SermonIndex Audio Sermons
Image Map
Discussion Forum : Articles and Sermons : what did lenard ravenhill hill think about this theologian

Print Thread (PDF)

Goto page ( 1 | 2 Next Page )
PosterThread
brothagary
Member



Joined: 2011/10/23
Posts: 1863


 what did lenard ravenhill hill think about this theologian

Text Sermons : Leonard Ravenhill : Jonathan Edwards

coped from sermon index text sermons
Open as PDF

Jonathan Edwards, 1703 - 1758, achieved greatness as an American preacher-evangelist, principal of a college, mystic, and revivalist.

"Jonathan Edwards is not only the greatest of all American theologians and philosophers but the greatest of our pre-19th century writers as well." So writes Randall Stewart in his book American Literature and Christian Doctrine.

Here is a concise summary of the life of Edwards from the able pen of Perry Miller: "Jonathan Edwards was one of America's five or six major artists-who happened to work with ideas instead of with poems or novels. He was much more of a psychologist and poet than a logician. Though he devoted his genius to topics derived from the body of divinity (the will, virtue, sin), he traced them in the manner of the very finest spectator. . . ."

For us to see Jonathan Edwards ascend his pulpit today, a candle in one hand and his sermon manuscript in the other, would cause a titter in the congregation. From our
m o d e r n foam-cushioned church seats, with carpeted aisles and soothing background music, we can scarcely capture the old-time dignity of the unpretentious church where Edwards and others held captive the hearts and minds of their hearers.

When Jonathan Edwards "uttered" in the Spirit, the expressionless face, the sonorous voice, the sober clothing were forgotten. He was neither a dullard nor a sluggard. His was a devoted heart intent on rightly dividing the word of truth. But in doing it, Edwards flamed. Yet to him, sensationalism was anathema. To make an impression was never the thought behind any of his preaching. Scholarship on fire for God is to my mind the eighth wonder of the world. Edwards had it.

The tongue of Edwards must have been like a sharp two-edged sword to his attentive hearers. His words must have been as painful to their hearts and consciences as burning metal on flesh. Nevertheless, men gave heed, repented, and were saved.

"Knowing the terror of the Lord" (a thing seemingly forgotten in our day both by pulpit and pew), Edwards smoldered with holy wrath. Impervious to any consequences of such severity, he thundered these words from his pulpit:
"The bow of God's wrath is bent, and His arrows made ready upon the string. Justice points the arrow at your heart and strings the bow. It is nothing but the mere pleasure of God (and that of an angry God without any promise or obligation at all) that keeps the arrow one moment from being made drunk with your blood."

To utter truth like that with tears and tenderness takes an anointed and therefore fearless and compassionate man.

But in the hearts and minds of the hearers there must also have been some prevenient grace at work. Apart from this, men would have rebelled at this stern sweep of power on their souls. As it was, before Edwards' spiritual hurricane, the crowd collapsed. Some fell to the earth as if pole-axed. Others, with heads bowed, clung onto the posts of the temple as if afraid of falling into the nethermost depths of hell.

Edwards w e p t as he preached. In this he was a kinsman in soul of the mighty Brownlow North of the revival that occurred years later in Ireland in 1859. The divine law of Psalm 126:6 never has nor ever can be abrogated: "He that goeth forth and weepeth, bearing precious seed, shall doubtless come again with rejoicing, bringing his sheaves with him."

As pastor of one of New England's largest, wealthiest, and most socially-conscious congregations, Edwards had a rare perception of the needs of his flock. He also had a heart of great tenderness for their spiritual health.

Let's go to the woods where Edwards is alone with his God. Let's creep up behind that old gnarled tree and listen to his broken prayer:
"I feel an ardency of soul to be . . . emptied and annihilated, to lie in the dust and be full of Christ alone, to love Him with a holy and pure love, to trust in Him, to live on Him, and to be perfectly sanctified and made pure with a divine and heavenly purity."
Edwards was also a soul kinsman of George Whitefield, his contemporary. Was the mighty American, Jonathan Edwards, sparked by the English apostle, Whitefield? Did the thunderings from the vibrant soul of Whitefield, then storming through New England, disturb and challenge the normality of Edwards' preaching life? This is not a rhetorical question. It cannot be answered fully, but it contains more than a grain of truth. We do know that after meeting young George Whitefield, Jonathan Edwards changed his style of sermon notes.

