======================================================================== WRITINGS OF W B RILEY by W.B. Riley ======================================================================== A collection of theological writings, sermons, and essays by W.B. Riley, compiled for study and devotional reading. Chapters: 79 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ TABLE OF CONTENTS ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 1. 00.00. Riley, W. B. - Library 2. 01.00.1. Christ the Incomparable 3. 01.00.2. Foreword 4. 01.01. I. The Christ of Prophecy 5. 01.02. II. Christ, The Virgin-Born 6. 01.03. III. The Childhood of Christ 7. 01.04. IV. Christ, The Teacher 8. 01.05. V. Christ’s First Apostles 9. 01.06. VI. The Miracles of Christ 10. 01.07. VII. The Ministry Of Christ 11. 01.08. VIII. The Mission Of Christ 12. 01.09. IX. The Atonement Of Christ 13. 01.10. X. Christ’s Resurrection And Ascension 14. 01.11. XI. Christ, The Incomparable 15. 01.12. XII. Christ And The Changing Order 16. 02.00.1. My Bible 17. 02.00.2. FOREWORD 18. 02.01. WHENCE AND HOW CAME MY ENGLISH BIBLE? 19. 02.02. IS MY BIBLE SCARRED BY DISCREPANCIES? 20. 02.03. IS MY BIBLE MARRED BY REPUTED MIRACLES? 21. 02.04. IS MY BIBLE A BLOOD-STAINED BOOK? 22. 02.05. HAS ARCHAEOLOGY DISCREDITED MY BIBLE? 23. 02.06. IS MY BIBLE AN UNSCIENTIFIC BOOK? 24. 02.07. IS MY BIBLE A DIVINELY INSPIRED BOOK? 25. 02.08. HOW MAY I BEST MASTER MY ENGLISH BIBLE? 26. 03.00.1. Pastoral Problems 27. 03.00.2. Dedication 28. 03.00.3. Pastoral Problems (Author/Introduction) 29. 03.01. I. The Problem Of Appointment 30. 03.02. II. The Problem Of Preaching 31. 03.03. III. Conserving Material For Sermonizing 32. 03.04. IV. Advertising The Services Of The Church 33. 03.05. V. Administering A Church Service 34. 03.06. VI. Administering The Church Ordinances 35. 03.07. VII. Performing A Wedding Service 36. 03.08. VIII. Conducting A Funeral Service 37. 03.09. IX. Transacting Church Business 38. 03.10. X. Managing Church Troubles 39. 03.11. XVI. Managing The Music And Musicians 40. 03.12. XII. The Problem Of Pastoral Visitation 41. 03.13. XIII. The Problem Of Pastoral Visitation 42. 03.14. XIV. The Pastor And Church Organizations 43. 03.15. XV. The Pastor And Special Soul-Winning Services 44. 03.16. XVI. The Pastor And The Mission Problem 45. 04.0.1. Seven New Testament Soul-Winners 46. 04.0.2. Foreword 47. 04.1. John Baptist – The Pioneer Soul-Winner 48. 04.2. Andrew – The Fraternal Soul-Winner 49. 04.3. Philip – The Faithful Soul-Winner - Acts 8:1-40 50. 04.4. Ananias – The Skillful Soul-Winner – Acts 9:10-18 51. 04.5. Peter – The Popular Soul-Winner 52. 04.6. Paul – The Passionate Soul-Winner 53. 04.7. Jesus – The Supreme Soul-Winner 54. 05.0.1. The Gospel in Jonah 55. 05.0.2. DEDICATION 56. 05.1. JONAH AT SEA 57. 05.2. JONAH IN THE STORM 58. 05.3. JONAH OVERBOARD 59. 05.4. JONAH’S GOSPEL 60. 05.5. JONAH’S GOURD 61. 06.00.1. The Preacher & His Preaching 62. 06.00.2. Foreword 63. 06.00.3. Introduction 64. 06.01. Chapter 1: The Preacher And His Preaching 65. 06.02. Chapter 2: The Proposed Standardization Of The Ministry 66. 06.03. Chapter 3: Some Secrets Of Success In The Ministry 67. 06.04. Chapter 4: The Ministry For Our Day 68. 06.05. Chapter 5: The Preacher And His Professional Ethics 69. 06.06. Chapter 6: The Genesis Of A Sermon 70. 06.07. Chapter 7: The Several Forms Of Sermons 71. 06.08. Chapter 8: Other Forms Of Sermons 72. 06.09. Chapter 9: The Soul-Winning Sermon 73. 06.10. Chapter 10: The Sermon-Series 74. 06.11. Chapter 11: The Construction Of A Sermon 75. 06.12. Chapter 12: The Sermon Illustration 76. 06.13. Chapter 13: The Use Of Alliteration 77. 06.14. Chapter 14: The Delivery Of A Sermon 78. S. Christianity vs. Socialism 79. S. Divine Healing ======================================================================== CHAPTER 1: 00.00. RILEY, W. B. - LIBRARY ======================================================================== Riley, W. B. - Library Riley, W. B. - Christ the Incomparable Riley, W. B. - My Bible Riley, W. B. - Pastoral Problems Riley, W. B. - Seven New Testament Soul-Winners Riley, W. B. - The Gospel in Jonah Riley, W. B. - The Preacher and His Preaching S. Christianity vs Socialism S. Divine Healing ======================================================================== CHAPTER 2: 01.00.1. CHRIST THE INCOMPARABLE ======================================================================== Christ the Incomparable By W. B. RILEY, D.D. Pastor, First Baptist Church, Minneapolis, Minn. Author of “The Crisis of the Church,” “The Evolution of the Kingdom,” “The Menace of Modernism,” etc. NEW YORK CHICAGO Fleming H. Revell Company LONDON AND EDINBURGH Copyright, 1924, by FLEMING H. REVELL COMPANY Printed in the United States of America New York: 158 Fifth Avenue Chicago: 17 North Wabash Ave. London: 21 Paternoster Square Edinburgh: 75 Princes Street ======================================================================== CHAPTER 3: 01.00.2. FOREWORD ======================================================================== Foreword THE chapters of this volume were prepared separately in time and independently in object, and were delivered from the pulpit of the First Baptist Church, Minneapolis. We now assemble them for publication, inspired by the hope that they may, in published form, instruct and strengthen a greater multitude. Beyond question, Christ is the citadel of Christianity. So long as His name remains the incomparable one of the earth, just that long Christianity stands as the one and only sufficient religion. That the crown of glory shall ever be taken from His brow we have no fears whatever. Modernism will no more succeed in effectually sealing Him in a tomb than did the Romans, or in discrediting His claims than did the Jews. As His Word “is forever settled in heaven,” so must His claim of Deity be forever settled for earth. If this volume accomplishes for any considerable number of readers both a confirmation of faith in Christ and an increased affection for Him, the author will be well content. W. B. R. Minneapolis, Minn. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 4: 01.01. I. THE CHRIST OF PROPHECY ======================================================================== I. THE CHRIST OF PROPHECY “Unto us a child is horn; unto us a son is given; and the government shall he upon his shoulder; and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The Mighty God, The Everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace .”—Isaiah 9:6. THERE is much in Isaiah that must be referred to the shadows, owing to the degeneracy of the times in which he lived; still, when the light does break, it floods the page with glory, for it is the light from the face of the Messiah of prophecy. Charles Haddon Spurgeon, speaking from the phrase “His name shall be called Wonderful,” compares this text to a storm at sea which he had just witnessed. It was a dark night and the sky was covered with clouds, and thunder answered to thunder, and lightning’s flash but left a deeper darkness on all the waters, when he noticed far away on the horizon, as if miles distant, a bright spot shining like gold. It was the moon breaking through a rift in the clouds, and while she could not shine where the prophet of God stood, he could behold the spot far distant upon which her mellow rays fell in beauty. And he thought of Isaiah when all about him was thick darkness and the very air was charged with the thunders of God’s anger, and the lightnings of His vengeance, and yet he could say “The people that walked in darkness have seen a great light. They that dwell in the land of the shadow of death upon them hath the Light shined,” by anticipating the hour when the text of this chapter would be the truth. No one can read the Major Prophets, or for that matter, the Minor Prophets of the Old Testament, without appreciating how dark were their days. All that they were privileged to see with the natural eye was apostasy and captivity, with all the evil consequences of both. But they never despaired, because the last man of them entertained “the glorious hope” voiced in this text. They knew their time to be that dark hour which presages the coming day. In other words, they believed in the Christ to come. If to us Christmas is a memorial, to them it was an anticipation. And as we look back to the manger and the Cross, they looked forward to both. Our prophets are imploring us to “believe on the Christ who came,” at all seasons their prophets were pointing them to “the Christ who was to come,” as witness the words of Isaiah spoken more than seven hundred years before the birth of the Wonderful One, “Unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given; and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, Mighty God, Ever lasting Father, Prince of Peace. Of the increase of his government and of peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to establish it and to uphold it with justice and with righteousness from henceforth even forever.” (R. V.) Now, following the suggestion of the text, we see four things: I. THE COMING OF CHRIST. “Unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given” Isaiah has before spoken of this wondrous child. To the house of David he had addressed these words, “The Lord himself will give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive and bear a son and shall call his name Immanuel. Butter and honey shall he eat” (Isaiah 7:14-15). He knew, then, that He was to come in the flesh—born of a woman. He not only prophesies his humility in that He was to be born of a virgin; but the hardships of his life in that He was to subsist upon “butter and honey,” for butter and honey are the products of that land which the people ate when all else had failed. The true humanity of Jesus is suggested also by the phrase, “Unto us a child is born.” As Jesus said to Nicodemus, “That which is born of the flesh is flesh.” Paul, in his epistle to the Philippians, speaks of Christ Jesus “who existing in the form of God emptied himself, taking the form of a servant, being made in the likeness of men, and being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, becoming obedient even unto death, yea, the death of the cross” (Isaiah 2:6-7). But “the form of a man” would not indicate the nature. There might be a sinless, there might be a sinful servant. This same apostle, however, in his epistle to the Hebrews, says, “Since then the children are sharers in flesh and blood, he also himself in like manner partook of the same. . . . For verily not to angels doth he give help, but he giveth help to the seed of Abraham. Wherefore it behooved him in all things to be made like unto his brethren” (Isaiah 2:14; Isaiah 2:16-17). While to the Romans Paul writes, “For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God, sending his own Son, in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh; that the ordinance of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh but after the Spirit.” Every man may feel, therefore, that when Christ was born He descended sufficiently deep to lay hold upon his condition, and lend him help. He who was equal with the Father for our sakes became as one of us, that He might bring us to God. Dr. Lorimer, in one of his volumes, speaks of the Christian’s influence in the Roman Empire. He treated the Goth, the Persian and the Roman as if they were one until they themselves came to see that they were “made of one bipod.” And Lorimer remarks “As a result of this growing conviction, Caracalla conferred the dignity of Roman citizenship upon the civilised world. The day when this famous edict was issued