist, for example, controlled by his philosophy of dialectical materialism, reduces man to a pawn of economics and politics. Other types of philosophy have isolated him as a piece of pure intellect, with the addition of a comforting doctrine that all he needs in order to emerge from his predicament is more and more education. Coming nearer home, the biologist concentrates on man's structure, abilities, movements, ductless glands and the functional balance of forces which enables the living organism to carry out an ordered existence. Even Medicine itself is guilty of a very partial view. For over a hundred years morbid pathology has tended to dominate the picture, and whilst normal physiology has done something to redress the balance, yet in general the abnormal has come to distort the perspective. So now it is the turn of the advocates of the psycho-somatic. 'Yes', they say, 'it is true that we have erred. We must cease to regard a patient as one who must be investigated like a biological specimen. We must take a bigger view. We must - in addition to our doctors and nurses - have cohorts of therapists trained in every form of assistance. We must treat the whole man.'</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
But, even here again, are they not already tending to slip into the same error of falling short in their concept of man? When they have taken account, and rightly so, of all the subjective factors which may influence the condition of the patient, his psychology and the environment in which he lives his life, is not their view still too limited?</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
It cannot be emphasised too much that every view of man which omits from its consideration such a major factor as man's relationship with God, is doomed to partial measures. It can never fully and finally solve the crucial problem which lies at the root of humanity's unrest and 'dis-ease'. There is a major element in the very nature of man, which can be catered for in one way, and only in one way. As Augustine said: 'Thou hast made us for Thyself, and our heart is restless until it finds its rest in Thee.' In other words, we can add together all the partial views which have ever been held and still not get a true picture of man, if this basic fact be overlooked. The truth is that man was originally made in the image of God. He is not a mere animal. He reflects the nature of the Eternal Being. He possesses self-consciousness and the power of self-criticism. His aspirations are in the last analysis not directed towards this world, but towards the world to come. Something within man continually calls for what is bigger and beyond himself. He was made for companionship with God and he cannot function properly until he is in true correspondence with his Maker.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
the scope of medical practice</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
It therefore follows, if what we have so far said is true, that we must ask: Can Medicine in itself deal with the whole man? Can it as such, and by itself, ever do so? In any case, is it within the province of Medicine to attempt such a thing? Is Medicine able to function so as to ensure that mankind will function harmoniously in society? Is it able to reduce to order all those things which interfere with, and vitiate man's life? Surely, the practice of Medicine was never intended nor equipped for such a function. Nor was it designed to uncover and to treat the evils gnawing at the heart of mankind. It cannot satisfy deep aspirations of the individual which are due to his very make-up and are accentuated by his estrangement from his Maker. Psychotherapy is no final answer. It may do much to help in restoring normal function to the mechanisms of the mind, but it cannot impart that positive addition for which each person's heart craves. Yet, without taking into consideration, and dealing with, such ultimate facts of human need, how can Medicine possibly talk of treating 'the whole man'?</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I must here enter a strong caveat. Much loose thinking has come in at this point. I would without apology venture to make the blunt assertion that Christianity, and Christianity alone, can deal with 'the whole man'. By definition, it alone is capable of undertaking such a task. Medicine is in its right place when it sets out to deal with the body and the mind. But it is the task of religion - of the Christian religion - to deal with 'the whole man'.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
There are two processes at work today in the borderlands between Medicine and the Church. They are both clearly illustrated in St. Luke's description of our Lord's healing of the lepers. Let us notice carefully the difference between the nine who failed to return thanks and the one who did so return. There was a vital difference in their whole outlook and attitude to the body-mind relationship. The group of nine patients were only interested in getting rid of the disease and its manifestations. Because of its signs on their bodies they had been ostracised and segregated from their people. As the record says: 'they stood afar off' If they had done anything else than this they would have been severely punished. They longed - naturally they would do so, as any of us would - to be cured and to be able to go back into society. But their interest stopped at that point. They were only interested in getting rid of the symptoms and signs, so that they could return to their ordinary life and routine. They revealed no sign of wanting to be 'made whole'. On the other hand, the one who returned 'praised God with a loud voice' and the Master declared that this man's faith had made him 'whole'. In this particular case the man had not only lost the signs and symptoms of the serious disease that had been holding him in its grip, he had come into a new and right relationship with his Maker. Of him it could now be truly said that he was made 'whole'.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Much of what one hears at the present time of certain 'Faith Healing' movements illustrates the same two processes. The doctors of today are praised for their very wonderful discoveries and procedures. These have made an incredible difference in modern life and to the outlook of many who in past centuries would have suffered increasing disabilities or a slow decline to a fatal termination of their condition. But there are still numerous things, which the doctors cannot manage. 'Let us', many say, 'go to the Church and let us get as many people to pray for us as possible in the hope that somehow we shall be healed' But both patients and Church continually forget the parable. These patients will go to God - they will go anywhere in their anxiety as soon as possible to get rid of their diseases. But most of them, at least, do not seem to be in search of 'wholeness' - i.e. in our Lord's meaning of the term. Their main anxiety is to get rid of their symptoms, signs of disease, and their immediate disabilities, so that they can speedily take their place again in society.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b>The place of Christianity</b></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
This matter of getting rid of symptoms, however, must never be mistaken for Christianity's essential function. Many members of the Medical Profession today, whatever lip service they may pay to it, simply regard Christianity as another speciality or another 'therapy'. When confronted with a particularly serious case with a bad prognosis, they will try all the therapies, radiotherapy, physiotherapy, psychotherapy and, when these have all failed, at last they will say: 'Ah, yes, it is really serious and beyond any help we can give - let us send him to the Church and see what that department can do.' But we must protest. Christianity is not just one extra, and final, link in a long chain of healing methods. It is not a branch of Medicine. It never can be!</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
There is today a great deal of confusion at this point. There is with many an understandable (and, when it is rightly understood, commendable) desire for the closest co-operation between the profession which is responsible for caring for the body and that which is responsible for caring for the soul. Co-operation, if it is on the right basis of understanding and relative functioning of the partners in the enterprise, is, of course, valuable. If, however, the problem of a man's illness is to be undertaken in co-operation, then it will not do for the Church to be regarded simply as a department of Medicine. It is tempting to add at this point that it is certainly not for Medicine to take over the Church, but rather for the Church to take over Medicine! The Church certainly cannot function simply as a branch of Medicine. It must not come to be used simply as a means of getting rid of the more troublesome symptoms of mankind's divided heart and only that. Its essential value may thus be missed.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The Church, also, is able to help Medicine by fostering in its doctors, nurses and all concerned in treating disease some of the most needed virtues, e.g. kindliness, patience, selfsacrificing service and much else. But when all such by-products have been supplied to Medicine, we shall still not have arrived at treating 'the whole man'. In fact, if the Church were to be prepared to let it go at that, it might be very misleading to the patient. It is dangerous to eliminate symptoms before the diagnosis has been assured. It is these symptoms which call attention to the presence and nature of the disease. Diagnosis becomes increasingly difficult if the symptoms are palliated too soon. The Christian Faith must not allow itself to be used as a mere palliative. It may otherwise hide from the patient his real condition and prevent his arriving at a deeper understanding of his ultimate need.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
There can be no real wholeness, until each patient has come to a state comparable to that of the one leper who returned to our Lord. 'He glorified God with a loud voice'; i.e. he really meant all he said. He fell at Christ's feet in adoration. He was both physically cured and spiritually restored. He was at last a whole man. He had been reconciled to God through our Lord Jesus Christ and had at last found peace. No man, by his very nature, can be finally satisfied, until God fills his heart.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b>A final consideration</b></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
There is one further consideration; and we must not overlook or evade it. A man cannot with real composure face death and eternity apart from consciousness of reconciliation with his Maker. We all need peace with God. We are getting older. Some of the colleagues whom I see here today are those whom in earlier years I taught in our Medical School. Speaking for myself, I can only face God in Jesus Christ, by spiritually dying and rising again in him, by being reconciled through him, and by living day by day in him. It is from him that I hear the liberating words: 'Thy faith hath made thee whole.' It is this spiritual element which ultimately matters to us. This goes on into eternity and, in Christ, I am ready for eternity.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Christian Doctors, there is only one way in which we can really make men whole! Modern Medicine has gained much for mankind and it may yet gain much more. But, when it has done its utmost, it can only prolong man's life for a few more years. It cannot do more than repair a man's mind and body. It has to leave him there. It has nothing to say to the most vital element in man's nature. At this point Christianity alone can step in. When it does so, however, it can impart to the man something of incomparable worth. But before any of us can share it with others, we must become Christians ourselves. Every doctor needs himself first to go to Christ. Then, with confidence, he can become a servant of the Lord of the New Testament who went about making men whole.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
D Martyn Lloyd-Jones (1899-1991)</div>
Gary Bradyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08171450135496647908noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7003299452291291222.post-51812707565140076012020-02-25T10:54:00.002-08:002020-02-25T10:54:47.786-08:00What is revival?<div style="text-align: justify;">
We can define it as a period of unusual blessing and activity in the life of the Christian Church. Revival means awakening, stimulating the life, bringing it to the surface again. It happens primarily in the Church of God, and amongst believing people, and it is only secondly something that affects those that are outside also. Now this is a most important point, because this definition helps us to differentiate, once and for all, between a revival and an evangelistic campaign.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
An evangelistic campaign is the Church deciding to do something with respect to those who are outside. A revival is not the Church deciding to do something and doing it. It is something that is done to the Church, something that happens to the Church.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
So then, what is it that happens? The best way of answering that question is to say that it is in a sense a repetition of the day of Pentecost. It is something happening to the Church, that inevitably and almost instinctively makes one look back and think again of what happened on the day of Pentecost as recorded in Acts 2.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The essence of a revival is that the Holy Spirit comes down upon a number of people together, upon a whole church, upon a number of churches, districts, or perhaps a whole country. That is what is meant by revival. It is, if you like, a visitation of the Holy Spirit, or another term that has often been used is this--an outpouring of the Holy Spirit.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
What the people are conscious of is that it is as if something has suddenly come down upon them. The Spirit of God has descended into their midst, God has come down and is amongst them. A baptism, an outpouring, a visitation. And the effect of that is that they immediately become aware of His presence and of His power in a manner that they have never known before.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I am talking about Christian people, about church members gathered together as they have done so many times before. Suddenly they are aware of His presence, they are aware of the majesty and the awe of God. The Holy Spirit literally seems to be presiding over the meeting and taking charge of it, and manifesting His power and guiding them, and leading them, and directing them. That is the essence of revival.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
And what does that mean? Well, there are general characteristics which you will find in every revival that you can ever read about. The immediate effect is that the people present begin to have an awareness of spiritual things such as they have never had before.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
They have heard all these things before, they may have heard them a thousand times, but what they testify is this: "You know, the whole thing suddenly became clear to me. I was suddenly illuminated, things that I was so familiar with stood out in letters of gold, as it were. I understood. I saw it all in a way that I had never done in the whole of my life." The Holy Spirit enlightens the mind and the understanding. They begin not only to see these things clearly but to feel their power.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
What are these things of which they become so aware? First and foremost, the glory and the holiness of God. Have you ever noticed, as you read your Bibles, the effect on these people as they suddenly realized the presence of God? Like Job, they put their hands on their mouths or like Isaiah they say, "Woe is unto me! For I am undone; because I am a man of unclean lips." They have just had a realization of the holiness and of the majesty and the glory of God. That always happens in a revival.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
There can be a lot of laughing and lightness, and obvious organization in evangelistic campaigns. Not so in a revival, but rather awe, reverence, holy fear, the consciousness of God in His majesty, His glory, His holiness, His utter purity.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
(Extract from lectures on Revival 1959)</div>
Gary Bradyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08171450135496647908noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7003299452291291222.post-87812591507225722632019-10-24T09:25:00.004-07:002023-05-21T08:54:43.533-07:00Lloyd-Jones on Romanism<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh6wGjqlt6kayfl5hYXZgZmoW7ZpArRj7MsM8AcZjBw4tQOUlumgfCvj5iEwTRwhjzneXiSNHpy_69W_Nf4i1SwZWcrFC8p7XColWxSYbLQnS59B-Aw3q23Ipdk1wznqnWlJ49wkeP-ZAnw1eqQYv80bi7M0tmCp7sxr0f3ztku05VXwmzOMYeFAXKc/s2280/cgbw.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="2280" data-original-width="1520" height="400" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh6wGjqlt6kayfl5hYXZgZmoW7ZpArRj7MsM8AcZjBw4tQOUlumgfCvj5iEwTRwhjzneXiSNHpy_69W_Nf4i1SwZWcrFC8p7XColWxSYbLQnS59B-Aw3q23Ipdk1wznqnWlJ49wkeP-ZAnw1eqQYv80bi7M0tmCp7sxr0f3ztku05VXwmzOMYeFAXKc/w266-h400/cgbw.png" width="266" /></a></div><br />A sermon from 1963 has often been reproduced in different forms. <a href="http://www.trinityfoundation.org/journal.php?id=42">It can be found here.</a>Gary Bradyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08171450135496647908noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7003299452291291222.post-8759161094173938412019-10-24T09:20:00.002-07:002023-05-21T08:57:11.592-07:00Tract The Message of the Bible<div style="text-align: justify;">
<a href="https://www.crossway.org/tracts/the-message-of-the-bible-tract/"></a><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://www.crossway.org/tracts/the-message-of-the-bible-tract/"></a><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgfVokT91ixrJ5CWivjrMP8ZrGCRIVkWtwwhjyRaCToMinTs9E_XilkZ4UcUJ-W_KmIedrEe_8hQoREArY1xQrBr2IyvgI6mZZDnOe5XFOdoXiiXvVxH1K3ShGJqJzTC9zlCPPr6IkUnJkJYiE8ZfpTMl6-R4zLUWQjFzXxTRq27bjtsfthvz0UptRY/s1429/90f064441fa92d3339c4649327759245e4f9c495.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1000" data-original-width="1429" height="280" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgfVokT91ixrJ5CWivjrMP8ZrGCRIVkWtwwhjyRaCToMinTs9E_XilkZ4UcUJ-W_KmIedrEe_8hQoREArY1xQrBr2IyvgI6mZZDnOe5XFOdoXiiXvVxH1K3ShGJqJzTC9zlCPPr6IkUnJkJYiE8ZfpTMl6-R4zLUWQjFzXxTRq27bjtsfthvz0UptRY/w400-h280/90f064441fa92d3339c4649327759245e4f9c495.jpg" width="400" /></a></div><br />See more here</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
We are all aware of problems in this world. Everyone knows what it is to be weary, to be disappointed, and to struggle. And we have a feeling that we were not meant for this. We are all searching for some solution to the problems of life.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The question is, why are you unhappy? Why</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