It pleased the Lord to sideline Edwards to a small pastorate at Stockbridge, Mass. This banishment came because of his difference with a Mr. Stoddard, who had administered the Lord's Supper to some who had not made public confession of their faith in Jesus Christ as their personal Saviour. But in his seclusion, Edwards' brilliant mind took wings. His long incubated thinking came to the birth. Thus he might have said to Mr. Stoddard what Joseph said to his brethren: "Ye meant evil against me; but God meant it for good." The Lord again turned the wrath of man to praise Him, for at this time Edwards' soul got the measure of "words." From his pen flowed the best of his writings. Edwards sleeps, but his message still speaks.

When the voice of Milton had long been silenced by death, Wordsworth cried,

Milton, thou should'st be
living at this hour:
England hath need of thee;
She is a fen of stagnant
waters.

We could paraphrase those words thus:
Edwards, thou should'st be
living at this hour:
America hath need of thee:
She is a fen (spiritually)
of stagnant waters.

A thin crust, a very thin crust of morality, it seems to me, keeps America from complete collapse. In this perilous hour we need a whole generation of preachers like Edward

"O Lord of hosts, turn us again; cause Thy face to shine upon us, and we shall be saved."

Contrast this great man of God with his contemporary. I quote from Al Sanders in Crisis in Morality!

"Max Jukes, the atheist, lived a godless life. He married an ungodly girl, and from the union there were 310 who died as paupers, 150 were criminals, 7 were murderers, 100 were drunkards, and more than half of the women were prostitutes. His 540 descendants cost the State one and a quarter million dollars.

"But, praise the Lord, it works both ways! There is a record of a great American man of God, Jonathan Edwards. He lived at the same time as Max Jukes, but he married a godly girl. An investigation was made of 1,394 known descendants of Jonathan Edwards of which 13 became college presidents, 65 college professors, 3 United States senators, 30 judges, 100 lawyers, 60 physicians, 75 army and navy officers, 100 preachers and missionaries, 60 authors of prominence, one a vice-president of the United States, 80 became public officials in other capacities, 295 college graduates, among whom were governors of states and ministers to foreign countries. His descendants did not cost the state a single penny. 'The memory of the just is blessed' (Prov. 10:7)."

To us this is the conclusion of the whole matter.


-----

COPYRIGHT/REPRODUCTION LIMITATIONS:
Used by permission of Bethany House Publishers. This article by Leonard Ravenhill appeared in DAYSPRING copyright (c) 1963 by Bethany House Publishers, a ministry of Bethany Fellowship, Inc. All rights reserved. For further information about the missionary outreach of Bethany Fellowship or for a complete listing of Ravenhill titles and others, please contact the publisher at 11300 Hampshire Ave S, Minneapolis, MN 55438; ph: (612) 829-2500; FAX: (612) 829-2768. - http://www.ravenhill.org/


 2012/12/29 21:01Profile
proudpapa
Member



Joined: 2012/5/13
Posts: 2936


 Re: what did lenard ravenhill hill think about this theologian

Hi brothagary

What did Leonard Ravenhill think about Charles Finney ??

Charles Finney was such an opposit theologicaly to that of Edwards that His systematic work was a direct refutation of that of Edwards. And Yet Ravenhill wisely honors them both as great men used by God, because he unlike many of us relized that God uses men of complete different doctrinal positions when ever they truly seek Him.

More Than Doctrine Needed In Ministry

“Ours is all theology. We get a starving man and give him a cookbook. Does it help him? He looks in the cookbook and sees there a dish with potatoes, beef, etc. What do you do? You tantalize him! You say, “Oh, I hope one day you can come to our place We’re going to have this dish, this beef, this turkey, and something else.” And yet the poor man is ravenously hungry! We give him a picture, but we don’t give him the goods! At the average church on Sunday morning, they give you the menu, but they never give you the meal. They give an outline of theology: ‘This is our precious doctrine.” So, most people will be reciting doctrine in Hell.”