has been considered one of the epoch-making days of history. Nor can its significance be over-estimated; it was in a sense the Coronation Day of Humanity. It recognised the essential greatness of man’s nature” But do we not believe that the great Coronation Day of Humanity occurred when Jesus was born “in the likeness of sinful flesh and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh”? That day recognised the essential degradation of Humanity, but by the act of God in Christ, lifted the same up to its Coronation. And not a child has been born since that need lead a hopeless life or die a hopeless death. Isaiah knew, also, that he was to come from God—begotten by the Holy Ghost. As Jesus said to Nicodemus, “That which is born of the Spirit is spirit.” Therein is the explanation of the angel’s words to Mary, “The Holy Spirit shall come upon thee, and the power of the Most High shall overshadow thee; wherefore also the holy thing which is begotten shall be called the Son of God” (Luke 1:35). John, in his first epistle, (Luke 3:5) says of Jesus, “And ye know that he was manifested to take away sins; and in him is no sin,” and explains by verse nine, “Whosoever is begotten of God doeth no sin because his seed abideth in him, and he cannot sin because he is begotten of God.” The humanity of Jesus, therefore, harmonised perfectly with His essential deity. And it is one of the marvels of inspiration that Isaiah saw and expressed this harmony when he said, “For unto us a child is born, and unto us a son is given.” He was born of a virgin; He was given of God— “God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son.” That is why Jesus could say unto the Jews, “Ye are from beneath, I am from above: ye are of this world, I am not of this world.” And that is why Jesus could make claim of wisdom, might and power, which would have been blasphemy upon the lips of another. Such, for instance, as “I am the Way,” “I am the Truth,” “No man cometh unto the Father but by me,” “Except ye believe that I am he, ye shall die in your sins,” “I am the door of the sheep,” “I am the good shepherd,” “Whatsoever ye shall ask in my name that will I do.” That is why Jesus could lay claim upon the consciences and to the obedience of men, saying, “Ye are my friends if ye do the things which I command you.” His colossal claim, “All power in heaven and in earth is given unto me,” accorded perfectly with His command, “As ye go preach, saying, The kingdom of heaven is at hand. Heal the sick, cleanse the lepers, raise the dead, cast out devils; freely ye have received, freely give.” We may have a debt of gratitude to the Unitarians and Universalists, and other Liberalists for having laid beautiful emphasis upon the humanity of Jesus, but they have also imposed upon us the painful necessity of uttering repeated warnings against forgetting or denying the essential deity of Jesus. With Comte, too many are now tempted to believe that the only religion is “the religion of Humanity,” by which, as one of our greatest preachers has remarked, “They mean a religion without a revelation, and even without a God.” The work of those critics who propose to give us a human Christ is no less a denial of His deity because they happen to cover His humanity with speeches fair as midsummer flowers. We are told that the executioner who beheaded Charles I. bowed before His majesty, kissed his hand, and begged pardon for undertaking the unpleasant commission in which he was engaged. But the king’s head came off just the same. Not a few of our critics seem to have studied this bit of history to a purpose and when they propose to decapitate Christianity by removing its Head, the Christ who is “very God,” they proceed with specious words and extravagant compliments to the humanity of Jesus, but deny His deity just the same. Utter what compliments they may, the Holy Ghost answers their words— “Who is the liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ?” (1 John 2:22), and again of Jesus Christ, “This is the true God and eternal life” (1 John 5:20). If the humanity of Jesus is essential to our Christian characters, and it is, the deity of Jesus is our only hope of salvation; for if we have trusted in a man and not in God our hope is in vain and we are yet in our sins. But Isaiah says not only “Unto us a child is born,” but, also, “unto us a son is given.” II. THE CROWNING OF CHRIST. “And the government shall be upon his shoulders,” reference to the insignia of office which is worn on the shoulder where it marks the high official and also suggests his power to sustain that which is committed unto him. Isaiah himself gives us this very interpretation of his own words when he speaks of Eliakim, who was to be a “father to the inhabitants of Jerusalem and to the house of Judah,” and of whom the Lord of hosts says, “I will commit thy government into his hands—and the key of the house of David will I lay upon his shoulder.” Keeping this in mind, permit three suggestions concerning the crowning of Christ: He shall govern God’s people. This Coming One is more often described under the single phrase “the king of Israel” than by any other of the marvelous and many sentences employed to depict Him. If one trace the Scriptures through he will find that when He sets up His throne it will be in the midst of His own people, children of Abraham by flesh, and children of Abraham by faith. “When the tabernacle of God is with men he shall dwell with them and they shall be his peoples.” He shall govern absolutely and alone. “The government shall be upon his shoulder.” The exclusiveness of Jesus’ reign is signally set forth in the seventy-second Psalm, “He shall have dominion also from sea to sea; and from the River unto the ends of the earth. They that dwell in the wilderness shall bow before him; and his enemies shall lick the dust. The kings of Tarshish and of the isles shall render tribute; the kings of Sheba and Seba shall offer gifts. Yea, all kings shall fall down before him; All nations shall serve him.” It is related that the king of Prussia visited a village school and was welcomed by the children. Having spoken to them, he took an orange from a plate and asked, “To what kingdom does this belong?” “To the vegetable!” Then a piece of money. “To the mineral kingdom,” answered a little girl. “And to what kingdom do I belong?” questioned the king. Upon a little reflection the child answered, “To God’s Kingdom, sire.” It is said that tears came to the king’s eyes. As he placed his hand gently on the child’s head he said, “God grant that I may be counted worthy of that kingdom.” And the time is coming when every king of the earth, instead of sitting in the place of power, shall prostrate himself at Jesus’ feet, for it is written, “As I live, saith the Lord, to me every knee shall bow, and every tongue shall confess to God” (Romans 14:11). He shall govern with authority and power. The mark of office upon His shoulder is the sign of His authority, while the shoulder itself is the place and symbol of power. It was Jesus who said, “All authority is given unto me in heaven and on earth,” and who claimed for Himself, “Henceforth ye shall see the Son of man sitting at the right hand of Power.” Authority and Power—He shall govern with both. They belong to the very office which He holds, they are essential to the success of the King. I remember that in Hood’s “Cromwell,” chapter twelve, when the Scots invited the return of Charles II., and were defeated by the army of Cromwell, Hood remarks, “It certainly does appear that David Leslie, the Commander of the Scots at Dunbar, found his hands tied by a committee, and any kind of battle anywhere may be lost, but probably no battle of any kind was ever gained by a committee.” The King—Christ—takes His opinions from no other. You will remember the astonishment that the teaching of Jesus created because “he taught them as one having authority and not as their scribes.” And with that authority there is coupled power. How many men there are now who feel absolutely bound by every word which Jesus speaks. They recognise His right to utter what He will and His power to enforce His least wish. There was a time when Hildebrand was not only a person of authority, but also of power. He could even leave the Emperor of Germany, himself, standing outside the gate of his castle at Canossa, barefoot in the snow, begging for mercy from the man who professed to be the Vicar of Christ. But where is that authority and where is that power now? It passed, as did all his splendid pretensions. Nobody cares what Hildebrand said, for his arm of flesh, like his magnificent robes, rests now in the dust. Not so with Christ, upon whom God has laid the insignia of authority and power! He commands more men today than ever before. He exercises, today, all the power of the Godhead. And yet He has only commenced to command; He has revealed but a little of His power. Wait until the government is laid upon His shoulder, and He is crowned King of kings, and Lord of lords, “then will he stretch out his hand over the sea, and shake the kingdoms.” III. THE CHARACTER OF CHRIST. According to the pen of Inspiration this character is four-fold, the “Wonderful Counsellor,” the “Mighty God,” the “Everlasting Father,” and “The Prince of Peace.” George Adam Smith doubts if these four names prove incontrovertibly that the prophet had an absolutely Divine Person in view; but we cannot share Smith’s scepticism. These words can never be applied to another than the King of kings, the Lord of lords, who though the Son is yet “the very God.” The Wonderful Counsellor. In the original this is a compound word, and expresses what is with Isaiah a favourite feature of the “Coming One’s” character. It is the same idea he expresses when he says concerning the increase of the ground, “This also cometh forth from Jehovah of hosts, who is wonderful in counsel.” Spurgeon, in his sermon on “The Wonderful Counsellor,” reminds us that Jesus is God’s counsellor. He sits in the cabinet council of the King of Heaven. He was there when God said “Let us make man in our own image.” He was there when the subjects of grace were determined. He was there when the plan of the ages was perfected. “And yet,” adds Spurgeon, “He is our Counsellor, a necessary Counsellor, a hearty Counsellor, a sweet Counsellor, and, thank God, a safe Counsellor.” No wonder Spurgeon concluded his great sermon by saying, “Obey His counsel and you shall have to rejoice that you ever listened to His voice, for He is indeed the ‘Wonderful-Counsellor.’ ” The Mighty God. Here is another phrase of which the Holy Spirit seems fond. In the very next chapter we read of a “remnant that shall return, even the remnant of Jacob, unto the Mighty-God.” It is not sufficient to speak of the authority and the power of Jesus, a weightier word is needed, a compound word which confounds His enemies and comforts His people—“The Mighty-God.” I am glad for the thought of power suggested. I am still more glad for the deity affirmed. And we know that Jesus has already so far filled up this description that Theodore Parker, though a liberal and a sceptic, was compelled to confess that fulness in these words, “Nazareth was no Athens where philosophy breathed in the circumambient air; it had neither Porch nor Lyceum; not even a School of the Prophets. There is God in the heart of this youth, that mightiest heart that ever beat; stirred with the spirit of God, how it wrought in His bosom.” The Everlasting Father. This is another of the prophet’s favourite terms. It was Isaiah who wrote, “For thou art our Father, though Abraham knoweth us not and Israel doth not acknowledge us: thou, O Jehovah, art our Father, our Redeemer, from everlasting is thy name” (Isaiah 63:16). And yet again, “But now, O Jehovah, thou art our Father; we are the day and thou our potter, and we are all the work of thy hand.” It is blessed to couple the thought of Creator and Father in one. The working of principles may produce certain effects, but only a person can feel affection. When, therefore, we call the Creator “Our Father,” we put a heart into that force which spake and the worlds were. And, oh, what a heart! Who can sound all the depth of the meaning of the word “father”? Who can search out all the fulness of a father’s love? And if it be true that the affection of an earthly father is unspeakable, immeasurable, with what words shall we weigh that of our Christ when He comes to us in the name of “the Everlasting Father”? It speaks to us not alone of redemption, but also of reconciliation. It means what Charles Wesley wrote: “My God is reconciled; His pardoning voice I hear; He owns me for His child; I can no longer fear: With confidence I now draw nigh, And Father, Abba Father, cry.” The Prince of Peace. It is intensely interesting to see how Isaiah keeps up this term “Peace.” It is truly a theme with him. He prophesies “The Prince of Peace.” He sings “Thou wilt keep him in perfect peace whose mind is stayed on thee, because he trusteth in thee.” He says of Jehovah, “Thou wilt ordain peace with us.” He affirms of the work of righteousness, “It shall be peace,” and the effect of righteousness “quietness and confidence forever.” He declares, “How beautiful upon the mountains are the feet of him that bringeth good tidings, that publisheth peace” And he rejoices with the children of Jehovah because “great shall be their peace.” And when he concludes his prophecy he writes of Jerusalem, the words of Jehovah, “Behold I will send peace to her like a river”; but he makes Jesus the Prince of all this peace. There is a climax in all these phases of character; He is a “Wonderful Counsellor,” He is “Mighty God,” He is “the Everlasting Father,” but He is, and, blessed be His Name, “The Prince of Peace.” No wonder Morrison sang: “The race that long in darkness pined Have seen a glorious Light; The people dwell in day, who dwelt In death’s surrounding night. “To us a Child of hope is born, To us a Son is given; Him shall the tribes of earth obey, Him all the hosts of heaven. “His name shall be the Prince of Peace, For evermore adored; The Wonderful, the Counsellor, The great and mighty Lord. “His power, increasing, still shall spread; His reign no end shall know; Justice shall guard His throne above And peace abound below.” IV. THE INCREASE OF CHRIST. “Of the increase of his government and of peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to establish it, and to uphold it with justice and with righteousness from henceforth even forever.” There shall be growth in His government. This idea may be interpreted in the light of past events. There was a time when the followers of Jesus were few indeed. But “the little one” has already “become a thousand” and the “small one a strong nation.” Those who think Christ’s kingdom is now upon earth call our attention to this fact, and remind us that He governs everywhere. But who shall answer that heretic George Herron when he asks us to show him “a village, a town, a city, in which Christ rules”? And yet, the promise is that a time will come when He shall reign from sea to sea, and from the rivers unto the ends of the earth, when the government shall indeed be on His shoulder. And we hold that that government shall grow. Jacob Seiss, in his third volume on “The Apocalypse,” discusses the perpetuity of “the race, and the ongoing of the redeemed,” proving that “the earth abideth forever,” and that those who are upon it when Jesus comes will only be an earnest of “the generations of the age of the ages” of which Paul speaks in Ephesians 3:21. That, also, is the explanation of the Apocalyptic vision, “After these things I saw, and behold a great multitude which no man could number, out of every nation, and of all tribes and peoples and tongues, standing before the throne and before the Lamb, arrayed in white robes, and palms in their hands; and they cry with a great voice, saying, Salvation unto our God who sitteth upon the throne; and unto the Lamb.” When Thomas Kelley sang, “Hark! ten thousand harps and voices, Sound the note of praise above; Jesus reigns and heaven rejoices; Jesus reigns, the God of Love; See, He sits on yonder throne; Jesus rules the world alone,” he dealt in small figures, forgetting Isaiah’s claim “of the increase of his government there shall be no end.” Peace also shall prevail in it increasingly. When Christ first comes all rebellion against Him will not be at an end. Read Matthew 25:1-46; read Revelation 20:1-15, and see also what the Apostle Paul means when he says, “Then cometh the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall have abolished all rule and all authority and power, for he must reign until he hath put all enemies under his feet” (1 Corinthians 15:24-25). Go back over the past and see the conflicts of the Christ; conflicts with false teachers and hypocritical followers in the first century; conflicts with arrogant bishops and evil emperors, in the fourth and fifth centuries; conflicts with a rising Roman Papacy in the sixth century; conflicts with the immoralities and spiritual deadness of the eleventh and twelfth centuries; conflicts with the false doctrines of the sixteenth century; in the commonwealth of the seventeenth; in the revolutions of the eighteenth; conflicts with the slavery and selfishness of the nineteenth. And yet, such a teacher as Newell Dwight Hillis tells us—“He has triumphed, as one knows who studies the conquest of the first century church, the Christian activities of the fourth and fifth centuries, the crusades of the eleventh and twelfth, the reformation of the sixteenth, the revolutions of the seventeenth, the emancipations and missions of the nineteenth.” And Hillis remarks, “Christ has touched poverty and clothed it with power. He has touched marriage and turned it into romance and love; He is now ready to touch work and wages and make them sacraments of human fellowship.” But there is even a better hope. The absent Christ has accomplished this by His ever-present Spirit. The “Christ to come” by “the increase of his government” shall compass infinitely more. When Henry VII. was crowned King of England the army of the Duke of Richmond sang a hymn of praise to God, and Tytler’s History tells us that “That auspicious day put an end to the civil war between the houses of York and Lancaster. By marrying the Princess Elizabeth, Henry united in his own person the interests and rights of both these families (his own and that of Edward IV.). The nation, under his wise and politic administration, soon recovered the wounds it had sustained in those unhappy contests, the parliaments which he assembled made the most salutary laws, the people paid their taxes without reluctance, the nobles kept in due subordination.” All of which brought to that government, now famed the world around, a peace and prosperity which has since made it the notable, kingdom of the world. But who was Henry VII, and what were his laws when compared with the King of. whom our text speaks? “Of the increase of his government and of peace there shall be no end.” Why, then, should we not sing, “Come, quickly come, great King of all Reign all around us, and within; Let sin no more our souls enthrall, Let pain and sorrow die with sin; Come, quickly come, for Thou alone Canst make Thy scattered people one.” His government, also, shall increase in righteousness. “Of the increase of his government there shall be no end. And to uphold it with justice and with righteousness from henceforth even forever.” Do you remember how that Danish king Canute wrote to his English subjects, “I have vowed to God to lead a right life in all things, to rule justly and piously in my realm, and subjects, and to administer just judgment to all. If, heretofore, I have done aught but what was just, through headiness or negligence of youth, I am ready, with God’s help, to amend it utterly.” Jesus needs to add no such postscript to His declared purpose of ruling with justice and with righteousness, for, as the four-and-twenty elders have affirmed of Him who sits upon the throne, “He is worthy.” “With righteousness shall he judge the poor; and decide with equity for the meek of the earth. . . . Righteousness shall be the girdle of his waist, and faithfulness the girdle of his loins” (Isaiah 11:4-5). “The zeal of Jehovah of hosts will perform this.” Let us rejoice in the fact that God himself is bade of the increase of the government of His Son. Its peace is as sure as His everlasting promise, and its righteousness is in keeping with His own character, while of His Christ, studied in the light of this text, we may sing with Richard Gilder: “Behold Him now where He comes! Not the Christ of our subtle creeds, But the light of our hearts, of our homes, Of our hopes, our prayers, our needs; The brother of want and blame, The lover of women and men, With a love that puts to shame, All passions of mortal ken. “Ah, no, Thou life of the heart, Never shalt Thou depart! Not till the leaven of God Shall lighten each human clod; Not till the world shall climb To Thy heights serene, sublime, Shall the Christ who enters our door Pass, to return no more.” ======================================================================== CHAPTER 5: 01.02. II. CHRIST, THE VIRGIN-BORN ======================================================================== II. CHRIST, THE VIRGIN-BORN “Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost. Then Joseph, her husband, being a just man, and not willing to make her a publick example, was minded to put her away privily. But while he thought on these things, behold, the angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a dream, saying, Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost. And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS : for he shall save his people from their sins”—Matthew 1:18-21. THE whole force of destructive criticism has been directed against the supernatural, whether that be found in the claims of sacred Scripture or in those of Jesus of Nazareth. The purpose of this criticism is to disprove the supernatural at every possible point. The so-called constructive criticism behaves little better. It expresses admiration for the Bible by way of introduction to objections to be raised against it; and it pays high compliment to Jesus of Nazareth in order that its professed friendliness may render its denial of His deity less offensive to the faithful. In the present discussion we propose a clear issue: Was Christ begotten by the Holy Ghost? The Scripture from which we start clearly and distinctly answers that question, and yet there are those who dispute its authority. In answer to their objections I propose three lines of argument: I. THE FORCE OF OLD TESTAMENT PROPHECY. This is the argument to which the Sacred writer himself appeals, “Now all this was done that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet.” Joseph Parker has said truly, “God does not work extemporaneously; the suddenness of His movements is only apparent; every word He says comes up from eternity.” The good student of His movements will come upon types and shadows of things to come. That is not so much true of any other part of the entire book called “the Bible” as of that which pertains to the Christ. His coming