do things go wrong? Why is there illness and sickness? Why should there be death? Those are the questions with which the Bible deals.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The Bible talks to you about your unhappiness. Some insist that the Bible, far from being practical, is really very remote from life. But nothing in the world is as practical as the teaching of the Bible.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
In order to answer questions about you, the Bible starts in the most extraordinary way: </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
"In the beginning God..."</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
It starts with God. Before I begin to ask any questions about myself and my problems, I ought to ask questions like this: Where did the world come from? Where have I come from? What is life itself?</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
You come to me and say, “I’m unhappy. I’m in</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
a crisis. What’s the matter with me?” And the Bible says, “In the beginning God . . .” as if it has forgotten all about you. But it has not! The only way to understand yourself or your life is to start with God. And right at the very beginning, the Bible takes us there.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The Bible also tells us that the world came into being because the eternal God made it. It tells us that God is the Creator, that he made everything out of nothing, by his own power, and he made it perfect.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
What’s more, according to the Bible, man is a special creation of God. The Bible tells us, “God created man in his own image” (Genesis 1:27). It does not say that about anything else, only about human beings. Man was made by God, for God. He spoke to God, walked with God, and enjoyed God. And his life was one of perfect bliss.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
But into this perfect world made by God there entered another power, another force. Something came that was opposed to God and opposed to man, and it was bent upon one thing only— wrecking God’s perfect work. The Bible tells us that the Devil entered into this world, and by tempting the man and the woman, whom God had made, brought to pass everything bad that you and I know.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Why are there jealousy and envy and misunderstanding? Why lust and passion? Why are homes and marriages broken? Why do little children suffer? Why all the agony and the pain of life?</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
It is because there is this other power in the world that has dragged man down. That is the biblical explanation. You will find it in the Bible from beginning to end. And if that is true, how hopelessly and utterly inadequate are all the remedies that are being offered apart from the Bible. What’s more, the Bible tells us that as the result of that original sin, all of us are in the grip of this evil power.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Man, as the result of all this, is quite helpless; he has brought a curse upon himself and cannot escape it. He would like to, but he cannot. Man has been trying to get back into Eden ever since he went out of it. That is the whole history of civilization. That is the whole meaning of philosophy and all political thought and all the blueprints of utopias at all times and in all places—man trying to get back into paradise.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
But it is worse than merely not being in paradise. Man is under the judgment of God. He thought that he could forget God and that there would be no risk involved. He did not realize that the law of God is absolute. Both man as an individual and the whole world, according to the Bible, are under the judgment of God. You see, in the garden Adam and Eve thought they could eat the forbidden fruit and all would be well. Then they heard the voice of the Lord God, and they cowered and were frightened. Judgment had come, and they were thrust out.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
But, thank God, he intervenes! God, even at the moment of rebellion, tells man that he has a way to rescue him and to redeem him: “It [the seed of the woman] shall bruise thy [the serpent’s] head” (Genesis 3:15). The serpent can only be mastered by one, and he has come—the seed of the woman, Jesus of Nazareth. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life."</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
JOHN 3:16 </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Christ, the Son of God, came into this world, took on our human nature, entered into our very situation, and defeated our enemy. He received judgment for us on the cross. God dealt with him there and pardons us, and our enemy is conquered. So the way to paradise is open, and it is open for you.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
All your problems, all your needs, arise from the fact of sin. That is the cause of all ill. And there is but one solution to the problem, the solution that God himself has provided in the person of his Son. “. . . that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.” And that life begins here and now—a knowledge of God, assurance that you are right with God, that he will take you through death and announce in the judgment that you are already pardoned and forgiven.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
My dear friend, that is your problem, and that is the answer to your problem. Believe it. Accept it here and now. Go to that great God. Acknowledge your sinning against him, and thank him for his eternal love in sending his Son to rescue you and to redeem you by dying for you, and ask him to give you new life. And he will. I say that on the authority of Jesus who stated, “Him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out” ( John 6:37).</div>
Gary Bradyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08171450135496647908noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7003299452291291222.post-15392254487889193142018-11-21T05:44:00.000-08:002019-05-24T11:15:35.893-07:001939 Review of D R Davies's On to orthodoxyOn <i>Onto orthodoxy</i> by D R Davies in <i>The Christian World</i> October 12, 1939<br />
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiHOzXviIp8qHqQAY83HRW4sWzv6ezD8fE9DxEaaJrAUCPAahPUwDsIbCmh6hbTQx6hRTZLpFiOjQMx584TGS5-Il85G4vGQKCYaxuH5mo05lGivsn2DkqQ9Hp9dUCxx7veEZNuUxFPewM/s1600/D.R+Davies.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiHOzXviIp8qHqQAY83HRW4sWzv6ezD8fE9DxEaaJrAUCPAahPUwDsIbCmh6hbTQx6hRTZLpFiOjQMx584TGS5-Il85G4vGQKCYaxuH5mo05lGivsn2DkqQ9Hp9dUCxx7veEZNuUxFPewM/s320/D.R+Davies.jpg" width="205" /></a><i>The Story of a Spiritual Pilgrimage</i><br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
If ever a book was written to meet a precise historical situation, surely this book was written for the hour in which we live. As the author tells us, it is is a sense a product of the times through which we have been passing. But it s not merely timely in that sense, but in the deeper and more vital sense that it is a prophetic message, a positive contribution to an understanding of the present and a preparation for the future. It is not that it has anything new to say, or that it is the first of a series. It is in line, in general, with what has been written by Barth, Brunner, Niebuhr and others. But nevertheless there is that quality about it which makes it not only distinctive, but quite unique. Mr Davies does not merely repeat what he has read, or re-state the opinions and convictions of others. What he has written he has discovered and thought through for himself. As I read it, <i>Onto orthodoxy</i> constantly reminded me of Rosalind Murray's <i>The failure of a good pagan</i> the common feature being that both are written on the basis of personal experience and are avowedly personal confessions.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
There is nothing doctrinaire or detached in the outlook of the book. It is intensely practical and vital; indeed, exciting. With the thoroughness of a true zealot, Mr Davies has invariably practised what he preached. He has staked his all on what he believed, and has suffered the consequences. His book therefore is an intensely human record, and when he writes with passion and with heat, one feels that he is entitled to do so. From his early days as a boy in South Wales, through to the period of his days as a working miner, and afterwards a student in college, and an ordained minister, to his subsequent experiences as a freelance journalist, life has been to him a fight and a struggle. And yet there is no bitterness here. The whole background of the book is stated perfectly in the following passage, which is also a good example of his virile, pungent style.</div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">
In journeying from Pacifism to Marxism, I may claim that I have fairly boxed the compass of modernist navigation. To change the figure, I have explored most of the areas of Humanism and Modernism. I have travelled the world in order to reach next door. It is true no doubt that I would have saved much time, and avoided much complication and acute suffering, if I had gone straight next door. But, in that case, the thought of what I would have missed oppresses me. I have journeyed the desert stretches of Christian Liberalism; I have trudged along the Arctic wastes of Pacifism, where everything was simple and remote - oh! so remote! Everything just plain white or black. I saw men as figures walking. ... I have groped my painful way in the caverns of psycho-analysis. I have known even the despair of atheism. And I have been under the thrall of Marxism. From every one of these explorations I gained something I am certain I would never have won if I had been a good boy and stayed at home. For good or ill, my wondering has been the world, not the back garden.</blockquote>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
That being the story the author tells us what he thinks now of the various places he has visited in his pilgrimage. It is difficult to think of anything more devastating on the subject of Christian Liberalism and Humanism than what we find here; and in like manner with the social gospel of which he was ever a fervent advocate and preacher.</div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">
From what I have said it will now be plain that I regard preaching the gospel of the forgivene of sin as the distinctive, unique and certainly most important tasl of the Church. Whatever she does in the way of social services constitutes no substitute. However many cheap meals she provides for the unemployed; however many billiard-tables and tennis clubs she gives to young people; however many psychological clinics, even, she opens - all these are worse than useless without preaching.Though she gives her body to be burned and reach not of sin, and of man's powerlessness and of the grace of God, it shall profit her nothing</blockquote>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
He insists that the message of the gospel is primarily and most essentially personal, that nations cannot be convicted of sin, and that "committees and classes cannot repent". As negative apologetic and preparation for the gospel I have rarely if ever read anything stronger or more convincing. The utter futility of all that has so often passed as gospel during the past hundred years is made terribly and tragically clear. Surely this is what is needed above all else at the present time. And especially, first and foremost, in the Churches. That complacent optimistic view of man and his nature that has so long controlled and directed thought and preaching must be given up, and must be replaced by the tragic view which is taught everywhere in the Bible. Those who are still uncertain of that can do nothing better than study the arguments presented so cogently in this book.</div>
<div>
So much for the negative aspect of the case. What of the positive? Mr Davies chooses as his title On to orthodoxy and in his conclusion he says "I shall have every sympathy with the reader who feels that my recovery of orthodoxy is incomplete". As a reader who belongs to that class I may be permitted a few observations. I am not concerned to point out how, in his view of the Bible, his attitude towards the proof of the facts of the Resurrection, his interpretation of the judgement of God and his teaching of the larger hope, Mr Davies deviates, and at times seriously, from traditional Protestant orthodoxy. For there is something else which is still more important. The great central and all important question for both Protestant and Roman Catholic orthodoxy has always been how should a man be right with God? The saints were not concerned primarily about their incapacity to "create a just society" but about themselves and their utter hopelessness and helplessness face to face with God. And at that point their primary problem was not as to how they could overcome and conquer the power of sin but how o be delivered from the guilt of sin and its penalty. In a most significant passage Mr Davies says:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">
In the logical order of my recovery of orthodoxy, it was the problem of eschatology that that raised anew for me the whole question of the being and character of God. The reader, especially if he is a theologian, may argue that I ought to have begun with God. The fact is I didn't. I began with Europe and the world of political, economic and social events.</blockquote>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
That statement, perhaps more perfectly than any other, states the essence of the difference between the new orthodoxy of Mr Davies and the school to which he belongs and traditional Protestant orthodoxy. The latter does not arrive at God as the only ultimate solution to the problem of society; it starts with God because its whole experience is that it cannot escape from God. The man has been apprehended by God, chased by "the hound of heaven" and is incapable of fleeing from His presence much as he has tried to do so. His crisis is not intellectual and philosophical, primarily, but spiritual and moral. Neo-orthodoxy does not count all its former achievements and experiences as "but dung and loss," it cannot say that "old things are passed away, behold all things are become new!. He does not believe in Revelation but decides rather on the basis of his own reasoning and understanding to adopt certain biblical ideas. In spite of itself, it is still tied to this terrible situation, and for that reason tends to forget the power and the activity of the Holy Spirit in the Church. Mr Davies suggests that the modern preacher knows too little about modern man and his problems. I would suggest that the trouble rather is ignorance of the power of God, especially in our own lives</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I have, I trust, stimulated all who are concerned deeply about the Church in the world today to read this moving, challenging, thought-provoking book.</div>
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<a href="http://freestgeorges.blogspot.com/search/label/D.%20R.%20Davies">(For more on D R Davies see here)</a></div>
Gary Bradyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08171450135496647908noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7003299452291291222.post-29431067572098281432018-05-21T11:09:00.004-07:002023-05-21T08:56:24.770-07:00Lloyd-Jones on Karl Barth<div style="text-align: justify;">
<i><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjTRdJTUx5rFt0veALcGIWiPe3oGQZc7i7HjCH-ghn0raA4WxQzdwH6oZZxWti9usEJlXGKWuMlqWTEhS8hhR0n6l_vD-KTFXTj8Wf_XNf_mi8mOiV3_12iO9hUHZO4qUCqXYnucos88e33WlhWk2XOFdkDsenw2jAznALVx3_gsd2-FxI2JCD7AN_f/s640/barth.webp" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="359" data-original-width="640" height="225" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjTRdJTUx5rFt0veALcGIWiPe3oGQZc7i7HjCH-ghn0raA4WxQzdwH6oZZxWti9usEJlXGKWuMlqWTEhS8hhR0n6l_vD-KTFXTj8Wf_XNf_mi8mOiV3_12iO9hUHZO4qUCqXYnucos88e33WlhWk2XOFdkDsenw2jAznALVx3_gsd2-FxI2JCD7AN_f/w400-h225/barth.webp" width="400" /></a></div><br />In December 1968 following Barth's death this article by the Doctor appeared in the newly founded Evangelical Times, under the editorship of Peter Masters. </i></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
THE PASSING of Dr Karl Barth at the age of 82 is an event that calls for comment.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
As a man, there is only one adjective to apply to him and that is ‘great’. Everything about him was big. He clearly had a first-class intellect. Nothing else could account for his acute criticism of various theological outlooks and his own massive Church Dogmatics. He was said by those who knew him to be a ‘great character’. But his greatness was seen supremely in his heroic stand against Hitler and Nazism as expressed in the Barmen Declarations which led to his expulsion from Germany.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
There is no question also but that he stood out above all others as a theological giant in this century. No name has been quoted more freely not only in Protestant circles but also among Roman Catholics.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
He first became known in the early twenties and in this country in 1927 with the publication of a translation of one of his books under the title of <i>The Word of God and the Word of Man</i>. This was followed in a few years by the English translation of the second edition of his commentary on the Epistle to the Romans. Others followed in rapid succession such as <i>Credo</i> and then his great work on dogmatics in many volumes.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The great question is – What has all this meant from the evangelical standpoint? The answer is quite simple – practically nothing! At first many evangelicals of reformed persuasion felt that Barth was a great new ally. His attacks on Liberalism and Modernism were devastating, and he appeared to be reasserting the old Calvinistic position. But alas, it was only a matter of appearance.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
To start with he accepted a radical criticism of the Bible, particularly the Old Testament. His view of revelation was clearly not that of the Reformers. He denied propositional revelation, and his view of the historicity of the foundational facts of the Christian faith expressed itself in his strange division of history into ‘holy’ and ‘secular’.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
‘By their fruits ye shall know them’ and when this canon of judgement is applied to Barth and his works it is clear that the result has been entirely negative from the evangelical standpoint.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Though his works and influence have been in existence for 50 years, he has brought no revival to the church. This is not surprising as his approach, in spite of his denials, is essentially philosophical. His style was involved and difficult and while for a time he produced a crop of intellectual preachers, who were always preaching about ‘the Word’, it soon became clear that they were not preaching the Word itself.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
By now his influence from the continent has been eclipsed by that of more radical thinkers.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Barth never had much influence in England, his whole approach being alien to the English type of thinking. In Scotland he had a much greater following and succeeded in turning into Barthians a number of younger men who had been prominent in evangelical circles.