~ Leonard Ravenhill
http://www.leonard-ravenhill.com/


 2012/12/29 22:19Profile
jimp
Member



Joined: 2005/6/18
Posts: 1481


 Re:

dear proudpapa, many times len would tell us about finney and you are correct in all that was writen. he talked about the second blessing of finney and the hot seat method of his evangelism. thank you for a wonderful word,brother.jimp

 2012/12/29 22:43Profile
Sree
Member



Joined: 2011/8/20
Posts: 1755


 Re:

Quote:
“Ours is all theology. We get a starving man and give him a cookbook. Does it help him? He looks in the cookbook and sees there a dish with potatoes, beef, etc. What do you do? You tantalize him! You say, “Oh, I hope one day you can come to our place We’re going to have this dish, this beef, this turkey, and something else.” And yet the poor man is ravenously hungry! We give him a picture, but we don’t give him the goods! At the average church on Sunday morning, they give you the menu, but they never give you the meal. They give an outline of theology: ‘This is our precious doctrine.” So, most people will be reciting doctrine in Hell.”



Wow. This is exactly what I believe about theology as well. I have been saying the same using different illustration but nothing as clear as this one. More than theology we need people who have a living testimony for Jesus. A living testimony of a person in holiness by the powe of Holy Spirit is much more powerful than anyone spreading theology.


_________________
Sreeram

 2012/12/29 23:21Profile
brothagary
Member



Joined: 2011/10/23
Posts: 1863


 Re:

im certaint that lenard was greatly influnced by finney,,

he held to a form of govemently theology

proudpappa thats not at anything to do with this artical ,if you like why dont you start a topic about that ,,,,,its changing subjests brother

i think it is interesting tho ,the knowlage and love lenard had for this THEOLOGIN ,EDWARDS

RATHER then mock sound theoligy and theologins,,,like people do here on sermon index ,,he gives honer whare honer is due

your last quote from lenard must be kept in contex with the muiltitude of other things he said and believed ,,,rather then used as a straw knife ,to atempt to cut down every theologin and theology

im not saying you are doing that ,but many people take saints out of there belief in doctrinal contex ,,to attack sound doctrine and bibilical theoligy ,


its interesting the importance tozer placed on good theology as well as men like paul washer and weasly

dead theoligy ,dead doctrines ,dead bible readings

dead prayer meeting ,,,theses are all one thing

but anointed and spirit fild prayer ,bible reading ,thelogigy is another reality ,,that should not be stained by biast rantings from wrong perceptions,that are birthed by seeing that reeking liberilism and hidden humanism that are spweing forth from the so called christan church ,,,neejerk reaction


staying centralsied and balanced in our views regarding personaly conflicting, but othadoxly sound teaching and viewpoints that vairiate from our own ,,is what lenard did ,, priase god for men like him

blessings

 2012/12/29 23:58Profile
proudpapa
Member



Joined: 2012/5/13
Posts: 2936


 Re: brothagary

Hi brothagary

brothagary wrote ///proudpappa thats not at anything to do with this artical ,if you like why dont you start a topic about that ,,,,,its changing subjests brother

i think it is interesting tho ,the knowlage and love lenard had for this THEOLOGIN ,EDWARDS ///

I am not tying to change topics but rather clarifying the reality that Ravenhills love for Edwards was based on Edwards Love for God and Edwards willingness to be used by God rather than Loving Edwards based on Edwards theolgy

 2012/12/30 1:01Profile
brothagary
Member



Joined: 2011/10/23
Posts: 1863


 Re:

hello pappa yea i agree bro ,,it had nothing to do with him being a theologin,or his reformed theoligy ,,amen

but dare i say if i may , he may also have loved him due to the solid doctrine an standared theoligy ,,that sprang forth from as you said his love for god and willingness to be used by god ,,,

iv noticed i sound standared theolgy springs forth out of many who love god and study his word by his spirit

by reading your posts for the last year ,,you seem to have that ,,,,sound love ,sound doctrine ,sound theolgy

one seems to led to the others in due time

 2012/12/30 1:35Profile









 Re: what did lenard ravenhill hill think about this theologian

Quote:
yea i agree bro ,,it had nothing to do with him being a theologin,or his reformed theoligy ,,amen

but dare i say if i may , he may also have loved him due to the solid doctrine an standared theoligy ,,that sprang forth from as you said his love for god and willingness to be used by god ,,,

iv noticed i sound standared theolgy springs forth out of many who love god and study his word by his spirit

by reading your posts for the last year ,,you seem to have that ,,,,sound love ,sound doctrine ,sound theolgy

one seems to led to the others in due time Gary




Does it really matter what Mr Ravenhill thought about anybody? What he thought about "the theologian" is probably even less worthy of consideration. We live today not in the day of Mr Edwards and not in the day of Mr Ravenhill. What is "standard theology?" Brother it is surprising to me that you keep pressing this subject as though it had any merit or could produce some good outcome. What do you know of the truth brother apart from what you have read in books? Has the Lord given you some excellent revelation and has He taught you so that you are able to teach others? If not then you have only theology. Do you really love the truth so much brother that you are willing to set your life down for it? Unless we all wake up to the hour in which we live and dress in readiness we will find that we have fallen asleep with a theology book in our hands and not a lamp trimmed and filled with the oil of obedience!