was plainly predicted. “The Lord himself shall give you a sign: Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel” (Isaiah 7:14). “For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder : and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, the mighty God, the everlasting Father, the Prince of Peace. Of the increase of his government and peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to order it, and to establish it with judgment and with justice from henceforth even forever” (Isaiah 9:6-7). “Behold, the Lord hath proclaimed unto the end of the world, Say ye to the daughter of Zion, Behold, thy salvation cometh: behold, his reward is with him, and his work before him” (Isaiah 62:11). “But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel: whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting” (Micah 5:4). Zechariah had a vision of Him as He rode triumphantly into Jerusalem, and wrote, “Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion; shout, O daughter of Jerusalem : behold, thy King cometh unto thee: he is just, and having salvation: lowly, and riding upon an ass and upon a colt the foal of an ass” (Zechariah 9:9). The time will come when all men shall know the meaning of prophecy. Dr. Albert Barnes tells us that “The visitor today looks on the site of ruined Petra, or the desolate scenes where once the city of Tyre spread out its bazaar-crowded thoroughfares, contemplates the waste places of Jerusalem, and hears the Jews at the ‘weeping stone’ bewailing the destruction of their magnificent temple, wanders through the exhumed ruins of Nineveh and catches a glimpse of ‘the wild beasts of the desert,’ the doleful creatures, the owls, that dwell in Babylon, and decides for himself whether the prophets ‘spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost’ when they foretold the destinies of these great centers of life and activity.” The man who travels through the Old Testament Scriptures and studies the predictions regarding Messiah’s coming, and then looks on the Man of Nazareth, can also decide whether they found their fulfillment in Him. The man who invests his money in a mansion has a perfect right to compare the finished pile of stones and all the arrangements thereof, and all the material employed, with the drawings and specifications of the architect, and on condition that they answer point to point, accept the product; and the man who proposes to invest his faith in Jesus Christ has a right to study the Old Testament plans and specifications concerning His coming and character and reject Him if He does not fill them up to the letter. The Old Testament prophets did more than predict the coming of Christ. They predicted His character. He was to be “a righteous Branch” (Jeremiah 23:5). He was to “love righteousness and hate wickedness” (Psalms 45:7). He was not to “cry, nor lift up, nor cause his voice to be heard in the street” (Isaiah 42:2). He was to be “a prophet from among his brethren.” Jehovah’s “words were to be in his mouth,” and He should “speak all that Jehovah commanded him” (Deuteronomy 18:18). He was to “bear our griefs” and “carry our sorrows,” to be “wounded for our transgressions” and “bruised for our iniquities,” “the chastisement of our peace was to be upon him,” and “with his stripes” we were to be “healed” (Isaiah 4:1-6, Isaiah 5:1-30). He was to be a “priest for ever after the order of Melchizedek” (Psalms 110:4). True, the critics have attacked these prophecies and have tried to disprove their authenticity and authority. The more surely Christ’s character has answered to these Old Testament descriptions feature to feature, the more have they inveighed against them. And yet, as one asks, “Which will you believe—critic or Christ?” Which appears to you as the more convincing, the marvelous agreement of Old Testament prophecy and New Testament history, or the arrogant, unproven claims of Twentieth Century critics? Charles A. Briggs, heretic as many regarded him, never so far lost his reasoning faculties as to forget the force of prophetic argument. He says, “Hebrew prophecy presents us a system of instruction which cannot be explained from the reflections of the human mind. It gives us a review of redemption as the final goal of the world’s history which is heavenborn. . . . Hebrew prophecy vindicates its relation to accuracy, its comprehensive ideality as the conception of a Divine mind, as the deliverance of a Divine energy, as a system by holy men who ‘spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost’; the Messiah of prophecy and the Messiah of history are not diverse but entirely harmonise in the Lamb who was ‘foreordained before the foundation of the world, but was manifested in these latter times.’ ” No wonder the apostle Peter wrote, “We have also a more sure word of prophecy whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn.” No wonder it is written again of Christ, “To him gave all the prophets witness.” Arthur T. Pierson said, “No miracle which He wrought so unmistakably set on Him the seal of God as the convergence of the thousand lines of prophecy in Him, as in one burning focal point of dazzling glory. Every sacrifice lit from Abel’s altar until the last passover of the passion week pointed as with flaming fingers to Calvary’s cross! Nay, all the centuries moved as in solemn procession to lay their tributes upon Golgotha.” These prophecies even promise His accomplishments. He was to be “the prophet of the Lord.” He was to be “a priest forever after the order of Melchizedek” (Psalms 110:4). He was to be a King reigning “in righteousness” (Isaiah 32:1). He was to “delight” in the will of God (Psalms 40:8). “The Spirit of the Lord” was to “rest upon him, the spirit of wisdom and understanding, the spirit of counsel and might, the spirit of knowledge and of the fear of the Lord” (Isaiah 11:2). He was to be “anointed” to “preach good tidings unto the meek,” sent to “bind up the broken-hearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to them that are bound; to proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord, and the day of vengeance of our God; to comfort all that mourn.” In His day “the eyes of them that see shall not be dim, and the ears of them that hear shall hearken. The heart also of the rash shall understand knowledge, and the tongue of the stammerers shall be ready to speak plainly” (Isaiah 61:1-2; Isaiah 32:3-4). Dr. Lorimer has portrayed, by a striking illustration sketched in contrast, Christ’s battle with evil, “The battle which Miltiades waged on the plain of Marathon on behalf of Hellenic freedom was one of the most salient and far-reaching events in the cycle of human history. It not only decided the destiny of Athens, but it preserved Europe from the heavy chains of Asiatic slavery. Had it not been for Marathon, freedom would have expired. ... Athens would have failed to be what she was to her own citizens, and though the Roman power might have spread over the world had Athenian civilisation been different, the Empire, untutored by Greek genius, would not have been the purveyor of arts as well as arms, of letters as well as laws to mankind. But still far easier would it have been for a sagacious statesman, standing in the region of the Tetrapolis, or surveying the field from Mount Pentelicus, and reflecting on the defeat of the Persians, to anticipate and describe the results, comprehensive and wide-sweeping as they were fated to prove, of that glorious disaster, than it would have been for the most gifted and foreseeing of the race to imagine, much less to predict, the ultimate effect on society, government and humanity of that stern, sharp conflict between the Son of God and the hosts of darkness which gave to history the Christian religion.” And yet the effect produced by Christ in it all was foreseen, was foretold, and the man who denies that Jesus Christ was begotten by the Holy Ghost must tell us how it happened that His accomplishments were promised hundreds of years before the “babe wrapped in swaddling clothes” was laid in the manger at Bethlehem, or before the Man capable of opening the eyes of the blind, unstopping the ears of the deaf, releasing the prisoner from his dungeon, bringing the acceptable year of the Lord had put in an appearance? We count it something of a marvel that modern science can tell us forty-eight hours in advance what changes will take place in the weather. How, then, can men do less than stand amazed before the work of those who, a thousand years before the event, promised the coming, predicted the character and described the accomplishments of Jesus of Nazareth? What is the explanation? Only this, that the same Spirit who begat Him spake through these souls of Old Testament time. I call attention to the second line of argument: II. THE AFFIRMATION OF NEW TESTAMENT WRITERS The sayings of these writers of the New Testament cannot be ignored. And what is the purport of them? They declare that He was the Son of the Most High, “Now the birth of Jesus was on this wise; When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost” (Matthew 1:18). Luke’s report is, “The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee; therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God” (Luke 1:35). It is not necessary for one to explain how this came to pass. The Spirit of God is not subject to our psychological limitations. Jesus himself said of Him, “The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth; so is every one that is born of the Spirit” (John 3:8). Christ was only the first begotten and the same Spirit begets many another. No man can explain his own spiritual birth. Why, then, should we attempt to explain the begetting of Jesus? If God could create man in the first place why should it be thought a thing incredible that He should, by His own will, have begotten the man Jesus? That He was the Son of God, Christ Himself never questioned. I met a Jew a while ago who told me that “Jesus never dreamed He was the Son of God; that was a claim which had been trumped up by the New Testament writers.” Why, then, did Jesus speak of “My Father who is in heaven”? How did He dare to say, “I and my Father are one”? When they asked Him, “Art thou the Son of God?” why should He have replied, “Ye say it; I am”? “No man cometh unto the Father but by me.” “No man knoweth the Father save the Son and he to whomsoever the Son will reveal him.” Take His miracles; they are an evidence of His sense of Divine Sonship. To the leprous, “I will, be thou dean”; to the storm, “Peace, be still”; to His disciples, “Heal the sick, cleanse the lepers, raise the dead, cast out devils, freely ye have received, freely give”; to Lazarus, “Come forth.” Take His teachings: “Moses said unto you” so and so, “But I say unto you.” And again, “Verily, verily I say unto you.” His word is that of One of conscious authority. Take His expression —“Thy sins are forgiven thee.” Who dares say that but God? Blasphemy indeed it would have been on the lips of another. Think of His statement to Peter, “Upon this rock I will build my church and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.” Think of His words regarding Jerusalem, “O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, how often would I have gathered thee as a hen gathers her chickens under her wings and ye would not!” Think of His comprehensive words of authority, “All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.” His disciples believed Him to be the Son of God, “AEneas, Jesus Christ maketh thee whole,” was Peter’s statement. “In the name of Jesus Christ, arise and walk,” was the word to the man