His keenest students at the present time seem to be Roman Catholic theologians, especially those of the liberal school that is accepting more and more the Higher Critical view of the Bible, and is at the same time anxious to interpret the pronouncements of the Council of Trent in a Protestant direction.
It may well be that his greatest achievement will be to provide a bridge between a modified (but not truly reformed) Roman Catholicism and a degenerate Protestantism, which often does not know what it believes.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
As a negative critic of the old Modernism he was superb, but because he tried to bend the Scriptures and their message to his philosophical system and failed to become ‘a fool for Christ’s sake’ in the Pauline sense, and to submit himself to that ‘simplicity which is in Christ Jesus’, his positive contribution to the cause of the Gospel was virtually nil. It is because of this that his name should never be coupled with those of Luther and Calvin. What a difference there is between causing a stir, or even a flutter, in the theological dovecotes, and being used of God to produce a reformation and a re-awakening!</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
All honour to a great man . . . but!</div>
Gary Bradyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08171450135496647908noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7003299452291291222.post-58814241622312551692018-05-21T11:01:00.003-07:002019-10-24T09:10:03.865-07:00Lloyd-Jones on the Altar Call<div style="text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi32KvwgTB_LJ7PWSosx1zQyJ_w5YQ8Ds5uAk8cvB8yHvM88CLm9-TS9Sucufrkm3XyvGzO38VYCUct65gIJR7tfuLDqudfhEduibwUBzHRbIEs6VdYziC_ut00dNtTbje50KFlmah6EtY/s1600/coming-healing-revival-1.jpg" imageanchor="1"><img border="0" height="215" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi32KvwgTB_LJ7PWSosx1zQyJ_w5YQ8Ds5uAk8cvB8yHvM88CLm9-TS9Sucufrkm3XyvGzO38VYCUct65gIJR7tfuLDqudfhEduibwUBzHRbIEs6VdYziC_ut00dNtTbje50KFlmah6EtY/s320/coming-healing-revival-1.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
According to an article on the Banner website <a href="https://banneroftruth.org/uk/resources/articles/2003/dr-lloyd-jones-on-the-altar-call/">here</a> early in the 1970s Dr Martyn Lloyd-Jones was the speaker at a ministers’ conference in the USA and at a question session was asked the following question and gave the answer given:</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Q During recent years, especially in England, among evangelicals of the Reformed faith, there has been a rising criticism of the invitation system as used by Billy Graham and others. Does Scripture justify the use of such public invitations or not?</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
A. Well, it is difficult to answer this in a brief compass without being misunderstood. Let me answer it like this: The history of this invitation system is one with which you people ought to be more familiar than anyone else, because it began in America. It began in the 1820s; the real originator of it was Charles G. Finney. It led to a great controversy. Asahel Nettleton, a great Calvinist and successful evangelist, never issued an "altar call" nor asked people to come to the "anxious seat." These new methods in the 182Os and were condemned for many reasons by all who took the Reformed position.
One reason is that there is no evidence that this was done in New Testament times, because then they trusted to the power of the Spirit. Peter preaching on the Day of Pentecost under the power of the Spirit, for instance, had no need to call people forward in decision because, as you remember, the people were so moved and affected by the power of the Word and Spirit that they actually interrupted the preacher, crying out, "Men and brethren, what shall we do?" That has been the traditional Reformed attitude towards this particular matter. The moment you begin to introduce this other element, you are bringing a psychological element. The invitation should be in the message. We believe the Spirit applies the message, so we trust in the power of the Spirit. I personally agree with what has been said in the question. I have never called people forward at the end for this reason; there is a grave danger of people coming forward before they are ready to come forward. We do believe in the work of the Spirit, that He convicts and converts, and He will do His work. There is a danger in bringing people to a "birth," as it were, before they are ready for it.
The Puritans in particular were afraid of what they would call "a temporary faith" or "a false profession." There was a great Puritan, Thomas Shepard, who published a famous series of sermons on The Ten Virgins. The great point of that book was to deal with this problem of a false profession. The foolish virgins thought they were all right. This is a very great danger.
I can sum it up by putting it like this: I feel that this pressure which is put upon people to come forward in decision ultimately is due to a lack of faith in the work and operation of the Holy Spirit. We are to preach the Word, and if we do it properly, there will be a call to a decision that comes in the message, and then we leave it to the Spirit to act upon people. And of course He does. Some may come immediately at the close of the service to see the minister. I think there should always be an indication that the minister will be glad to see anybody who wants to put questions to him or wants further help. But that is a very different thing from putting pressure upon people to come forward. I feel it is wrong to put pressure directly on the will. The order in Scripture seems to be this – the truth is presented to the mind, which moves the heart, and that in turn moves the will.</div>
Gary Bradyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08171450135496647908noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7003299452291291222.post-59975720555050181702018-05-21T10:51:00.001-07:002018-05-21T10:51:36.079-07:00Transcript TV Interview<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi2aFvretcupG6HzidW3qA42F0YQD0pUkuB78Pvgc19hG5faE37HDU0XQePQimJ4qvSqPl0E6MqHuXryioYl_q7BnaTmO-bKI3mG4jIhnXBTZtIh0ZZnP60C2vUSf2WB06E6KXzGjjdI30/s1600/mlj.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="239" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi2aFvretcupG6HzidW3qA42F0YQD0pUkuB78Pvgc19hG5faE37HDU0XQePQimJ4qvSqPl0E6MqHuXryioYl_q7BnaTmO-bKI3mG4jIhnXBTZtIh0ZZnP60C2vUSf2WB06E6KXzGjjdI30/s320/mlj.png" width="320" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b><br /></b></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b>This is the transcript of a televised interview from December 1970 between Dr Lloyd-Jones and Joan (now Dame Joan) Bakewell. <a href="https://rodiagnusdei.wordpress.com/2013/12/12/dr-martyn-lloyd-jones-newly-released-video-interview-transcript-from-december-1970/">The transcript is here.</a></b></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b>Bakewell:</b> Dr. Jones, you are an evangelical preacher and it is your wish to bring people back to the biblical truth about man. Now, in so doing, you persuade man that the modern popular idea of what man is is on the wrong track. Could you specify where you think he’s making mistakes?</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b>Dr. Jones:</b> Well, he makes mistake that thee essential biblical view of man is that he is a creature who has gone astray. In other words, I criticise the modern view of man on two grounds:
One is that it makes too much of man.
Secondly, that it doesn’t make enough of man.
He doesn’t make enough of man, in that he tends to regard him as just an animal, but that the cerebellum is more developed than most animals, but still, essentially, an animal. And I think that’s degrading man and debasing him. But then, you see on the other side, they make too much of him, in the sense that they believe that he’s got it within himself to order himself and this society, and more or less, to create a perfect world. So, I criticise on both those grounds, whereas, the biblical view to me is a consistent view of man in this way: that it says that man is a creature created in the image and likeness of God; that he is not a mere animal. That he is the lord of creation; that the image of God, which means his reason and his power to criticise and evaluate, and to control himself. This image of God is in him, and that is man, essentially.
Well then, why is man as he is? Well, that is because he’s rebelled against this, rebelled against God and regards himself as God- and he is incapable of functioning as such. The result is you’ve got chaos. But, this is a unified view.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b>Bakewell: </b>Can we talk of the elements that you find wrong in the modern image of man. Now, you say that he’s treated as less than man, but, in respect to his animal instincts, and the research that has been done into man, as the naked ape, the victim of environment and heredity. Now, you cannot presumably quarrel with the actual facts that have been scientifically ascertained about this.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b>Dr. Jones:</b> I would do a little query about the ‘scientifically ascertained’ .. See, so much today is as certain as fact in the realm of science, which is nothing but theory and hypothesis. This is one of the great troubles, it seems to me today. And, I’m not only sceptical about it, I tend to ridicule it for this reason, that I know in my medical training we were told, you see, that 100 years ago we regarded the thyroid gland as a vestigial remains, no function. But, we know now that you can’t live without it; and they’re still saying that about the appendix. They said this about so much; this is the arrogance of modern man. Because his knowledge is limited, he makes these wild assertions that can’t be proved. All I’m prepared to agree with is this: That man today is behaving like an animal. But the question is, why?</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b>Bakewell: </b>You say in one of your books that the very essence of the problem is in the nature of sin. And you also say that in fact sin has always been part of man’s nature, but sin used to be ashamed of itself, whereas today, sin excuses itself.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b>Dr. Jones:</b> Well, yes. I don’t think I’ve ever said sin is an essential part of man. Man, I would say as the Bible teaches, was originally perfect. But, since man’s original fall, sin has been a part of human nature. And that has been true, of course, throughout the centuries. I would say that the story of humanity is just a proof of this fact, that man is sinful now by nature, and this is bound to show itself.
<b>Bakewell:</b> What you quarrel with is that the initial assumption about man today is that he’s basically good, but he goes astray and blame must be put elsewhere. Now, indeed, there is some legitimacy in that point of view, in that poverty, and pressure, exploitation does set many problems for man in which he doesn’t always behave well. Will you not subscribe to it at all?</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b>Dr. Jones: </b>Yes. This is where we’ve got to start, with man as he is today. And my quarrel is, with the general outlook of today is this: that they begin to talk about treatment before they establish a true diagnosis. Now, I can’t help putting it like this, you see; it’s a very poor doctor who medicates symptoms and isn’t aware of the disease that is producing the symptoms. Well, to me, the disease is this fallen sinful nature of man. And because that is true, none of your medication of the symptoms is going to deal with the problem. And I maintain that this is what history is teaching us, that with all our advantages today, the problem is as great as ever.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b>Bakewell: </b>What then is the nature of man’s sin that you wish us to recognise?</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b>Dr. Jones:</b> It is this. It isn’t so much that he does things that are wrong, and thereby makes himself miserable. No, I think this is an important point, if I may say so, I’m glad you asked that question. There are some people who represent sin as a sickness. and say that ‘man is sick’. There are a lot of Christians who would say this. Well, I agree that man is sick. But to me, that’s not the essence of the problem. The essence of the problem is that man is a rebel, and he is sick because he is a rebel. In other words, the business of Christianity, ultimately, is not simply to make us feel happier, or even to make us live a better life. It is to reconcile us to God. Man, you see, from this biblical standpoint, was never meant to be autonomous or self contained. This is my quarrel with the modern view. They regard man as autonomous- he is the master of his fate, the captain of his soul. It is so obviously ridiculous, because he isn’t. But, this is where they start.
Whereas, I start by saying, that man was not only meant not to be autonomous, and can’t be and can’t act as such, but, he only functions truly when he lives his life under God; the God who made him, and made him in a given way and has put laws in his nature. Well, man doesn’t respond to this essential law of his being and is quarrelling with his maker; he’s bound to go wrong. He’s bound to be miserable in what he does. He’ll produce chaos. And he has done so throughout the centuries. This is the whole story of the human race. But, it isn’t merely that he’s sick; it’s that his attitude towards his maker is wrong. Now, the apostle Peter, for instance, puts it in a phrase like this, that Christ came into the world to bring us to God. That’s why Christianity must never be thought of of as a sort of cult which heals your body, enables you to sleep at night and stop worrying… now, that’s a cult.