 2012/12/30 3:09
brothagary
Member



Joined: 2011/10/23
Posts: 1863


 Re:

i supose it matters as much as what you think of me or any other saint ,,,,,,

i think if mr ravenhill found edwards worthy to honer and descus his life ,who am i to say it does not matter what he thought ,,i think lenared thought it mattered enough to right the artical ,and i would not be proud enough to say he was wrong to write about some of the saints

you could say the same about nee and sparks who cares what anyone thinks about them ,,,i wont say it ,i leave that to you andrew

standared theoligy ,in my defenition would be to what most of us here hold to ,and teach ,,,the hpostaic union of christ ,,gods atrubutes ,,, pheumaoligy ,,ect

more or less ,, not what the jehovawitness hold to ,or mormans ,christadpelians ,or knostics ,,or liberal theoligy as a contrass

i personly dont own any systmatic theoligy books or comentarys by theoligoens ,,iv only read a little online

some arminian reformed pentacostal ,carasmatic


most of my understanding came from scripture ,but comparing with weasly edwards ,and others and gleaning from men like that and others would be what iv done

as you have watchman nee and others

men like tozer, washer

at times i spend 4or more ours aday listening to audio recordings of scripture mainly the leters of the newtestament and the gosples

i relie on light bulb moments or revalations ilunination of the word of god ,,always have ,, the elixer of life

man can not live by bread alone ,,but by every word that proceds out of the mouth of the holy spirit ,,his writern words for me holds the athority ,,,,,,but gods spirit speaks with less athority through the saints of old and saints of new

iv spent ten years or so teaching my wife and my mother by the anointing of the spirit m who speaks through us when he wills

iv repented and turned from my old life and given up things i once held as idols , laied it on the cross or the alter he has burned ,and is still burning ,,thank god for that

i was a criminal drug addict ,lieing, fornacation,party loving pure fleshly vilent ,angry ,cheating covetus ,enemy of god ,the chefiest of all sinners

he has set me free indeed by the power of his blood through sangtfication of his spirit

glory to god in the highest forever

 2012/12/30 5:23Profile









 Re:

Quote:
i supose it matters as much as what you think of me or any other saint ,,,,,,

i think if mr ravenhill found edwards worthy to honer and descus his life ,who am i to say it does not matter what he thought ,,i think lenared thought it mattered enough to right the artical ,and i would not be proud enough to say he was wrong to write about some of the saints

you could say the same about nee and sparks who cares what anyone thinks about them ,,,i wont say it ,i leave that to you andrew! (Gary)



I don't know you Gary and neither do you know Mr Ravenhill, neither did Mr Ravenhill know Mr Edwards. Just to be balanced I can say with certainty that I do not know Nee. The validity of speaking about Mr Ravenhill, who spoke about Mr Edwards or myself speaking about Nee is self evident. My comment in this post earlier has to do with an entirely different matter as you know well enough brother. The thing I was saying was simple enough. If we live by the "theology" of others we will never know the truth in our own lives. To that end I have said "theology" is a waste of time. It is a dead work.

Sound doctrine on the other hand is meaningful if it is held to by reason of faith and not by reason alone. If not then sound doctrine is a dead work as well. Some believers never shrink back from anything which they hear until they hear something worthy of shrinking back from. It would have to be something pretty fundamental as well. Others shrink back from every whisper of a lie or untruth and discern the possibilities for error and deception in those who receive such things. It is a matter of calling and so I asked the question. What I personally think about others or what others think about me if of no consequence to me at all. Except that I am a cause for stumbling it matters not. Neither ought it to anyone else brother.

 2012/12/30 6:06





©2002-2020 SermonIndex.net
Promoting Genuine Biblical Revival.
Affiliate Disclosure | Privacy Policy