at the gate. Devils believed Him to be the Son of God: “Jesus, thou son of God,” was the very phrase by which they addressed Him. “Why hast thou come to torment us before our time?” was the fear they expressed in His presence, and felt at the sight of His face. The centurion, seeing Him die, said, “Truly this man was the Son of God.” Are professed Christians to be more sceptical than wicked men and devils? Yet He was born to Mary—Joseph’s wife. Christ was a man, essentially a man. Flesh clothed His bones; blood filled His veins. Had you put your ear to His heart it would have beat as the heart of any other man in life; had you counted His pulse it would have been normal. Who knows but the world has missed the normal pulse by not having taken that of Christ? When Daniel had his marvelous vision “He saw, and behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages should serve him; his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed.” When the heavens opened and a voice was heard out of it saying, “This is my beloved Son in whom I am well-pleased,” and when the Spirit descended upon Him in the shape of a dove, it was a man that stood in the waters saying to John, “Suffer it to be so now, for so it becometh us to fulfill all righteousness”—a man born of woman. Joseph Parker has sagely said, “His mother was no imaginary Mary. This literal history was required in order to vindicate her memory from the charge of her being a merely dramatic woman. She lived the common human life, wept the common tears, enjoyed the same enjoyments that fall to the lot of all. There is enough said about her in the Gospels to prove the poor human nature of the woman, and little enough said about her not to magnify her into a feminine god.” The people who attempt to make her anything more than a woman are thereby detracting from the perfect humanity of Christ. It was “the seed of woman” that was to “bruise the serpent’s head,” and Jesus of Nazareth was such. So, then, begotten by the Holy Ghost and born of man, He was God and man. Who can explain this? “Great is the mystery of godliness.” You receive more things upon statement than you ever believe by reason of demonstration. All history attests that, somehow, Jesus of Nazareth had the form and flesh and blood of man but the brain and heart and character of God. There is little occasion for either “if” in the lines— “If Jesus Christ is a man, And only a man, I say, Of all mankind I will cleave to Him, And to Him I will cleave alway. “If Jesus Christ is a God, And the very God, I swear, I will follow Him through heaven or hell, The earth, the sea, or the air.” But there is a third line of argument, namely— III. THE TEST OF ACHIEVEMENTS. His character is the incomparable One. No other man ever walked the earth who could face even his enemies and say, “Which of you convinceth me of sin?” No other man ever lived of whom his disciples could say, “He was tempted in all points like as we are, yet without sin.” It is no more the precepts of Jesus that win men to Him than it is the practice. The incomparable character of Jesus Christ is as powerful as His Gospel. “Whose preaching was it that led to your conversion?” was asked of one who had just come into salvation. The answer was significant, “It was nobody’s preaching, it was my mother’s practicing.” What would happen in this world if all those who have named the name of Jesus Christ began to keep themselves unspotted from the world I shall not attempt to say, but I do dare to affirm that the spotless life of Jesus Christ is the one secret power of drawing men and women unto Himself. It is in vain that the sinner confesses to a sinful fellow-mortal and hears from his lips the words promising absolution. But to approach One who Himself never sinned, and to ask Him to become your advocate before God, is to name an intercessor who shall secure Divine favour. No wonder Isaac Watts could sing: “With joy we meditate the grace Of our High Priest above: His heart is full of tenderness; His bosom glows with love. “Touched with a sympathy within, He knows our feeble frame; He knows what sore temptations mean, For He has felt the same. “He, in the days of feeble flesh, Poured out His cries and tears, And in His measure feels afresh What every member bears. “Then let our humble faith address His mercy and His power; We shall obtain delivering grace In each distressing hour.” His achievements demand explanation. The marvel about Jesus Christ is not that He claimed so much but that He accomplished more. The Old Testament writers spake of “One to come who should open the eyes of the blind, heal the sick, and raise the dead.” Wherever Jesus walked the most faithful reports indicate that the blind received their sight, lepers were cleansed, and never once before an open grave, or bier, did His word of command “Come forth” fail. Explain it, will you? Tell me, how did it happen that this man, living among a people of ignorance, was Himself enlightened; dwelling with the intolerant, was yet free from every arrogance; consorting with the harsh, was yet full of tenderness; in daily touch with the impotent, was yet possessed of all power? Montgomery spoke truly when he said, “When, like a stranger on our sphere, The lowly Jesus wandered here, Where’er He went, affliction fled, And sickness reared her fainting head. “The eye that rolled in irksome night, Beheld His face—for God is light; The opening ear, the loosened tongue, His precepts heard, His praises sung. “With bounding steps the halt and lame, To hail their great Deliverer came; O’er the cold grave He bowed His head, He spake the word, and raised the dead.” Explain it. Let some man stand up and tell us why no other mortal ever wrought such deeds. Truly, as Renan confesses, “It would take a Jesus to forge a Jesus.” If He was not a forger how do you account for Him? What better can you do than Matthew has done, say—“He was begotten by the Holy Ghost”? But His indisputable credential is His sawing power. It was a marvel when fever was rebuked by His word, it was a marvel when the Gadarene was dispossessed of devils! But His matchless sentence was “Thy sins are forgiven thee.” His matchless power was the impartation of peace and purity to the soul of man. Have you ever thought upon this phrase, “Thou shalt call his name Jesus”? Joseph Parker says, “Christ is the only man known in history who was born with special reference to the sins of the human family. He does not come into the race with small programs. The world is sick of men with programs an inch long.” There are plenty of men all about us with small programs arid! abbreviated plans. There is the man who can shine your shoes; there is another who can shave your face; there is another who can clothe your form; there is another who can construct your house; there is another who can stir your ambition. But where is the man who can save me from my sins? Who can take all the disordered machinery of life and put me to rights and set me to running for God and with God? In old Nazareth He was; in heaven He is; in earth He shall be! Aye, by His Spirit, here now, today, with the sole desire and purpose of salvation! I have read, somewhere, the story of that man who, on a Sabbath day at an English seaport town, saw a vessel tossed by the rising storm, and heard the cry, “A man overboard.” Looking out he saw brave rowers speeding toward him, and yet the man sank, and as he went down the on-looker saw one running down the beach, his face white with excitement, his eyes filled with anguish, and pointing to where the waves had just covered the head of the sinking man, he cried, “Save him! Save him! A thousand pounds to the man who saves him! He is my brother!” But the appeal was in vain, the remorseless waves were doing their work, the rowers had fallen short, for he was sinking but a few boat-lengths away! But, beloved, when Peter on Gennesaret, found the waves parting beneath his feet and saw himself suddenly engulfed, his cry was directed to Jesus of Nazareth, “Lord save, or I perish!” and instantly His hand shot out and laid hold upon the doomed apostle and lifted him up. He is able to save! Will you put your trust in Him? I meet people every day who tell me they have long intended to do this. A purpose put into no practice is worthless. “Behold, now is the time accepted; behold, today is the day of salvation.” Jesus stands ready to respond, and is able to save. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 6: 01.03. III. THE CHILDHOOD OF CHRIST ======================================================================== III THE CHILDHOOD OF CHRIST “And the child grew, and waxed strong in spirit, filled with wisdom: and the grace of God was upon him”—Luke 2:40. THE childhood of Jesus is a subject of easy speculation. Apocryphal gospels there are which narrate the most marvelous and unimaginable things as the experience and acts of the wonderful Nazarene lad. But the true Gospel passes full thirty years in a silence broken but a single time, and that time is clearly recorded in Luke 2:40-52. A solitary glimpse of Jesus, but a significant one. The remarks made concerning His growth are significant. His attendance upon the feast of the tabernacles was significant. His place in the temple was significant. His questions and answers before the Sanhedrin were significant. His ready yielding to His parents and His implicit obedience were significant. While it may seem most unnatural to pass through this great and potential period of youth with only this solitary reference to it all, it is most natural and even most wise to give us the glimpse of Him at twelve years of age when He was passing from boyhood to manhood, at the moment when those emotions that make up life were beginning to stir every part of His being, perhaps the time when the very plans of life itself were being unfolded to Him by His heavenly Father. Then He let us look at His face just once. What a lad! Frederick W. Farrar, in his “Life of Christ,” tells us that when the moon is in crescent a few bright spots are visible through the telescope upon its unilluminated part; those bright spots are mountain peaks, so lofty that they catch the sunlight. And then he remarks, “One such point of splendour and majesty is revealed to us in the otherwise unknown region of Christ’s youthful years, and it is sufficient to furnish us with a real insight into that entire portion of His life.” Consenting with Dean Farrar, I call your attention to some suggestions of the Scripture Luke 2:40-52. I. THE NATURAL GROWTH. The remark “The child grew, and waxed strong in spirit, filled with wisdom, and the grace of God was upon him” undoubtedly looks to a natural three-fold division of life—physical, mental and spiritual. He was approaching a manhood which should come to the full, He was not to be a one-sided man, all physique and hence beastly; all intellect and hence a hook-worm, or all devotion and hence a bald monk. The Young Men’s Christian Associations have insisted that there is a four-fold development of life, physical, social, intellectual and spiritual. I think we will find even this in the text, for before we shall have finished we will see that Jesus increased not alone in wisdom and “in favour with God,” but also “in favour with man.” His growth in stature reveals His true humanity. Paul, in writing to the Hebrews, makes a very significant remark. Quoting from Isaiah—“Here am I, and the children whom thou hast given me,” the Apostle adds, “For as much, then, as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same.” The humanity of Jesus is absolutely essential to His priesthood for, as the