The real object is to bring man to his true position, which is that he’s in communion with his maker and he’s living to the glory of his maker. Now, there’s a very well known definition of this, a Scottish confession of faith, a Presbyterian confession of faith, known as the Westminster Confession of Faith. They produced a shorter catechism, and the first question in that is about man: ‘What is the chief end of man?’ And this is the answer: ‘The chief end of man is to glorify God and to enjoy Him forever.’ But, do you see the order? You glorify God. Well, let me put it in another way to you. A clever fellow, a lawyer, I don’t know why they tackled Jesus Christ, and said, ‘Which is the first and the greatest commandment of the law?’ You see, they were dealing with about 613 commandments, and they were arguing about which one is the greatest. Well, that fellow had a great shock when Christ answered him. He said, ‘Thou shalt love the Lord, thy God, with all thy heart, and all thy soul, and all thy mind and all thy strength. That is the first and the chiefest commandment. The second is like unto it. Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.’ Now today, people start with the second and forget the first.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b>Bakewell:</b> You know, this point of view is obviously held with great conviction by you. But, I would have thought it brought you into great conflict not only with people who don’t subscribe to the Christian religion, but to many other Christians too.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b>Dr. Jones: </b>Well, of course it does. I’m sorry about this; this is something I deeply regret. But, you know, this isn’t the first time that my – have been right. And, in any case, we don’t decide this kind of question by counting heads. I know nothing about these things properly, except for what I find in the Bible. But, I maintain that the story of the human race, and the story of civilisation is a proof of the truth of the Bible.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b>Bakewell: </b>But, what I would suggest is that whereas they would tolerate your point of view as rather different and divergent view of Christianity, you are unprepared to tolerate their view as a possible version of the truth</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b>Dr. Jones:</b> I am, of course I am. And I say this quite deliberately, for this reason: that Christianity is a very exclusive and dogmatic faith. Take the apostle Paul, for instance, writing- ‘Though we, or an angel from heaven, preach to you any other Gospel except that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.’ He puts it like that. Now, you may say, ‘That’s the arrogance of Paul.’ I say, ‘No, this man has been given his message, he has received it by revelation. It isn’t his point of view.’ If a man asserts his own point of view, as a result of his own thinking, in this intolerant manner, well, he’s a –, he’s not to be tolerated; he’s a hopeless fellow. But, when you are given truth, what you claim is truth from God, well, then you have no right to be anything but intolerant. When I find people insinuating their own theories and ideas, and using the name of Christ, well, I have to protest. This is dishonest, apart from anything else, in my opinion.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b>Bakewell:</b> But, none the less, sir, it’s a highly regarded Christian virtue these days to be both charitable and tolerant with people of different views of oneself. Do you disapprove of that?</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b>Dr. Jones:</b> Again, for the same reason, I am bound to. Christ Himself said, ‘I am the way, the truth and the life. No man cometh unto the Father, but by Me.’ He says all others have been thieves and robbers. So when I find the thieves and robbers being accepted into the church, and their views being tolerated and praised, surely I am bound to protest. The point is this, that Christ- we claim, I claim- is unique; you mustn’t put anybody near Him. You mustn’t mention Him in the same category as Confucius, or the Buddha, or Mohammad, or anybody else. Why not? Well, because He is the only begotten Son of God. This is not my theory; this is Christianity. This is what the apostles preached. They preached Jesus and the resurrection. Now, take a man like the apostle Paul; he, as a Pharisee, resented all this. The Pharisees regarded Christ as a blasphemer. ‘Who is this fellow? How can this man teach, never having learned Himself? Who is this man who claims to be equal with God?’ And Saul of Tarsus persecuted the church and he hated Christ. He says so. But then, he came to see that this was the Lord of glory. And he preached nothing else.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b>Bakewell:</b> I must take you up on the social relevance of all the things you’ve been saying, because, if the church here on earth has a role to play in the lives of all people, whether Christian or not, and I wonder where the dogma, the dogmatic nature of the church, as you speak of it, doesn’t inhibit you from having a role in the lives of ordinary people. A lot of people would find it, in a sense, easier to reject you, than someone who you would regard as liberal social minded regimen?</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b>Dr. Jones:</b> Precisely. And that’s why the world is as it is. That’s exactly the explanation. You’ve put it very perfectly. Now, I cannot accept the statement that the church is a social institution in your sense. A church, to me, consists of people who are truly Christian. Now then, you say: What is the relevance of this to the social conditions and the problems? Well, I would say that it is the business of individual Christians to play their part in society. And, of course, historically, this is what is the most interesting.
The church has had its greatest influence upon society and social conditions when she’s been most evangelical. Now, this isn’t, again, my theory. I can establish this. I was in Scotland last week, commemorating the 400th anniversary of the death of John Knox. You read the accounts of the conditions in Scotland before Knox, and he’s always charged with intolerance and all the things you were saying, but that man changed the life of the whole of Scotland. He introduced an educational system, He changed it politically, and in every respect. The Puritans did it in this country. Cromwell, don’t forget was an evangelical Christian. And then, you come on to the 18th century, you have the evangelical awakening, and the Whitley’s and the Wesley’s, that did more to improve social conditions in this country than all the dabbling of ecclesiastics in politics.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b>Bakewell:</b> You know, and yet, it’s often alleged against evangelicals: They promise salvation at the end of life and don’t, in fact, apply themselves to relieving man’s lot here on earth. Now, how concerned are you with man’s lot here on earth?</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b>Dr. Jones:</b> Well, I’m very concerned and I’ve always criticised that particular presentation of evangelicalism. To me it wasn’t biblical. You see, the biblical view of man is that he’s to function in society. For instance, Paul’s teaching is that the powers that be are ordained of God. That magistrates, and all, are ordained by God. There are two elements in my position:
Man fundamentally needs this Gospel, which can renew him and renovate him, and make a new man of him. But in the mean time, He’s a believer in law and order, because sin must be held within bounds. If you don’t have magistrates and punishment and so on, you’ll get chaos. And, I think we’re witnessing a great deal of it at the present time.
But this is a part of the whole Christian position. And Christian people, in the past, have played their part in politics and in various other aspects of Christian life. Unfortunately, in the last 100 years or so, I agree, they have been somewhat guilty of the charge that you bring against them. By now, I think, that’s more or less gone. I find today that most evangelical Christians are very much concerned about the social implications and are laying a great stress upon it.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b>Bakewell:</b> Can we go back to this matter on ‘man having lost his sense of sin’, and therefore not being in a situation of being able to be saved? I would say, a great many people now feel that matters of sin are less than their immediate concern. And that being so, do you see much possibility of your point of view prevailing?</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b>Dr. Jones:</b> I not only see the possibility, I already see it happening. I find people are turning back to this. I’m travelling about the country a great deal now. I was telling you, I was in Scotland last week, I was in Glasgow Wednesday night; I preached to 2,100 people. Well, it seems to me that something’s happening. I find, politicians, have it very difficult to get 50 people to listen to them. In other words, I believe, people are beginning to realise the utter bankruptcy of most of what’s been offered them, and are turning, perhaps vaguely, and even wistfully back in the direction of this great authoritative message of the New Testament, which I maintain is only represented by the evangelical – and we’ve got to bring them to an awareness of this. Of course they’re ignorant, but that’s the business of preaching.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b>Bakewell:</b> But, isn’t this need for an authoritative line, whatever it might be, in conflict with the other trend in man’s development, which is for self expression, fulfilment, self realisation, which you actually disapprove of?</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b>Dr. Jones:</b> Well, yes, of course I do, because man as he is, the more he expresses himself, the worst things become. You see, if each man is autonomous, and is to express himself or herself, you’re bound to get conflict, aren’t you? If each one of us is a god, and I determine I do what I think is right, well, you would think differently. Well, there’s a clashing immediately and you get chaos. You see, we must both of us, unto all others submit ourselves to God. We’ve got an authority outside of ourselves. And we have a motive and a reason and a purpose. You see, when people deny this, you must get chaos. And you’ve got it. This is the tragedy. And so, my business is to call people back to this. You’ve got, first of all, to show them why things are as they are. They’ve got to be clear about this. There’s no hope until they are. Now, I know that there are people going around today saying, ‘Jesus loves you…’ and so on. Well, if I was to be on the street, I would say, ‘Well, what about it? Who is your Jesus? I don’t want Him. I’ve got a car, I’ve got a refrigerator, I’ve got a television set; what are you bothering about? I’m not interested.’ That is my reply to them. You see, the Old Testament is the law, and as Paul puts it: the law was our schoolmaster, to bring us to Christ, to show us our need. Now, when people confront the 10 commandments, there they see their failure. And it’s only when they realise this, truly, they see their failure. And it’s only people who see their failure, who are ready to listen to the offer of salvation</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b>Bakewell:</b> Dr. Martyn Lloyd Jones, thank you very much.</div>
Gary Bradyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08171450135496647908noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7003299452291291222.post-77338079919521512512016-02-24T07:59:00.000-08:002017-05-24T09:42:03.810-07:001969 Eifion Evans's Welsh Revival 1904-5<div style="text-align: center;">
<strong><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhtYfaB33hqMG8Ec54O_NbmgvrNPgW03-c1V4mz5kfHIIi9FHdn_nhE42JiFNtK3QyuxLF0bXv5tHA0TmIhFEwgs7kOaLDrd_0W_bYVopyt2UpxW-0_SOtaou7ZqHpya99L2bX6dAdwVj8/s1600/welsh+revival+1904.jpg" imageanchor="1"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhtYfaB33hqMG8Ec54O_NbmgvrNPgW03-c1V4mz5kfHIIi9FHdn_nhE42JiFNtK3QyuxLF0bXv5tHA0TmIhFEwgs7kOaLDrd_0W_bYVopyt2UpxW-0_SOtaou7ZqHpya99L2bX6dAdwVj8/s400/welsh+revival+1904.jpg" /></a></strong></div>
<strong><br /></strong>
<strong>Eifion Evans on The Welsh Revival of 1904/5</strong><br />
Foreword<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I am very happy indeed to write this Foreword to, and to recommend, this study of the Welsh Revihave known those who had been prominent in the revival and the many who had benefited by it. I amval of 1904-5.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
This is something which has been badly needed for years, and should be of especial value to people like myself, who were too young to remember the revival itself, but who particularly pleased by the way in which this study has been written; for it is not a mere recital of facts, but truly a study. This is good because certain features of the revival had always posed problems - theological and psychological.
Dr. Eifion Evans has dealt with all this in a thoroughly satisfactory manner, indeed, in a unique manner. What was needed was a writer who was a trained historian, able to take an objective view, and yet at the same time one who was able to deal with the subject theologically. Moreover, it called for a writer with spiritual insight, understanding, and sympathy. Dr. Evans combines these qualities in an exceptional way with a result that his book is invaluable, not only as a study of this particular revival, but also as a study of the phenomenon of revival in general.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
This is particularly important at the present time for the following reasons:
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
First, the great need of revival in the churches. This is surely the only real hope; but it is essential that Christians should be clear as to the difference between revival and organised evangelism. Here is a reminder of what is possible, and especially for those whose whole doctrine of the Holy Spirit really leaves no room for revival.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Secondly, this book is most opportune because of what is known as the "Charismatic Movement" and a new interest in spiritual phenomena. It helps to show the danger of passing from the spiritual to the psychological and possible even the psychic.
There are undoubtedly many problems in connection with the Revival of 1904-5 - certain tendencies to extreme mysticism in Mr. Evan Roberts himself, the general difference in character between this revival and previous revivals, and the and the lamentable failure of the preachers to continue preaching and teaching during the revival, etc. All these are dealt with in a most judicious manner by Dr. Evans. All revivals have produced problems - life always does so - and the danger is to dismiss the entire phenomenon because of certain excesses that often accompany it.
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
No one can read this book without coming under judgement. It will reveal whether our ultimate faith is in "the power of God" or in human ability and organisations". It is my prayer, and my hope, that it will lead many so to realise anew and afresh the
glory and the wonder of the former that they will begin to long and to yearn and to pray for another "visitation from on high" such as we experienced in 1904-5.</div>
<strong>June, 1969. D M Lloyd-Jones</strong>
Gary Bradyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08171450135496647908noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7003299452291291222.post-20276319910024652872016-02-24T07:56:00.002-08:002020-09-30T03:28:29.289-07:001965 Alexander's More Than Notion<div style="text-align: justify;">
<strong><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgTMGiNJ50G3CpdX5iKtf8IMJL1BN6El3XuKY3Qr85sYC4zkzEDc71VEedgR9gBIarX1yvXRf4PNwSxpLmrZ1Z7kJWnosc8pXUcXwzyrHckDjjpR6YBCERjz5mnDAAmLAJaIghgG0FWZrU/s640/s769313777709094367_p852_i2_w640.jpeg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="640" data-original-width="430" height="400" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgTMGiNJ50G3CpdX5iKtf8IMJL1BN6El3XuKY3Qr85sYC4zkzEDc71VEedgR9gBIarX1yvXRf4PNwSxpLmrZ1Z7kJWnosc8pXUcXwzyrHckDjjpR6YBCERjz5mnDAAmLAJaIghgG0FWZrU/w269-h400/s769313777709094367_p852_i2_w640.jpeg" width="269" /></a></div><br />J H Alexander's More Than Notion</strong><br />
Foreword</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I am delighted to hear that there is a call for a second edition of this excellent book and am most happy therefore to write a word of commendation for it. It came into my hands almost accidentally. I had never heard of the author but the moment I began to read I was gripped and deeply moved.
There are some books of which it can be said that to read them is an experience, and one is never the same again. The extracts out of the lives of these various people who came in varied ways to a saving knowledge of the Lord Jesus Christ are, at one and the same time, convicting and encouraging. Some were poor and ignorant, others well placed socially, and learned and cultured; but all came to the same glorious experience.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
In reading about them one is shown the vital difference between a head knowledge of the Christian faith and a true heart experience.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
In recommending it to the congregation at Westminster Chapel on a Friday night I said that it should be made compulsory reading for all theologians especially, but it will prove valuable also to those who long for a vital Christian experience.
Many who have read it as the result of my recommendation have testified to the blessing they have received. In one church known to me the reading of the book by one man led to a prayer-meeting such as they had not experienced before.
In these superficial and confused days I thank God for a book such as this and pray that He may bless it to countless souls.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<strong>D M Lloyd-Jones Westminster Chapel London 1965</strong></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<strong></strong> </div>
Gary Bradyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08171450135496647908noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7003299452291291222.post-32172228122420116822016-02-24T07:45:00.002-08:002020-02-25T09:59:41.495-08:001968 Peter Masters' Men of Destiny<div style="text-align: justify;">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgP0K1I-ocrmC8BM8VHbcb0i3uBNOZJU7RHqwlbOZImsiwYMzGNguv0RxrVYgHHVt6o9JpM2cAx5V-dXFEEXA_6B7s6-SqHq3VJVleokYtQjoYU6yewsD5zgI52Y6vnT4r-utx9e2FOlxY/s1600/men+of+destiny+original.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="623" data-original-width="402" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgP0K1I-ocrmC8BM8VHbcb0i3uBNOZJU7RHqwlbOZImsiwYMzGNguv0RxrVYgHHVt6o9JpM2cAx5V-dXFEEXA_6B7s6-SqHq3VJVleokYtQjoYU6yewsD5zgI52Y6vnT4r-utx9e2FOlxY/s320/men+of+destiny+original.png" width="206" /></a></div>
<strong>Men of Destiny by Peter Masters</strong></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I welcome the publication of the articles, which have already appeared in the <em>Evangelical Times</em>, in this permanent form. I do so for many reasons. Throughout my Christian life I have found that, next to the Bible itself, nothing has given me greater help and encouragement than the reading of biographies of great Christians of various ages and countries.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Our danger is always to think that our problems are unique and our lot exceptionally hard. Thus we tend to become despondent and fearful. The finest antidote to that is to read the stories of great heroes of the faith of past ages. As we do so we are both shamed and also encouraged. That is what will happen to those who read this book.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
At the same time it will serve what is a yet more important function, and especially at this present time. So many people today think ones attitude to Christianity is purely a psychological matter. If you belong to a certain type or group, or have a particular religious "complex", then you will be a Christian. They argue that it has nothing to do with objective truth but is purely a matter of our particular makeup.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Others fondly believe that it is purely a matter of intelligence and that no intelligent, educated, integrated person can possibly be a Christian. The simple answer to that is to be found, quite simply, in the history of the Christian church. Nothing is so amazing as the way in which people of every conceivable psychological type, and of all possible grades of intellect and knowledge have been found worshipping God together as Christians.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
That is the thing that is brought out so clearly and unmistakably in the series of biographies found in this book. How different these men were on the surface, and by nature; but how united in their faith in the One Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Here, then, at one and the same time, is a challenge to the sceptic and a comfort for the saint. I wish it a very wide and large circulation.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<strong>1968
D M Lloyd-Jones</strong></div>
Gary Bradyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08171450135496647908noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7003299452291291222.post-70878800907015093402016-02-24T07:34:00.001-08:002020-09-30T03:32:25.619-07:001951 Henry Frost's Miraculous Healing Reprint<div style="text-align: justify;">
<strong><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjga3lF6VAZ8MitZLvufFsXfOlI3pw5P7nEiMG7vJL1LYqSqGwUKPiN0I9CVZ8cSatZ4gKLE2Ncueon-XxW8rYigGJMyur8Zq1t_Xzk6Nw10x7YFFOjxbp7B-BpxIqgjYx_LSNSgQJdNek/s350/ajehjhj.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="350" data-original-width="255" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjga3lF6VAZ8MitZLvufFsXfOlI3pw5P7nEiMG7vJL1LYqSqGwUKPiN0I9CVZ8cSatZ4gKLE2Ncueon-XxW8rYigGJMyur8Zq1t_Xzk6Nw10x7YFFOjxbp7B-BpxIqgjYx_LSNSgQJdNek/s320/ajehjhj.png" /></a></div><br />Miraculous Healing (Why does God heal some and not others?) by Henry W Frost</strong></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
Endorsement</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I am truly glad that the publishers have decided to reprint this
excellent volume, largely perhaps at my suggestion. Ever since I
first read it, I have felt that it is easily and incomparably the
best book I have ever read on this subject. It is the book,
therefore, which I have always recommended to those who have been
anxious for help on this matter. Many times have I been asked to
write myself on this theme. I have always replied by saying that
Henry W. Frost has already dealt with the matter in what I regard as
a final and conclusive manner. The reappearance of this book at this
present time is most opportune as there is evidently a recrudescence
of interest in this subject.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Some
recent writings seem to suggest that the only problem is as to
whether one believes or not that miraculous gift s ended with the
apostolic age. But this is by no means the only problem. Dr Frost
shows clearly that theological problems are also involved, and which
we only ignore at our spiritual peril. The Bible frequently warns us
against the danger of being deluded by evil powers. All ‘miracles’
and ‘wonders’ are not produced by the Holy Spirit, and we must
know how to ‘test the spirits’ in this matter. Our Lord Himself
has warned us that the ‘lying spirits’ are so clever and so
subtle as to deceive, if it were possible, the very elect (Matt
24:24).
Dr
Frost’s method is particularly helpful. He starts on the practical
level by citing cases and examples which prove the fact of miraculous
healing. He then proceeds to deal with the difficulties, both on the
practical and experimental plane, and also in the realm of correct
and clear thinking. Above all, he is thoroughly biblical, and not
only orthodox, but truly spiritually minded. I strongly recommend
this most valuable study.
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<strong>D.
M. Lloyd-Jones</strong></div>
Gary Bradyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08171450135496647908noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7003299452291291222.post-50265523244488856512016-02-24T07:17:00.000-08:002016-02-24T07:30:38.062-08:001939 The Lordship of Christ<em>This article appeared in </em>The Christian Graduate <em>in October 1939</em><br />
<br />
<div align="CENTER" style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
The Lordship of Christ
</div>
<br />
<div align="CENTER" style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
DR. D. MARTYN LLOYD-JONES
</div>
<br />
<div align="JUSTIFY" style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
WHAT do we mean when we
say with Peter that God hath made "that same Jesus ... both Lord
and Christ”? What do I mean when I say that Jesus Christ is "my
Lord"? I put it thus in a personal way, because one cannot deal
with a question like this in any other way. Shall I suggest just two
things which I do not mean?</div>
<br />
<div align="JUSTIFY" style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
(1) When I say that Jesus
is my Lord, I do not mean that I do my best and utmost to be faithful
to His memory and His example, and that I give myself entirely to
that endeavour. I think it must be agreed and admitted that there has
been a tendency during the past fifty years or so to emphasise and
stress that particular view of the matter. To acknowledge Christ as
Lord has been spoken of in terms of imitating Christ or following
Him. And to this end, of course, scholarship and research have
concentrated their energies upon the earthly life of Jesus and have
done their utmost to sift and to separate what they regard as being
true from what they regard as being false. They have tried to
re-construct the life, or at any rate, a picture of the life of the
Jesus of history. The Jesus of history is to be our Lord. But,
strangely enough, the more we look at Him the greater the tendency
becomes to call Him Jesus rather than Lord! Why that is we shall see
in a few moments. Let it suffice to say, at present, that all the
efforts of men to make Jesus Lord have clearly failed.</div>
<br />
<div align="JUSTIFY" style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
(2) Again, when I say
that Jesus Christ is my Lord, I do not mean that I just take all the
words which He uttered and which we have reported and chronicled, and
make of them a law for my life. There are people who would confine
God's dealings with mankind through Christ to the New Testament
words, and then the New Testament becomes a kind of legal code which
defines everything.</div>
<br />
<div align="JUSTIFY" style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
Now, the reason why both
of these conceptions of the Lordship of Christ are erroneous, seems
to me to be clear and obvious, and that by definition. The
relationship involved in the word "lordship" is obviously
and clearly a living relationship between two persons. Moreover, the
slave waits for his lord's command and just asks, "Lord, what
wouldst thou have me to do?" He doesn't even engage himself to
his master for his own profit - he belongs to his master! Now judged
by that standard, the two conceptions of the lordship of Christ which
we have considered are obviously false, and fail in that they do not
provide a living Person to take part in the relationship with me. A
memory, however dear, is not a living person and cannot command me
and dictate to me in the present. I cannot talk and pray to an ideal.
I cannot cast myself in my helplessness and my woe upon my hero who
was buried some twenty centuries ago. Besides, where I am the sole
living person involved, it is obvious that I alone really count ; and
though I set up a certain standard and decide to be governed by it,
it is I who set it up. I count most of all and there is, in reality,
no lord outside myself.</div>
<br />
<div align="JUSTIFY" style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
Therefore, and in order
to hasten on, I say with the apostle: "Yea, though we have known
Christ after the flesh, yet now henceforth know we Him no more."
I deal no longer with the Jesus of history, but with the Lord in
Glory. I look not back to a memory but into the Face of the Living
Christ. I cease to paint beautiful pictures of Jesus of Nazareth and
to sentimentalise with vague generalities about beauty, truth and
love, and begin rather to "know the terror of the Lord,"
and to feel it to be my bounden duty "to persuade men" to
flee from the wrath to come and to see that their gentle Jesus is to
be the Judge of the whole world. He, as my Lord, is everything, and,
in a sense, there is nothing else that really matters. The immediate
problems of 1939 no longer concern me most of all ; the needs of
mankind, great though they are, are not the field of my real enquiry.
What I desire to know is what my Lord would have me to do. Conditions
next year may be entirely different, and in twenty years' time still
different again, but my Lord's lordship can never change - "He
is the same yesterday, to-day, and for ever."</div>
<br />
<div align="JUSTIFY" style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
But, having said all that
in order to get clear the true conception of lordship ; having
stressed and emphasised the truth that it is only the Lord from
Heaven who can be my Lord and not the earthly Jesus and His memory
alone, I am reminded of my quotation of St. Peter's words at the
commencement, those words which tell us that it is that same Jesus
Whom God hath made "both Lord and Christ." The same Person,
but not as He was, but as He is. He was the Servant, He is now the
Lord. <i>He</i> is the same, but His offices are different. We do not
pray to "the Servant," but to "the Lord." On what
grounds do we do so? Or, to put the same question in another way, we
may ask with reverence what are Jesus of Nazareth's rights and title
to His lordship? Two main answers are given to that question in the
New Testament.</div>
<br />
<div align="JUSTIFY" style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
(1) There is, first of
all, what one may perhaps best call the purely theological answer, by
which I mean an absolute, essential answer apart from you and me and
our experiences. Jesus Christ is Lord as it were in His own right,
because He is the Son of God. He is the Eternal Word. " He is
the image of the invisible God, the first-born of every creature, for
by Him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in
earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, dominions, or
principalities, or powers : all things were created by Him and for
Him. And He is before all things, and by Him all things exist."
Do not look back for your Lord. "By Him all things consist"
- now! But in the well-known passage in Philippians ii, the apostle
seems to give as the main ground of our Lord's lordship His
exaltation by God as a reward for His self-humbling and perfect
obedience - " Wherefore God also hath highly exalted Him, and
given Him a name which is above every name. That at the name of Jesus
every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and
things under the earth. And that every tongue should confess that
Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father." "God
hath highly exalted Him." The lordship is a fact in spite of us
and whether we recognise it or not! Nay, more than that, a time is
coming when we shall have to recognise it whether we will or not!
Though we try to rob Him of His Deity, though we try to confine Him
to Jesus of Nazareth, though we would make of Him a mere memory and
not a living Person, though we would thus crucify Him afresh - the
fact remains.</div>
<br />
<div align="JUSTIFY" style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
(2) But all that, as I
have said, is in a sense, in spite of my experience and outside of
it. Yet any fair reading of the New Testament and of the lives of the
saints shows clearly that the lordship of Jesus Christ is not
something purely objective and theological. It is not only something
that I recognise, but also something that I feel. If He is my Lord,
He of necessity, takes up every part of me, intellect and feeling
alike, head and heart, the entire man. On what ground is Christ my
Lord How is this great Cosmic Person related to me? How can I claim
Him as my Lord? And how can I know that He is? Well here again, the
great apostle answers the question by telling us "that no man
can say that Jesus is the Lord but by the Holy Ghost." What does
he mean by that? That no one can truly unfold the Person and
character of Jesus Christ to me, save the Holy Ghost.</div>
<br />
<div align="JUSTIFY" style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
I may look at Jesus
Christ with my own eyes and with my own mind and powers, and see in
Him Someone to be persecuted, Someone to be mocked, Someone Who has
claimed too much for Himself. Or I may look at Him and just see a
great man whose principles I like and admire, and whose life appeals
to me. Yes, I may look at Him with my own natural and unenlightened
eyes and see many, many different things, none of which make me feel
that He is my Lord. But when the Holy Ghost deals with me and
convicts me of my sin ; when I see myself estranged from God with
that irremovable barrier of my sins between me and Him ; when I see
myself as lost and without any life and without God in the
world—when, seeing all that and feeling that there is no hope for
me, the Holy Ghost grants me to see by the eye of faith that Jesus
Christ the Son of God came from heaven, was made flesh, lived for
thirty-three years on earth, and when He died on Calvary, died for my
sake and for my sins, and rose again to justify me before God, and to
purchase my pardon and forgiveness, when I see all that, what can I
say, but:</div>
<br />
<div align="JUSTIFY" style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
"Love so amazing, so
divine Demands my soul, my life, my all"?</div>
<br />
<div align="JUSTIFY" style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
If He has done all that
for me, if He has so saved me, nothing that He can ask is too great.
He gave Himself for me, I give myself to Him. His love demands it!</div>
<br />
<div align="JUSTIFY" style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
But I see something else
which goes even further than Isaac Watt's great hymn. It is not
merely that Christ's love "demands" my entire allegiance
and submission. In a sense I have no choice. I do not decide that
Christ shall be my Lord. He is my Lord, by right. I was the slave of
sin and of Satan, and, try as I would, I could not obtain my freedom.