same apostle writes to the same people, “We have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities, but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin. Let us, therefore, come boldly to the throne of grace that we may obtain mercy and find grace to help in time of need” (Hebrews 4:15). I have no question myself but that His humanity was not only real but robust, and that this text is our Scriptural warrant for such a statement. He “grew” in stature! Dr. Campbell Morgan, pleading for the physical prowess of Jesus, says, “When will some inspired artist give us a true picture of this glorious Man? He is almost always depicted as frail in physical form and lacking in bodily beauty. Perhaps the German artist Hoffmann has come nearest to the true ideal. ‘There is no beauty that we should desire him,’ but the prophet did not mean that He would be devoid of beauty, rather that men should not recognise it. We strenuously hold that He was perfect in physical form and proportion. The body is the outward and visible sign of the inward and invisible spirit, and the perfect spirit of Jesus would form a perfect physical tabernacle in which He passed the probationary life.” Visitors to the First Baptist Church, Minneapolis, who walk into one of the social rooms will see on the wall Mrs. Wayland Hoyt’s painting of the Christ. It is Dr. Morgan’s conception, a man of enormous proportions; the fullness of whose strength is suggested by every full-rounded muscle, yet the refinement of whose nature is distinctly painted into every feature of the great face. “Know ye not that ye are the temple of the Holy Ghost?” And is it not of the religion of Christ that the physical growth of the child should have the utmost care, and that a sound body should be reckoned as the best seat of a sound mind and a healthy soul? But, as we have already suggested: There was a social side to Christ’s life. The lad of twelve was growing in another direction “in favour with men.” I am glad that this phrase appears in Luke’s report. It tends to present the two sides of Jesus character, two sides which some people believe cannot exist in the one and same man—sweetness and strength, kindness and courage, personal attractiveness and professional repulsion. It is not difficult to imagine that the little children of Nazareth ran in and out of His shop for the pure pleasure of His smiles, that the young men and maidens often dropped into the same to hear His hearty greetings, to uncover to Him some secret of life or love which they would not share with another, and get His kindly counsel, and that even old men and women who watched His growth from infancy to manhood often remarked on Him in the language of ardent admiration. It was only when He left the private life and went into the public; it was only when He could no longer exercise His personal graces, but delivered His professional and divinely appointed soul, it was only when to save the world He loved so much from death and hell, He had to speak of sin and show what it was, and what it would do in the lives of men, that both Gentile and Jew commenced to hate Him, commenced to overlook all His natural kindliness, to disregard His tender love, to misinterpret His warning speech, and finally to plead for His crucifixion. But if any man, reading the story of this antagonism, concludes that Christ must have been a very unattractive, repellent individual, let him turn back to this text and be corrected. He was a delightful companion. In private life men and women only knew Him to love Him. As He increased in age the circle of His friends widened, and when He closed the carpenter’s shop for Jordan and the baptism of John, doubtless the most popular man that had ever lived in Nazareth left the village of His boyhood to begin the most unpopular career upon which a courageous soul was ever sent. In the enlargement of Christ’s life the intellect was prominent. “He grew in wisdom.” Evidently that growth was not a normal one; evidently it was not such as the majority of the Jewish lads had revealed. Before His day other lads had shown strength, had either said or done remarkable things at this very age of puberty. The old Jewish legends tell that Moses had left the house of Pharaoh at that time, that such was Samuel when he heard the voice summoning him to the prophet’s office, that Solomon was also twelve years of age when he had given a judgment that made for wisdom, and Joseph, at about the same age, had his first dream of what he was destined to accomplish. “The child” is, truly, “father to the man.” Almost every lad at twelve is the prophecy of his own later life. The day does not break into full noon, there are the dawnings and the rising of the sun, but the man who studies the first can easily prophecy what is coming. A lightning flash is different, it breaks out unexpectedly; it illuminates with a glory beyond the sun; its brilliance is such as to compel the attention of all men. We are told that the second coming of Christ shall be like the lightning. The first appearance was the dawning of a new day. Men have debated and will, when Christ became conscious of His deity. It is not a subject for dogmatism. It does seem, however, that at twelve years of age He either perfectly understood, or else had begun to understand. Happy the boy who thus early in life becomes conscious that God is in him, and gladly consents to the indwelling Spirit, and feels as Jesus felt the power of the same, so that He can say, “I must do the will of the Father.” If there is one thing in which I believe as the result of personal, mental, and emotional experience, any one thing which is an absolute necessity of all children of God, it is in the compelling voice, quickening the man, determining the will, pointing the way, namely, the voice of God. Evidently also the devotion of spirit was keeping pace, for “The grace of God was upon him.” This Scripture suggests something other than the rites and ceremonies of the Jewish people, something more than the fact that He knew He was the child of circumcision; something beyond His familiarity with the Jewish traditions; something beyond His conscious kinship with Abraham and Isaac and Jacob; something beyond the formality of the phrase that is spoken to the effect that as “He had been joined to the covenant so might it also be to him in regard to the law and to good works.” This phrase compasses a communion between the Son and Father, between the child Jesus and the infinite God. No wonder Ernest Renan says of Jesus “He has no visions; God does not speak to Him as to one outside himself; God is in Him; He feels He is close to God; He draws from His own heart all that He saw of the Father; He lives in the bosom of God by contact at every moment; hears Him without need of thunder or burning bush like Moses, or revealing tempest like Job, or oracle like the old Greek sages, or familiar genius like Socrates, or the angel Gabriel like Mahomet.” That grace of God which was upon Him was the personal consciousness of God in Him, and God with Him. This is the way to develop devotion of spirit. We may attend church as often as we like, we may pray all night if we please, we may even enter the closet and “shut to the door” and thereby literally fulfill the Saviour’s injunction of secrecy, but unless somehow we get into the Divine presence and know the meaning of the phrase “with God” it is vain. “In the secret of His presence How my soul delights to hide. Oh, how precious are the moments Which I spend at Jesus’ side,” is a hymn which has always appealed to me as one that must have been voiced by a soul en rapport with God, but “A little talk with Jesus Makes it right, all right,” has always had a jingle of insincerity, not alone because of the jangle in tune, but largely because of the lightness with which the subject is treated. “A little talk with Jesus!”—That is the curse of the Church of God! Christ was in constant communion with the Father. Oh, that as Christians we might be in constant communication with Christ. It is the only way to have the grace of God in Christ. II. THE SUPERNATURAL WISDOM. The incident of Christ’s remaining in Jerusalem when the parents departed for home results in their return. What a scene! A twelve-year-old in the Temple, “sitting in the midst of the doctors, both hearing them and asking them questions,” and the remark —“All that heard him were astonished at his answers.” The Temple was His preferred school. The posture was the posture of a student—“sitting.” How different from the modern idea. Many of the twelve-year-old lads and lasses are now being made familiar with temples of vice; the picture show, the dance hall, the theatre,—these are modern institutions, and men tell us that they have their “educational features.” Truly! But they are out of all harmony with Christ’s education. For His education He went to the Temple of God. The public school is all right in its place; secular information is not a sin; to know science is to know how God does His work in the natural world. But when men separate the School and the Temple, secularise the latter and flout the former, they are destroying the foundations of society. Has it not occurred to you that the great men of the past have grown in the Temple of God? Not only its great prophets, but its great discoverers, its great inventors, its great scientists. Columbus was a church man, Livingstone learned much in the House of God. Men of letters have learned much there. Shakespeare was able to quote copiously from the Scriptures, and the temple in which he used to worship is still standing in Stratford-on-Avon. Carlyle was a child of the Church; let no modern scientist imagine that his predecessors were atheists, or even infidels. Call the roll:—Galileo, Kepler, Faraday, Henry, all trouped forth from the Temple of God. If you want reformers you will bring them from the same secret presence. Luther and Huss, Knox and Savonarola received not alone their inspiration, but much of their education there. The day when the Temple of God no longer plays a part in the education of the youth will be the same as the day in which this child Christ will no longer be regarded as an ensample to children, and that day will sound the death knell of the education that is worth while. Mark again: Doctors of Divinity were His chosen teachers. For He sat “in the midst of the doctors; both hearing them and asking them questions.” These were not catch questions! These were not questions propounded to reveal His superior wisdom. These were questions of the earnest student who gave audience to His elders, and then to bring further information He plied them with questions. There are people in the world, now, who imagine that the poorest place we can go for information is to the feet of the “Parson,” as they call him. It might be well for such to remember what part the Doctors of Divinity have played in the whole educational scheme. It might be well to remember that these are the men who laid the foundations of Oxford, of Harvard, of Yale, of Brown and of Princeton, and that more of these men have been presidents and hold professorships than come from any other walk of life. It was truly a dark day for Harvard when she had as President a man who ruled the Bible out of his five feet of essential books. Boys graduating from the feet of such scholars, even though they be named “Doctors of Divinity,” are destined to greatness only on the condition of parting company with their professors. It is not difficult to see why Samuel became a noted man in Israel. In the Temple and at the feet of Eli he learned. It is not hard to imagine