I was never a free man. "I was born in sin and shapen in
iniquity." A slave! And there I would be now, were it not that
Christ came and "bought me with a price." What follows? "Ye
are not your own!" I am still not free! I have been bought by a
New Master! ,I am the slave, the bond-servant of Christ! He is my
Lord for He has bought me. He does not" demand my soul, my life,
my all" ; He has bought them, they <i>are</i> His.</div>
<br />
<div align="JUSTIFY" style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
I am His, because He is
my Lord, because He owns me, because He has bought me with His Own
precious blood.</div>
Gary Bradyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08171450135496647908noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7003299452291291222.post-25645600282659794082016-02-24T07:05:00.001-08:002020-09-30T03:47:22.013-07:001976 Bunyan's Holy War in modern English by Thelma Jenkins<div style="text-align: justify;">
<strong><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi7kYLtAon9s21IAEl94zflxN6GA64XQ-9zZIFANOeBWDVmmJht9r_ilaCU9ufXb2_R2cnvhR7-gFQQ-g9WJevcjNlj_H1Av_WR13WlBvPvCf0a4SS-iZNZq-csS25ivO_hU0VN_rUE1JM/s425/asdfg.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="425" data-original-width="269" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi7kYLtAon9s21IAEl94zflxN6GA64XQ-9zZIFANOeBWDVmmJht9r_ilaCU9ufXb2_R2cnvhR7-gFQQ-g9WJevcjNlj_H1Av_WR13WlBvPvCf0a4SS-iZNZq-csS25ivO_hU0VN_rUE1JM/w203-h320/asdfg.png" width="203" /></a></div><br />A modern English version of The Holy War by Thelma Jenkins</strong></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Foreword
Nothing,
perhaps, provides us with a better index to the quality of life of an
individual or a generation of Christian people, than their reading
habits.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Many, alas, do not
seem to read at all, but just spend their time in talking or arguing
or in attending an endless succession of meetings. Others read
nothing but exciting and dramatic accounts of other people's
experiences. Still others are interested only in books and booklets
which deal with the “Christians attitude” to this, that and the
other.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Most significant of
all, however, is our attitude to the great classics of the Christian
life, the books in which our forefathers delighted, and on which,
next tot eh Bible itself, they fed their souls. In this category the
works of John Bunyan always stood out prominently for some 250 years,
and their neglect during the past 50 years exposed the pathetic,
superficiality of our generation.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
It is said that the
moderns find Bunyan difficult to read. Because of this, Mrs Thelma
Jenkins, in her desire to introduce people to the riches of 'The Holy
War' in particular, has undertaken this labour of love. Her desire is
that as a result of reading it in this more modern idiom, many may be
lead to read Bunyan himself directly, and thereby experience untold
blessings and great enrichment of their spiritual lives.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
It
is my pleasure to encourage this noble effort and my privilege to
pray that God will bless it to that end.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b>D
M Lloyd-Jones</b></div>
Gary Bradyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08171450135496647908noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7003299452291291222.post-12689958460347056952016-02-24T06:57:00.002-08:002020-09-30T03:54:31.326-07:001975 Peter Lewis's The Genius of Puritanism<strong><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgm9V7rJHZw-NLZJAAwxqe3HBRyfKIse4QPuLkx5kkhSk30j2atfqLYB0EZe6E_8v_Ggpp3Lclqu3K-VAp_BJs1bMz5QHhD3rNIzQplXYyYTek-5-D7Zei3PfneCv_YbjLS4xINeN8rABo/s282/qwyuyu.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="282" data-original-width="179" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgm9V7rJHZw-NLZJAAwxqe3HBRyfKIse4QPuLkx5kkhSk30j2atfqLYB0EZe6E_8v_Ggpp3Lclqu3K-VAp_BJs1bMz5QHhD3rNIzQplXYyYTek-5-D7Zei3PfneCv_YbjLS4xINeN8rABo/s0/qwyuyu.jpg" /></a></div><br />The Genius Of Puritanism by Peter Lewis</strong><br />
<em>Foreword</em><br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I readily write this word of commendation for this volume. I well remember how Mr. Lewis as a student showed a real living interest in the writings of the Puritans, and how he came into my vestry at Westminster Chapel from time to time to tell me of various purchases he had been fortunate to make, and at times to lend me some of these.
I am particularly glad that he has clearly kept up this early interest and has continued his wide reading in, and study of the Puritans. This volume provides abundant proof of that.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
He has chosen to concentrate attention on the preaching and pastoral activities of those remarkable men of the 17th century, while explaining in an introductory chapter that their original and primary interest was in the nature of the Church.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
He thus provides an excellent foretaste of the rich meal that readers of the works of the Puritans can enjoy.
His arrangement of the matter - the brief biographical touches, the judicious selections threaded into a continuing theme etc. - is brilliant.
Here some of the leading Puritans are allowed to speak for themselves, and I am sure that many who read this book will be stimulated to acquire and read the read the works out of which these selections have been made. Nothing but great spiritual good can result from that, both in individual lives, and in the lives of the churches.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<strong>D M Lloyd-Jones July, 1975</strong>
</div>
Gary Bradyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08171450135496647908noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7003299452291291222.post-29600693202081915262016-02-24T06:54:00.003-08:002020-09-30T03:59:36.940-07:001973 Mrs Lloyd-Jones's translation of The Experience Meeting<strong><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhY3pxYxnZf9yQUiYcuRck2P9CCvhs39JCGZGqFzkVQTCPvFxbGVxEfFLTmTrpoznNqfioko3w0dQ7m_kH8FO9EV9I4X3uM0YhCi0BW6OoLsoiPtpD6XstmHgNd0kkdS6_prYysPj2jZEo/s475/xczvxcvc.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="475" data-original-width="317" height="400" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhY3pxYxnZf9yQUiYcuRck2P9CCvhs39JCGZGqFzkVQTCPvFxbGVxEfFLTmTrpoznNqfioko3w0dQ7m_kH8FO9EV9I4X3uM0YhCi0BW6OoLsoiPtpD6XstmHgNd0kkdS6_prYysPj2jZEo/w268-h400/xczvxcvc.png" width="268" /></a></div><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><br />William Williams The Experience Meeting translated by Mrs Lloyd-Jones</strong><br />
INTRODUCTION<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The Methodist or Evangelical Awakening of the 18th century began in
Wales some two years before that in England, and was quite
independent of it for a number of years. That they were part of the
same movement of the Spirit of God is shown clearly by the many
features that were common to both.
There was the same
inspired, fervent, warm preaching, with great emphasis on repentance,
justification, regeneration and assurance of salvation, the same
itinerant ministry outside the bounds of the particular parishes of
the preachers, and the open-air or field-preaching which attracted
the masses who never attended the churches.<br />
However, in many
ways the most striking similarity was the way in which, independently
of each other, the leaders were led to gather together the converts
into little groups or societies for further teaching and nurturing in
the Faith. These men of God had a great concern for the souls of the
people and realising that the parish churches were so spiritually
dead that they could provide neither the fellowship nor the teaching
that was necessary for these raw converts, they developed the idea of
'religious societies' where such people could meet together regularly
every week.<br />
The object of the
societies was primarily to provide a fellowship in which the new
spiritual life and experience of the people could be safe-guarded and
developed. The great emphasis was primarily on experience and the
experimental knowledge of God and his love and His ways. Each member
gave an account of God's dealings with him or her and reported on any
remarkable experience and also their sins and lapses and so doing
compared notes with one another in these respects. The societies were
not ‘bible study’ groups or meetings for the discussion of
theology. Of course great stress was laid on reading the Bible as
well as prayer, but the more intellectual aspects of the Faith were
dealt with in the preaching services and not in the societies. Here,
the emphasis was on daily life and living, the fight against the
world, the flesh and the devil and the problems that arise inevitably
in the Christian's pilgrimage through this world of sin. At first the
preachers themselves were able to conduct these societies but as the
numbers soon greatly multiplied it became necessary to appoint lay
leaders to conduct the various local societies. The preachers now
became superintendents of a number of local societies which they
visited periodically for the purpose of examination and giving
advice. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Of these preachers and leaders the Rev. William Williams, the great hymn-writer and poet, though second to Howell Harris in organising ability, soon became the outstanding and recognised leader and authority in this respect. The task of conducting these 'experience-meetings' obviously called for great wisdom, spiritual insight, tact, and discretion. They could easily degenerate into exhibitionism on the part of extroverts and lead to scandal, as very private matters were related involving others. It was in order to obviate such troubles and disasters and to instruct the leaders in this most important work, that the Rev. William Williams wrote this little book now translated into English for the first time.
His genius, his spiritual understanding and what would now be described as psychological insight stand out everywhere and are truly astonishing.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The experimental or experiential aspect of the Christian life has been seriously neglected during the present century. Certain factors and tendencies have led to this unfortunate condition. Chief among these has been a superficial evangelism which has neglected real conviction of sin and repentance and encouraged an easy believism. Secondly, there has been a theory of sanctification, more psychological than spiritual and scriptural, which has discouraged self-examination and taught that we have only to ‘leave it to the Lord'. Thirdly. and more recently. has been an unbalanced emphasis on intellectual understanding of Truth, the social application of Truth and the manifestation of particular spiritual gifts. All this has greatly impoverished the spiritual life of both the individual Christian and the churches and led to coldness, barrenness, and loss of power. The greatest need of the hour is a return to the emphases of the Evangelical Awakening. It is in the belief that this classic of the spiritual life and warfare can greatly stimulate and hasten that return that I encouraged my Wife to translate it, and am now happy to commend it and to advise all Christians to read it. I would particularly urge ministers and pastors to read it, not only because it will prove to be an invaluable help in what is now called counselling of individuals, but also because I would press upon them the importance of introducing such meetings into the life of their churches. Much untold blessing would follow.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<strong>D M Lloyd-Jones</strong>
</div>
Gary Bradyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08171450135496647908noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7003299452291291222.post-57113337004018100772016-02-18T13:06:00.001-08:002020-09-30T04:02:43.323-07:001976 Mari Jones' In the Shadow of Aran<div style="text-align: justify;">
<strong><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhUl6deKWoxB_leDBcZjE1jYH5b4WoRVDuFWxFz4fHFaSfoQLNmawYv1SVTkkCA7ewbfRmSXcnbnI-q1wpN36JstUaZzWG6X63MCzOFDUe1bgTmjL4rLA2-9WJtE8GK0x-RmCokZAYe7d4/s499/51-9UQdGPvL._SX319_BO1%252C204%252C203%252C200_.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="499" data-original-width="321" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhUl6deKWoxB_leDBcZjE1jYH5b4WoRVDuFWxFz4fHFaSfoQLNmawYv1SVTkkCA7ewbfRmSXcnbnI-q1wpN36JstUaZzWG6X63MCzOFDUe1bgTmjL4rLA2-9WJtE8GK0x-RmCokZAYe7d4/s320/51-9UQdGPvL._SX319_BO1%252C204%252C203%252C200_.jpg" /></a></div><br />In the Shadow of Aran Mari Jones</strong></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Foreword</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The writer of this little book is well known to many of God's people in Wales, and, indeed, to many in England too.<br />I think of her essentially as a Christian with a great love for her Saviour, and as one who seeks to show this by unfailing kindness to His people. The hospitable open door at Pantyneuadd is well known, and now, for years, Mari and her genial husband have been keeping up the same tradition at Brynychaf, Llanymawddwy. Dozens, if not hundreds of us have received physical and spiritual refreshments in their company, and that in one of the most beautiful spots in Wales. Spiritual, certainly, as well as physical, for you cannot be long in the company of this writer, without hearing some striking account of spiritual experiences.<br />Mari belongs to the same spiritual lineage as Ann Griffiths. In the most natural way, she sees spiritual pictures and lessons in almost everything around her, and especially, of course, in shepherds and sheep and dogs. At the same time, she would be the first to say that the first glimpse of some of these things come through the eyes of the shepherd himself!<br />And now, here are some of these things, that some of us have had the privilege of hearing over the years, in print, giving an opportunity for all to read them. I rejoice in this and pray that God may bless this little book abundantly. Indeed, I'm sue that it will be a blessing to all who read it - enlightening the mind, awakening the imagination and moving the heart. We thank the gentle authoress, and we thank God who endows his children with such a variety of spiritual gifts.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
D M Lloyd-Jones London</div>
Gary Bradyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08171450135496647908noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7003299452291291222.post-43504439204997543712016-02-18T12:36:00.000-08:002016-02-24T07:49:22.046-08:001972 Lewis Lupton's History of the Geneva Bible Vol 4<span style="font-family: inherit;"><strong>Volume 4 of The History of the Geneva Bible by Lewis Lupton</strong></span><br />
<strong></strong><br />
<em><span style="font-family: inherit;">Preface</span></em><br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">For many years I had known of Mr. Lewis Lupton's interest in the Geneva Bible, and having heard his paper on the subject at a "Puritan Conference" some years back, I was delighted when he told me that intended publishing the story of its history in several volumes.</span></div>
<span style="font-family: inherit;">I have already greatly enjoyed the first three volumes and it is now my privilege to write this word of Introduction to the fourth volume.</span><br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">All who have read the previous volumes will need no encouragement to read this one, but for the sake of those who may not have done so, I would call attention to certain special features of this series of books.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">They are of unusual interest and importance at the present time. We have been bombarded by new translations of the Bible during the past twenty years, so it is particularly valuable to have this history of one of the most important and influential translations ever made.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">Fortunately for us, however, Mr. Lupton does not confine himself solely to that theme. He rightly includes the entire history of that most fascinating period during which the shape of the different sections of the Christian church in Britain was being determined. At a time when the nature of the church and its form of government is constantly before us because of the various ecumenical activities, it is essential that all branches of the church should be familiar with their origins and factors that determined what happened.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">Here we have it all in detail - the troubles at Frankfurt, the prejudices and the divisions, and the mighty influence of John Calvin at Geneva.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">At the same time there are cameos of the great men of those days who were gathered together in various places, and who grappled with the great questions which are in our day and generation still <span style="font-family: inherit;">burning and vital issues.
I am particularly glad that Mr. Lupton has "spread" himself. Far too often we are given mere summaries, or an expression of the prejudices of the author; but here, the facts are allowed to speak for themselves and we see these men who belonged to the second generation of Protestant leaders as they were, and as they met their daily problems.
At the same time we are led into what, from the purely theological standpoint, are most interesting by-paths, where we learn something about printing, art, etc.
Personally I always find this type of book not only interesting but truly instructive and stimulating, and the larger the number of facts and details the better.</span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Mr. Lupton has not only the eye of an artist but also the nose of the true historian, and above all the understanding of one well versed in the Reformed faith. I need say nothing about the sheer delight to the eye of these volumes.</span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">This particular volume is worthy of its predecessors and whets our appetite for what is yet to come.</span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">D M Lloyd-Jones</span></span></div>
Gary Bradyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08171450135496647908noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7003299452291291222.post-18276560042799116472016-02-18T12:26:00.000-08:002016-02-24T07:37:12.672-08:001962 Richard Bennett on Howell Harris and the Dawn of Revival<div style="text-align: justify;">
Howell Harris and the Dawn of Revival by Richard Bennett</div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
INTRODUCTION</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
As the one primarily responsible for the suggestion that this book should be translated and published I am happy to write a word of introduction and recommendation.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The very fact that I have made the suggestion shows in itself the value that I attach to it. I have long felt that those who cannot read and understand the Welsh language should be given the opportunity of reaping some of the benefits and blessings that I have enjoyed from reading this book.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Let me introduce its contents.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
It is not a complete biography of Howell Harris. It concentrates in great detail only upon the first three years of his spiritual history. There are two or three full biographies of him in book form (out of print alas!) and also articles on him in certain larger works on Welsh Calvinistic Methodism.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
But the object of Richard Bennett, the original author, was to allow us to see the working of God's Spirit in the soul of Howell Harris in the detailed manner recorded in Harris's own Diaries, in these first formative and thrilling years. Bennett therefore rightly felt that his own remarks should be reduced to a minimum, and that all that was required of him was to supply the connecting links in the story so as to enable the reader to understand the various allusions to actual events. He does not attempt to comment upon, still less to apply or to enforce, what is revealed in the extracts from Harris's diaries. He was too sensitive spiritually to do so, and probably felt the ground was so holy that he could but take off the shoes from off his feet and be silent in awe. I have always been most grateful to him for this.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
No! Here we have Howell Harris himself making bare his soul and allowing us to read of God's dealings with him. As spiritual autobiography it is practically unrivalled. A more honest soul than Harris never lived. That was the testimony of all his contemporaries to him. There is a sense in which he was almost too honest and too sensitive. But who are we in this decadent, superficial and glib age to say that? At times we are privileged to look on at the struggles of a mighty soul and made to feel something of its agony. At other times we listen to the praises and thanksgiving of a soul virtually lifted up to the third heaven and knowing such outpourings of the Holy Spirit and workings of the love of God that he could scarce contain them.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Anyone who reads this book carefully will derive great spiritual benefit. He will be troubled and uplifted, corrected and encouraged. Some may well feel that they have never hitherto been Christians at all if this is really what is possible to the Christian. Others in self defence and resisting the Spirit, will feel that this is but "enthusiasm" and "ecstasy," the two things that a "moderate," formal, respectable, Laodicean Christianity always abominates.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
But read it for yourself!</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Quite apart from these considerations which are the chief reason for reading it, this book is quite invaluable from the historical standpoint. Howell Harris was an intimate friend of Whitefield, the Wesleys and the other leaders of the evangelical awakening in England in the 18th century. He frequently preached for Whitefield in London and acted as his deputy while the latter was in America.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
As for the history of the same revival in Wales and the origin of what is now known as the Presbyterian Church of Wales what is recorded here is crucial and essential.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Ryle in his work "The Religious Leaders of the 18th Century" did not include Harris because he never became an ordained clergyman. The reasons for that are explained here and are of fascinating interest in and of themselves.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Nothing is more profitable, after the reading of the Bible itself and books that help us to understand it, than the reading of the biography or autobiography of a great Christian man. Howell Harris was a great man and a genius in a natural sense, a brilliant organiser and improvisor - a man who would have succeeded in almost any walk in life. He had a complex and fascinating personality which made him inevitably a prince and a leader amongst men. He takes his place naturally and as an equal in the distinguished company to which I have already referred.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
He was not as great a preacher as Daniel Rowlands and George Whitefield, but as an exhorter he was probably superior to both. But what amazes us and humbles us and condemns us is his humility and his utter submission to our Lord at all costs. This is why God used him in such a mighty manner.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Would you know something of what is meant by the term "revival"? Would you know the real meaning of, "the Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit that we are the children of God"? Would you know more of "life in the Spirit," and "prayer in the Spirit," and something of "the powers of the world to come"? Then read this book and remember that Howell Harris was but "a man of like passions with ourselves" and that Jesus Christ is " the same yesterday, today and forever."</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The translation is faithful and clear. I pray that this book may be so blessed and used as to cause many to cry out saying, "where is the Lord God of Howell Harris?"</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
D. MARTYN LLOYD-JONES,</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Westminster Chapel, London</div>
Gary Bradyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08171450135496647908noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7003299452291291222.post-30241870166972565612016-02-16T01:58:00.000-08:002017-05-24T09:48:45.017-07:001959 Commentary on John by William Hendriksen<div style="text-align: justify;">
<div style="text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhRSYqB4rcFdGQsk5k5yemaM5BUf6Wuagv1iEhcxlp_1O_g6XXjvbxj8Kz4b1jmHfqiNuHignYn-c_cl_07BLr22ZTSN2nSOEPjeADBUzMkndIIXutjWcFUluZDfHbUIScEnkHt6Bfd4T8/s1600/hendriksen+john.jpg" imageanchor="1"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhRSYqB4rcFdGQsk5k5yemaM5BUf6Wuagv1iEhcxlp_1O_g6XXjvbxj8Kz4b1jmHfqiNuHignYn-c_cl_07BLr22ZTSN2nSOEPjeADBUzMkndIIXutjWcFUluZDfHbUIScEnkHt6Bfd4T8/s320/hendriksen+john.jpg" width="204" /></a></div>
<br />
<b>Hendriksen Commentary on John (Banner of Truth)</b><br />
Foreword</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
There is but one reason why I write this Foreword and that is that the works of Dr. Hendriksen are hitherto not so well-known in this country as they should be.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
His commentary on the Book of Revelation called "More than Conquerors" has been published here and has exercised influence on the outlook and teaching of many in Evangelical circles. It is betraying no confidence to say that the last series of addresses delivered
at the Keswick Convention by the late and much lamented Mr. Fred Mitchell were based upon this book.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
It is good, therefore, that this commentary on the Gospel according to St John should now be made available in this country. For myself I have to say that it is the most satisfying commentary that I have ever read on this Gospel. Dr. Hendriksen is acknowledged and recognized as an outstanding New Testament scholar who is thoroughly up-to-date and fully aware of all modern movements of thought. He leaves nothing to be desired in that respect, but at the same time his outlook and teaching are thoroughly Reformed, Conservative and Evangelical.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
There is an excellent Introduction, and a peculiarly interesting feature is the way in which he gives a synopsis of the argument of each section. At the
same time there is a verse by verse commentary, and all bathed in the warm devotional spirit of a Pastor's heart.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Here is an invaluable aid for all preachers, Sunday school workers and Bible Class leaders, and indeed for all who "desire the sincere milk of the word that they may grow thereby." All who enter into the riches of this great Gospel under the guidance of Dr. Hendriksen will find their minds informed, their faith quickened, strengthened and established, and their hearts moved to adoration. At any rate that has been my experience. That is what one is entitled to ask and to expect of any commentary, but alas it is a desideratum that is but rarely satisfied by modern commentaries.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I pray that it may be widely read and studied, and that Dr. Hendriksen's commentaries on other books of the New Testament already published in America will soon be available in this country.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
D M Lloyd-Jones</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Westminster Chapel, London,</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
January, 1959
</div>
Gary Bradyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08171450135496647908noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7003299452291291222.post-50336260805469468652016-02-16T01:46:00.001-08:002023-05-21T08:45:33.916-07:001929 Part of the review of A T Schofield's Christian Sanity<div style="text-align: justify;">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj5Em0SBd_0DejsqlSbRHb4erSgu0Iy7erqQga8SWl0lKcPQLhT3_UUAy_KRryz2BXSzWEY-LtI7NsC-ZOkZdmyYwmsff55iNjPSNTyT5Xlz04LrCc78-2OD1NqDyDHWRbUD1tGVxyKUdu6tiyjxgi1EgTpHtQtmM5pmnuUvF3-J8k1ypORu2cLLcMU/s416/christian-sanity-classic-reprint-original-imafef9yptezmzhr.webp" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="416" data-original-width="289" height="400" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj5Em0SBd_0DejsqlSbRHb4erSgu0Iy7erqQga8SWl0lKcPQLhT3_UUAy_KRryz2BXSzWEY-LtI7NsC-ZOkZdmyYwmsff55iNjPSNTyT5Xlz04LrCc78-2OD1NqDyDHWRbUD1tGVxyKUdu6tiyjxgi1EgTpHtQtmM5pmnuUvF3-J8k1ypORu2cLLcMU/w278-h400/christian-sanity-classic-reprint-original-imafef9yptezmzhr.webp" width="278" /></a></div><br />This is taken from Iain Murray's <em>First forty years. </em>We do not presently have access to the whole review.<br />
... Schofield tends, as many others definitely do, to conclude that conversion is somehow related to puberty and its concomitant changes. One wonders whether there is not a grave danger here of confusing ‘confirmation or acceptance into full membership’ with ‘conversion’. To me, there is nothing which is quite so pernicious and detrimental to the true interests of Christianity as this association of ‘conversion’ with a certain age period. There is no question but that this teaching is responsible for all the concentration upon ‘the young people’ which characterises our church work in these days, and makes many a minister and deacon say woefully: ‘The young people and children are our only hope – we must concentrate upon them.’ Such statements and such a belief show a lack of faith and set a limit upon the power of God. The Gospel recognises no such limit – there is hope to the end, to the eleventh hour. There is as much hope today for the middle-aged and the aged as there is for the young people. It may be more difficult to teach morality and ethics to the older people or to teach one’s own special fads and fancies with respect to the Christian life, but to ‘The Help of the helpless’ and ‘Hope of the hopeless’ there are no such distinctions. Yea, indeed, the besetting sin of most who are concerned in Christian work is to concentrate on one particular age or one particular truth instead of delivering ‘the whole counsel of God’ to all and sundry whoever or whatever they may be. Concentration upon the young is a large part of the genius and success of Roman Catholicism, but surely it is the very antithesis of the genius of Protestantism. It is one thing to produce a religious man – men can do that – but it takes the power of God in Jesus Christ to produce a Christian man, and there is no limit to that power. ...<br />
(A<span style="font-style: normal;">. T. </span><em><span style="font-style: normal;">Schofield</span></em><span style="font-style: normal;">,</span> <em>Christian Sanity</em>, Marshall, Morgan & Scott, <i>Yr Efengylydd</i>, Jan. 1929)</div>
Gary Bradyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08171450135496647908noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7003299452291291222.post-20629184376295355112015-07-25T10:07:00.002-07:002020-09-30T04:11:53.721-07:001958 Lectures on Revival by W B Sprague<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b><span face="TimesNewRomanPS-BoldMT"><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiVlgOC5cZx0vSNU-daZe4kqxkYBP6L_l0d0Q3AFJCs89uRwgOTUKOIIvRxUN8G_7RnLOLIOiadJBBanUwur_O9Fdi_pFJXBfdvc2ibZUpFzcSzfc8kZm2omoiSDN5sP4f9UnLQuEM6eYQ/s640/18840459140.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="640" data-original-width="416" height="400" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiVlgOC5cZx0vSNU-daZe4kqxkYBP6L_l0d0Q3AFJCs89uRwgOTUKOIIvRxUN8G_7RnLOLIOiadJBBanUwur_O9Fdi_pFJXBfdvc2ibZUpFzcSzfc8kZm2omoiSDN5sP4f9UnLQuEM6eYQ/w260-h400/18840459140.jpg" width="260" /></a></div><br />Lectures on Revival by W B Sprague (Banner of Truth) 1958</span></b><div style="text-align: justify;">
<b><span face="TimesNewRomanPS-BoldMT">
</span></b></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
Foreword</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
This work was first published in 1832 by Dr. Sprague who was a
minister in the Presbyterian Church in the U.S.A. It was introduced to
this country by two eminent minsters, one of whom was John Angell
James, the great predecessor of Dr. R. W. Dale at Carr's Lane,
Birmingham, and well-known author of “The Anxious Enquirer”, a
book greatly used in the conviction and conversion of sinners in the
nineteenth century.
I am glad to commend such a book at the present time for the
following reasons.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The first and most important reason is that I am profoundly convinced
that the greatest need in the world today is revival in the Church of
God. Yet alas! the whole idea of revival seems to have become strange
to so many good Christian people. There are some who even seem to
resent the very idea and actually speak and write against it. Such an
attitude is due both to a serious misunderstanding of the scriptures,
and to woeful ignorance of the history of the Church. Anything
therefore that can instruct God's people in this matter is very welcome.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
My second reason is that this particular book gives this instruction in
an exceptionally fine manner. Dr. Sprague's own treatment of the
subject is scriptural, theological and balanced. Then to supplement
that there is an Appendix of twenty letters by such great saintly and
scholarly men of God as Archibald Alexander, Samuel Miller, Ashbel
Green and the seraphic Edward Payson dealing with their own
experience in revivals. The result is a volume of outstanding merit and
exceptional worth.
My third reason for commending it is that I do not know of any better
preparation for the meetings that are to be held in 1959 in various
places to recall the great revival of 1857-59, than the careful and
prayerful study of this book.
My prayer is that as we read it and are reminded of "Our glorious
God," and of His mighty deeds in times past among His people, a
great sense of our own unworthiness and inadequacy, and a
corresponding longing for the manifestation of his glory and His
power will be created within us. His "arm is not shortened." May this
book stir us all to plead with Him to make bare that arm and to stretch
it forth again, that His enemies may be confounded and scattered and
His people's hearts be filled with gladness and rejoicing.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
D M Lloyd-Jones
Westminster Chapel
December 1958
</div>
</div>
Gary Bradyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08171450135496647908noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7003299452291291222.post-49233340565370113462015-07-25T10:04:00.000-07:002017-05-24T09:46:13.240-07:001958 Biblical Foundations by B B Warfield<div style="text-align: center;">
<b><span style="font-family: TimesNewRomanPS-BoldMT;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgOxmgH73T4houtbD-NeRg0WlCPOiYPqMr2nhW7j9V3a1_I0TbLapdYBPyIFsiroodn6uFwzEwX5-YtiQC0FZaI-AAPSgCN4a-5XNiXASfUMHtekx-9KTl13TePUyIfiWk8amNb2Eo_sF4/s1600/warfield+book.JPG" imageanchor="1"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgOxmgH73T4houtbD-NeRg0WlCPOiYPqMr2nhW7j9V3a1_I0TbLapdYBPyIFsiroodn6uFwzEwX5-YtiQC0FZaI-AAPSgCN4a-5XNiXASfUMHtekx-9KTl13TePUyIfiWk8amNb2Eo_sF4/s320/warfield+book.JPG" width="225" /></a></span></b></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b><span style="font-family: TimesNewRomanPS-BoldMT;"><br /></span></b></div>
<b><span style="font-family: TimesNewRomanPS-BoldMT;">Biblical Foundations by B B Warfield (Tyndale Press) 1958</span></b><br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: TimesNewRomanPS-BoldMT;"><strong>
</strong>Introduction</span><br />
<span style="font-family: TimesNewRomanPS-BoldMT;">
It would probably be true to say of all conservative evangelicals who
take a lively interest in theology that no works have proved to be of
more practical help to them and a greater stimulus than those of B. B. Warfield. For myself I shall never forget my discovery of them in a
library in Toronto in 1932. My feelings were similar to those of ‘stout
Cortez’ as described by Keats. Before me stood the ten sizeable
volumes published by Oxford University Press. But, alas, it was the
OUP of New York only and not of this country also. Friends and
pupils of Warfield had arranged the publication of the volumes. The
fact that they were not published in this country is a sad commentary
on the state and condition of theological thinking here at that time.
The volumes were collections of various articles written by Warfield
in journals and encyclopaedias, classified under various headings.
Here are some of the titles: Biblical Doctrine; Studies in Theology;
Christology and Criticism; Calvin and Calvinism; two volumes on
Perfectionism.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: TimesNewRomanPS-BoldMT;">
Warfield had never written text books on theology in a large and
systematic manner, but had contented himself with the publication of a
few small works. (This I was given to understand by the late Principal
John Macleod of the Free Church College, Edinburgh, was due to his
loyalty to his friends and teachers, the Hodges of Princeton, and his
fear that anything he might publish might affect the sale of their
works.) The ten volumes, however, published about ten years after his
death which took place in 1921, have served to compensate us for that
loss and to give us the essence of his teaching.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: TimesNewRomanPS-BoldMT;">
There is even a positive advantage in having his teaching in this form
rather than in a more systematic one. Warfield was first and foremost a
defender of the faith. The title of his chair in the old Princeton
Theological Seminary was "Professor of didactic and polemic
theology" and the writing of articles and reviews of books, rather than
formal treatises, gives greater scope for the display of this polemical
element. Warfield lived and taught and wrote in this period (1880-1921) when what was then called Modernism was virtually in control.
It was the age of the 'liberal Jesus' and 'the Jesus of history' who was
contrasted with the 'Christ of Paul'. The Bible had been subjected to
such drastic criticism that not only was its divine inspiration and
unique authority denied but the whole idea of revelation was in
question. The Lord Jesus Christ was but a man, 'the greatest religious
genius of all time', miracles had never happened because miracles
cannot happen, our Lord's mission was a failure, and His death on the
cross but a tragedy. The great truths proclaimed in the historic Creeds
of the Church, and especially in the great Confessions of Faith drawn
up after the Protestant Reformation, concerning the Bible as the Word
of God and the person and work of the Lord Jesus Christ were being
questioned and rejected by the vast majority of 'scholars'.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: TimesNewRomanPS-BoldMT;">
While there were many who fought valiantly to stem this tide and to
refute the errors which were being propagated, it can be said without
any fear of contradiction that B. B. Warfield stood out pre-eminently
and incomparably the greatest of all. He was peculiarly gifted for such
a task. He had a mathematical mind and had at one time considered
the possibility of a career as a mathematician. His precision and
logical thinking appear everywhere. Added to this he was a first class
New Testament scholar and a superb exegete and expositor.
Furthermore, he had received the best training that was available at the
time, and not only in his own country. He thus could meet the liberal
scholarship on its own grounds and did so.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: TimesNewRomanPS-BoldMT;">
His method was not to meet criticisms of the traditional theology with
mere general philosophical and theological arguments, though he
could and did do that also. It was rather along the following lines. He
would first state the case as presented by the critic in a fair and clear
manner. Then he would proceed to analyse it and deal with it clause
by clause and word by word. He was thoroughly familiar with all the
literature but for him the test always was "to the law and to the
testimony". For him the question was, Was this a true exegesis and
interpretation of what the Scripture said? Was it consistent and
compatible with what the Scripture said elsewhere? What were the
implications of this statement? and so on. It was really the method of
the advocate in the law courts who obtains his verdict, not by
passionate and emotional appeals to an unlearned jury, but rather as
the result of a masterly analysis and patient dissection and refutation
of the case of the opponent, followed by a crystal clear and positive
exposition of the truth addressed to the 'learned judge on the bench'.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: TimesNewRomanPS-BoldMT;">
No theological writings are so intellectually satisfying and so
strengthening to faith as those of Warfield. He shirks no issue and
evades no problems and never stoops to the use of subterfuge. One is
impressed by his honesty and integrity as much as by his profound
scholarship and learning. The result is that there is a finality and
authority about all he wrote. Those who disagreed with him seemed to
recognise this. They did so by simply ignoring him. This has
continued to be his fate since his death and since the publication of the
ten volumes. It is quite amazing to note the way in which this massive
theologian is persistently ignored and seems to be unknown. A
'conspiracy of silence' is perhaps the only weapon with which to deal
with such a protagonist.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: TimesNewRomanPS-BoldMT;">
Some may wonder why the writings of such a man who died nearly
forty years ago should be republished and may feel that they are of
necessity out of date. The answer is that the writings of Warfield are,
as indicated above, not merely polemical and designed to expose error,
but also positive expositions of truths which are eternal and which are
as vital today as they ever have been. This can be said of the subjects
dealt with in each chapter of this present volume, the contents of
which have been culled from the ten volumes of his writings. Never
have they been more urgent than today and the reader will find, thanks
to Warfield's particular method, that he will be helped to face and to
answer criticisms of the historic evangelical faith in their most modern
form and guise.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: TimesNewRomanPS-BoldMT;">
A final word. While Warfield was such an outstanding scholar and
theologian that the most learned can profit by reading him, it is also
true to say that any intelligent lay person though lacking in technical
knowledge, can be greatly helped by reading him. His mind was so
clear and his literary style so chaste and pellucid that it is a real joy to
read his works and one derives pleasure and profit at the same time.
The selection of subjects for this volume is most judicious and
representative and should serve as a perfect introduction to the works
of the greatest exponent, expounder and defender of the classic
Reformed faith in the 20th Century.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: TimesNewRomanPS-BoldMT;">
D Martyn Lloyd-Jones</span></div>
Gary Bradyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08171450135496647908noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7003299452291291222.post-32067810649210629922015-07-25T09:25:00.003-07:002023-05-21T08:15:53.754-07:001958 Burrowes on Canticles<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b><span face="TimesNewRomanPS-BoldMT"><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgr2mThCOMu1gYXoCtRRkAhZ7Gcjo1_w93BLwrvbrQ3QfV_NRsMW1ioX0P0Mcdd5miKhatukGc4gnEpgOslPKpCeSDC6b_SE_E88KT3l2WMu1FDBiVpR0ZDNy3_gjzpY9QU59PaH4LJPyicbEAV4jbxZ0oWUY8g1wh7Cta38TASbDMU0Nf-IVlaQCbw/s504/poioiiop.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="504" data-original-width="327" height="400" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgr2mThCOMu1gYXoCtRRkAhZ7Gcjo1_w93BLwrvbrQ3QfV_NRsMW1ioX0P0Mcdd5miKhatukGc4gnEpgOslPKpCeSDC6b_SE_E88KT3l2WMu1FDBiVpR0ZDNy3_gjzpY9QU59PaH4LJPyicbEAV4jbxZ0oWUY8g1wh7Cta38TASbDMU0Nf-IVlaQCbw/w260-h400/poioiiop.png" width="260" /></a></div><br />Commentary on Canticles or the Song of Solomon by George Burrowes (</span></b><b><span face="TimesNewRomanPS-BoldMT">Banner of Truth) 1958</span></b><br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
Foreword</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
There is probably no book in the Bible which is so neglected as The
Song of Solomon. There are many reasons for this. The “higher”
critics regard it as but the love song or poem of a king, written to one
of his loves when he was probably under the influence of wine. They
feel that it should not be in the Bible at all, that it has no spiritual
value whatsoever, and that it is scarcely a fit book for good and moral
people to read. It is not surprising therefore that they should neglect it.
But there are many who, while totally rejecting such a view,
nevertheless neglect this book because they find it difficult to
understand. They cannot see the meaning of the imagery and often
find themselves in difficulties as to the exact speaker. They feel that is
has a message but they cannot find it. Contrasted with these there are
those who regard this book as a mine of spiritual treasure and as one
of the most exquisite expositions of the relationship between the
believer and his Lord to be found anywhere in the Bible. Such, for
instance, was the view taken of it by J. Hudson Taylor, the founder of
the China Inland Mission, and his little book expounding it called
“Union and Communion” is of great value.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Clearly, therefore, the
average Christian needs help in order to be able to enter into this rich
enjoyment. It is because I know of nothing which in any way
approaches this commentary in that respect that I am glad that it is
being re-printed and made available. It has everything that should
characterize a good commentary – learning and scholarship, accuracy
and carefulness, but, above all, and more important than all else, true
spiritual insight and understanding. It provides a key to the
understanding of the whole and every verse which the humblest
Christian can easily follow. I predict that all who read it and study it
will agree with me in saying that they have never read anything more
uplifting and heart-warming. It will lead them to their Lord and enable
them to know and to realize His love as they have never done before.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
D M Lloyd-Jones
Westminster Chapel, London
</div>
</div>
Gary Bradyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08171450135496647908noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7003299452291291222.post-2239809212745953502015-07-25T09:10:00.002-07:002023-05-21T08:43:19.133-07:001945 Review of This is the message by Franz Hildebrandt<div style="text-align: justify;">
<em><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgSnT5oUfye4NSRVO4ixHRR30_PtN8qreB861IkTG0s4Yvx9QB8_6E4tK83ru7Pq5jVXuP21RN4N-Fb9qtF_qJL6u7Z0x2YeleaZwGq9vGNP_DoaK9sF9b01avTKaaqPBm8TSxtvGwuep-xgDkVh-ubDsEmvD9wzYRUJUpmYXK1vd0vIflOe2iphcsh/s3767/kkjljlgcv.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="3767" data-original-width="2695" height="400" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgSnT5oUfye4NSRVO4ixHRR30_PtN8qreB861IkTG0s4Yvx9QB8_6E4tK83ru7Pq5jVXuP21RN4N-Fb9qtF_qJL6u7Z0x2YeleaZwGq9vGNP_DoaK9sF9b01avTKaaqPBm8TSxtvGwuep-xgDkVh-ubDsEmvD9wzYRUJUpmYXK1vd0vIflOe2iphcsh/w286-h400/kkjljlgcv.png" width="286" /></a></div><br />This is the message</em> by Franz Hildebrandt, Ph.D. (Lutterworth Press,4s.6d)</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
This book which takes the form of ten letters written Prof. C. E. Raven of Cambridge, is by way of a reply to and a criticism of, the latter's book, Good News of God, which purported to be an exposition of the first eight chapters of the Epistle to the Romans.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The author has also chosen to state his case and formulate his criticism of Dr. Raven's teaching in terms of an exposition of the leading ideas of the first Epistle of John. The titles of the chapters are accordingly - This is the Message, This is the Promise, This is His Commandment, etc.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The book is avowedly polemical in character, and the author does not hesitate to strike hard blows. At the same time his deep personal regard for Dr. Raven and his sense of gratitude to him are constantly in evidence.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
To some there may seem to be too much lightness of touch, not to say facetiousness, in the style - but this is perhaps largely a matter of taste. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
As a reply for Dr. Raven, and as an exposure of the gulf that separates him from orthodoxy, and of the increasing subjectivity that characterises his writings, the book is entirely successful. It shows also by clever and frequent quotations from his own book how inconsistent his position is, not only as regards his attitude towards others holding different views but also as regards his own views in different places.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The utter antithesis between philosophy and revelation as the final authority in matters of belief stands out on almost every page. It is interesting, as the author points out, indeed pathetic that an Englishman should still try to proclaim and to defend a teaching originating in Germany that has long since been discarded by most teachers in that country.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The main purpose of the book is thus amply fulfilled.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
A subsidiary function which it subserves is that it underlines certain fundamental differences that characterize the Continental and English outlook and approach to Truth. One is constantly face to face with the question - to what extent does rationality enter these matters? This is a most important question which we must constantly bear in mind as we proceed after the war to renew our contacts with our friends on the Continent. By birth and upbringing, and especially as the result of their experiences under Nazism during the past eleven years, and the agonies they have had to endure during the war, the Continentals are more realistic and vital in their approach and outlook.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
One other matter calls for comment. While Dr. Hildebrandt is definitely anti-modernist and liberalist, he displays the fact that all who agree thus do not agree elsewhere. He clearly differs at many points from the Barthian, and as for those of us associated with the I.V.F., he says definitely and specifically on page 42: "I would rather err with Charles Raven than be saved with X, Y, Z, who are boring in their soundness and unattractive in their hypocrisy." How the author reconciles such a statement with his position, I cannot conceive or imagine. It seems quite indefensible, and it leaves us with the uncomfortable question - What is it about us that can so antagonize and embitter one who theologically is so close to us? Is he entirely to be blamed and to be dismissed as a German? Or is the fault ours? Let every man examine himself.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
D. M. L1.-J.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
From <em>Inter-Varsity</em>,
spring 1945</div>
Gary Bradyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08171450135496647908noreply@blogger.com0