how Spurgeon became England’s most prominent preacher; on the knees of Dr. Knill, and from many other great students and teachers in the Church of God he took his great lessons, and in truth, never did he feel the need of another or better college than that which provided for the coming of these men to his father’s house. Is it not a strange sight, the modern school, supported in no considerable part by the money of men and women who love God and believe His Word, conducted now without a reference to His Holy Name? Almost anything permitted to enter its halls except His holy Word, and almost any subject under heaven, high or low, exalting or debasing, presented to the student-body save Christianity. Rum stains the escutcheon of the nation. Rome has almost removed her foundation stone. And yet further, remember, His understanding was an amazement. “They that heard him were astonished at his answers.” There had been bright lads before this lad appeared in Jerusalem, but there had been no lad like Him. There had been precocious youths, a multitude, previous to Jesus; no one of them had produced the impression upon the Sanhedrin that He was making, without ostentation, perhaps without even consciousness on His own part that He had accomplished it. He compelled the admiration of this circle of wise men and left them in a dumb amazement at the wisdom of which the remark of later days would have been true even then, “We never heard it on this wise.” Yes, there is so much in the life of Christ that is inexplicable that those who deny His deity are dumb in His presence. There is but one explanation! Truly, in the language of Carnegie Simpson, “He is beyond our analyses. He confounds our canons of human nature. He compels our criticism to over-leap itself. He awes our spirits.” There is a saying of Charles Lamb which is responded to by a very deep feeling within the heart of every true student of Christ, “If Shakespeare was to come into this room we should all rise up to meet him, but if Christ came we should all fall down and try to kiss the hem of His garment.” III. THE UNNATURAL SUBJECTION. The reproof from His mother was gently given (Luke 2:48-52). “Son”—it is introduced with a word of affection—“why hast thou thus dealt with us?” It is a question sincerely put with the expectation of an answer. “Thy father and I have sought thee, sorrowing.” It is a revelation of her love. Oh, wise mother! A lad had behaved badly in the presence of company. The mother looked at Him, but said not a word. Later she called Him aside and in a secret conference, with no one looking on to see the blush mantling the little cheeks, she told Him how it hurt, and how badly it looked. A friend of John Adams told him he had found out who made him, by the reading of his mother’s published letters. Many a man has been compelled to confess that the gentle, wise mother was God’s wonderful agency for the formation of his life. We have the testimony of many of earth’s greatest in this matter. Suppose we listen to them while two of its most eloquent talk to us about it. John Ruskin says, “My mother steeped my soul in the knowledge of the Sacred Scriptures. I have just opened my oldest Bible. My mother’s list of chapters with which she established me in life has just fallen out of it, and truly this maternal installation of my mind with those chapters I count the most precious, and on the whole, the most essential part of my education.” Let Tennyson sing of his sainted mother. In “The Princess” he tells the story of his admiration for the woman who bore him and at the same time reveals her character. “Yet was there one thro’ whom I loved her, one Not learned, save in gracious household ways, Not perfect, nay, but full of tender wants, No Angel, but a dearer being, all dipt In Angel instincts, breathing Paradise, Interpreter between the gods and men, Who look’d all native to her place, and yet On tiptoe seem’d to touch upon a sphere Too gross to tread, and all male minds perforce Sway’d to her from their orbits as they moved, And girdled her with music. Happy he With such a mother! faith in womankind Beats with his blood, and trust in all things high Comes easy to him, and tho’ he trip and fall He shall not blind his soul with clay.” I am glad that Christ was a mother’s child, and that Mary lives, a mother’s ensample. Mark His reply—It was firm but gracious. “Wist ye not that I must be about my Father’s business?” I love that word “must.” I believe in men who do things because they are compelled to do them, who do them because they cannot do otherwise; men who choose a certain path because they have heard Christ say, “This is the way, walk ye in it”; who face certain tasks because the Father demands it; who walk even to Calvary if that be His will; who fail not, even in Gethsemane, but conclude their agony with the cry, “Not my will, but thine, be done.” There is in that word the sound of a holy necessity. The man who can choose one path as well as another, the man who can please one party as well as another, the man who tries to please all parties, is a poor excuse of manhood and as far removed from the Man of Nazareth as the poles of the earth are apart. Thank God for the statement “I must.” There are some things we may do, but oh, there are other things we must do or lose out with God, and those are the things that involve “the Father’s business.” That is my business! Finally, His subserviency was surprising. “And he went down with them and came to Nazareth, and was subject unto them.” What a strange subjection, the subjection of the superior to the inferior! And yet that unnatural subjection was a further revelation of the unusual character. The lad of the truly great heart, the girl whose brain is blessedly developed, these may know more than their parents but they never parade it, they refuse even to think it, they give it no place in their feelings; to voice it is the last thing they would do. It is only a little man that wants to be forever giving orders. It is only a cramped and contracted life that is forever demanding allegiance and obedience. The man who lives in the large, as Christ lived, the man who looks upon all things and sees clearly, the man who is worthy to command, he is the man who stands ready to obey. For such the law of the Lord is not a. hardship. David could say, “I will walk at liberty for I seek thy precepts.” Within the limits of His mother’s will and his father’s desire Christ found sufficient liberty, and yet He found delight, for, as Farrar remarks, “His self-subjection to them was all the more glorious in proportion to the greatness of the self-subjected.” When will men learn that “To obey is better than sacrifice”? ======================================================================== CHAPTER 7: 01.04. IV. CHRIST, THE TEACHER ======================================================================== IV CHRIST, THE TEACHER “Rabbi, we know that thou are a teacher come from God.”—John 3:2. CHRIST, the Teacher, is an appropriate subject for students, of the New Testament, for we must remember that teaching was one of the prominent traits of His earth-life as well as one of the most important functions of His matchless ministry. Many of those who came to Him addressed Him as “Teacher,” and in so doing they spake better than they knew, for indeed He was, as Nicodemus said, “a teacher come from God.” Before Him Cicero had been in Rome, Socrates, Plato and Aristotle had stimulated Greek students by their instruction, and contemporaneous with Him, Gamaliel taught among the Jews; and yet, if all the ages past and all the ages to come could have been brought together in Jesus’ time, He would still be worthy of the title “The Teacher,” because of a truth “never man spake like this man.” It is my purpose to call your attention to some respects in which Christ effectively illustrated our text. I. HIS UTTERANCE WAS WITH AUTHORITY. If we turn to Mark 1:22, we find Jesus in a synagogue of Capernaum on the Sabbath day, teaching, and it is said of what He taught, “They were astonished at his doctrine; for he taught them as one that had authority, and not as the scribes.” If we look into Matthew 7:28, we are at the end of the longest discourse Christ ever delivered, at least so far as the inspired reports of His sermons inform us. This sermon was delivered on the mountain-side Matthew 5:1-48, Matthew 6:1-34, Matthew 7:1-29 close “And it came to pass that when Jesus had ended these sayings, the people were astonished at his doctrine; for he taught them as one having authority, and not as the scribes.” What else would we expect from the Son of God than that He should so speak? He with whom wisdom is, needs not to be trained in poor schools and taught the traditions of the fathers and made familiar with the speeches of the so-called great in order that He may speak. Henry van Dyke, in “The Gospel for an Age of Doubt,” says, “He did not make a long catena of quotations from learned sources.” “He was not a commentator on truths already revealed. He was a Revealer of new truth. His teaching was not the exposition; it was the text. . . . He gave out His doctrine from the depths of His own consciousness as a flower breathes perfume—fresh, pure, original and convincing.” “His teaching is neither ancient nor modern, neither deductive, nor inductive, neither Jewish nor Greek, it is universal, enduring, valid for all minds and for all times. . . . It fits the spiritual needs of the nineteenth as closely as it fit the needs of the first century.” “By His word we test all doctrines, conclusions and commands. On His word we build all faith. This is the source of authority in the Kingdom of Heaven.” And Van Dyke only voices what the so-called Christian world accepts to the extent of its true Christianity, for the moment a man calls into question the authority of Jesus Christ, his Christianity is not in question but is under condemnation. There are those who vainly imagine that they can deny the authority of Jesus Christ and yet keep a Bible that is worth one’s study, and is a guide to life, holiness and heaven. But, as Dr. Talmage said, “Christ is the Alpha and Omega of this Word, and to deny Him and the authority of His every utterance, is to destroy the Word itself, for if we begin with Genesis, “the seed of the woman shall bruise the serpent’s head” is Christ, the Alpha, and when we come to Revelation, the Lamb before the Throne who has conquered the Dragon of the Pit, is “Christ—the Omega.” Take Christ out of the Bible and you have the Louvre without the pictures, the Tower of London without the jewels; take Him out and man is a failure, the world a carcass and eternity a vast horror.” But, thanks be to God, you cannot take Him out, for “Never man spake as this man.” “He taught them as one having authority.” II. HIS SENTENCES WERE SIMPLE AND STRAIGHTFORWARD. The Sermon on the Mount abundantly illustrates this claim, “And he opened his mouth and taught them, saying, Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of Heaven. Blessed are they that mourn, for they shall be comforted. Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth. Blessed are they which do hunger and thirst after righteousness, for they shall be filled.” Take Matthew 6:1-34 : His sentences are equally simple and straightforward. “Take heed that ye do not your alms before men, to be seen of them, otherwise ye have no reward of your Father which is in heaven. Therefore when thou doest thine, alms, do not sound a trumpet before thee, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and in the streets, that they may have glory of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward. But when thou doest alms, let not thy left hand know what thy right hand doeth, that thine alms may be in secret, and thy Father which seeth in secret himself shall reward thee openly.” And in Matthew 7:1-29 : “Judge not that ye be not judged. For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged; and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again. And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother’s eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye? Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye, and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye? Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother’s eye.” Dr. Broadus, in his volume entitled “Preparation and Delivery of Sermons, says, “Style is excellent when, like the atmosphere, it shows the thought but itself is not seen, or, perhaps like stereoscopic glasses which, transparent themselves, give frame and body, and distinct outline to that which they exhibit.” And surely that claim can be made for the style of Jesus Christ. It was not His habit to employ terms so technical and high-sounding as to obscure the thought and thereby get for Himself a cheap reputation for learning or eloquence, or both. As I listen to men speak, whether as teachers, preachers or lecturers, there is nothing that quite so tries me as the obscurity of their sentences. A man may be as scholastic as he pleases in his own study, but when he stands before his audience he ought to be so simple and straightforward in statement that the little ones and the unlearned can understand him. At that point Christ Jesus is a Teacher of teachers. Dr. John Hall, as he spoke to students for the ministry, said, “Young men, it is a good thing to know Greek, but if you are to preach in America, it is absolutely necessary for you to speak in plain English.” The beauty of that statement is that Dr. John Hall himself was a good illustration of it. A distinguished theologian in conversation with Dr. Theodore Cuyler said, “If I should return to the pastoral charge of a church I should do two things: I would make more direct personal efforts for the conversion of souls and I would spend no time on the rhetoric of my sermons. I would saturate my mind with Bible truth and then deliver that truth in the simplest idiomatic English I could command.” I speak to not a few who teach, some in public school and college, a number of you in Sunday Schools; and in a certain sense all those of us who have come to years of maturity are instructors. Shall we not speak in plain words? I listened recently to two addresses delivered by a teacher who is reputed to be great, to audiences that were certainly not above the average. It is not an overstatement to say that every fifth word in his discourse would require a dictionary upon the part of a college graduate. God’s Son is no such teacher. Every sentence, from Matthew 3:15, where Jesus began His public ministry, to Matthew 28:20, where He uttered the Great Commission, is as clear as the noonday, and illustrates the claim of Christ, “I am the light of the world.” In His teaching is no darkness at all. With elaborate sentences He had nothing to do; technical terms found little employment at His tongue, well-poised sentences, perfectly rounded periods, and high-sounding climaxes may come from the lips of little men, but the great Son of God speaks and the ignorant of earth, and the little children understand. “Never man spake like this man.” III. THIS SUBJECTS WERE THE GREAT ESSENTIALS. He spake of the Kingdom of God and of Heaven. He taught concerning the Son of Man, concerning the Father, concerning the Holy Ghost. He taught concerning sin, concerning repentance, concerning regeneration, concerning righteousness, concerning salvation. He taught concerning the church, concerning the immediate and final effects of His Gospel, concerning His second coming, the Millennium, the judgment, the future. No small theme ever engaged His tongue. Put down a list of the subjects that could stand as proper titles to His talks to the disciples, and His sermons to the multitude, and write beside them the subjects that the average preacher puts into the paper in the course of the year; it would be to shame the latter. At the present time some good men are engaged in collating the teachings of Jesus as they can be easily gathered out of the four Gospels, and in systematising them to show what subjects He discussed and what He said about them. They are bringing together abbreviated reports of Jesus’ words and the result is a new vision of the Son of Man. Dr. Horton tells us that in the ruined Abbey of St. Albans the restorers found a large amount of carved and painted stone trodden into the ground behind the chancel. When these were collected and patiently fitted together the shrine of the saint was recovered and now stands in its completeness, a visible proof that the fragments had originally belonged to the whole. “In the same way we are able to take the scattered utterances and thoughts of Jesus and fit them together until a lovely and harmonious structure of doctrine rises before our eyes.” He might have added that when that structure is finished, when the last piece is laid in its place from foundation stone to finial, there is not one unimportant subject introduced, not one cheap sentence employed. “Never man spake like this man.” IV. THE OBJECT OF HIS TEACHING WAS EQUALLY SUPREME. That object was two-fold. First, He taught to make successors unto Himself. From the first day of His public ministry He seems never to have forgotten that He was shortly to cease speaking and go His way to Golgotha, and yet His teaching was of such importance to the wicked world that He would fain have it continued, and must therefore, find some one or more who would stand in His stead after Calvary had cut short His life. That was doubtless the occasion of choosing the twelve. They were to be His successors in the office of teaching. They were successors in the truest sense. Not that any one of them, not even that the twelve combined, could ever teach as He taught, so far as natural powers were concerned, but upon the faithful eleven He was to send the Holy Spirit to “bring to their remembrance” the things He Himself had said, and to “guide them into all truth.” In John’s Gospel, fourteenth chapter, twelfth verse, He is talking to His disciples about succeeding Him in office. He has told them again of His speedy departure and they are sad. He has comforted them by saying “Let not your hearts be troubled, ye believe in God, believe also in me.” Then, to show that everything was not to cease when He passed from the earth, He said, “Verily, verily I say unto you, he that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also, and greater works than these shall he do, because I go unto my Father.” And again, “The Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, He shall teach you all things and bring all things to your remembrance whatsoever I have said unto you.” James Stalker, in his volume entitled “Imago Christi,” says, “If we were to express the aim of Christ in the training of the twelve by saying that it was to provide successors to Himself, we should be using too strong a word, for in His greatest and most characteristic work, the working out of redemption by His sufferings and death, He had and could have no successor. He finished the work, leaving nothing for anyone else to do. But this being understood, we may perhaps best understand what He did as a Teacher by saying that He was training His own successors.” It would seem indeed that no man who ever filled an office in love could be content to leave it unless he hoped a suitable successor could be found. In proportion as one partakes of the Christ-spirit this thought stands forth, for Christianity is a religion which looks to the future, and in the future must find its victory and reward. The question of a suitable successor arises every time a call from another field brings up the question of quitting the one of present occupancy, and every time a pain starts in him the thought “Who knows but I may be near my end.” A few years ago a teacher in a small college in Indiana, having had offered him a place of larger honour and richer financial returns, said, “I would accept this office instantly, only, if I did, I don’t just know who would come to succeed me here.” For a man to be so situated as to be able to train up his successors, and through that training to come into such intimate touch with them as to know them in character as well as in conduct, in motive as well as in outward motion, and be convinced that truth would suffer nothing at their tongues, and find an equally vigourous putting by their pen would be a delight. Dr. John A. Broadus mourned that he had no son to take up his work of teaching, but the cause of mourning was removed when a most scholarly man married his daughter, and at the Doctor’s decision, stepped into his office to teach others the things the great man of God had taught him. The second object of Christ’s teaching was the all-essential one, namely, Salvation. His mission to the world is well defined in the Old Testament. It was prophesied of Him, “The Spirit of the Lord God is upon me, because the Lord hath anointed me to preach good tidings unto the meek, he hath sent me to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to them that are bound.” He was faithful unto His office! In the Book of Matthew it is said, “And thou shalt call his name Jesus, for he shall save his people from their sins,” while Luke reports Him in these words, “The Son of Man is come to seek and to save that which was lost.” When Nicodemus came to Him at night and said, “Master, we know that thou art a teacher come from God,” Jesus responded to this appeal for instruction by saying, “Verily, verily I say unto thee, except a man be born again he cannot see the kingdom of God.” That was the all-essential object of His instruction. If one considers the subjects to which He turns His attention they were all essential to instruction about salvation. To Nicodemus He says, “Ye must be born again.” Concerning the Father He said, “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.” Concerning the Spirit He said, “When he is come he will convince the world of sin, of righteousness and of the judgment; of sin because they believed not on me.” Concerning repentance, He said, “Except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish.” Concerning regeneration, “Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.” Concerning righteousness, “Seek ye first the kingdom of God and his righteousness and all these things shall be added unto you.” Concerning the Gospel He taught what Paul afterwards voiced in a single sentence, “It is the power of God unto salvation unto every one that believeth.” Concerning the Second Coming, He insisted upon preparation, since we “know not the day nor the hour when the Son of man cometh.” No sincere student of the teachings of Jesus could ever call into question that the purpose of it all, so far as the supreme object was concerned, was salvation. It seems a sad circumstance that so few of the teachers in our schools today, academies, colleges, universities and divinity seminaries are making salvation the supreme object of teaching. Would that more of them felt what a certain Principal expressed at a great Convention when he said, “Unless I can see accomplished student salvation I will not remain in the office of teacher.” What is the use of science if it does not show men to God? What is the use of literature if it does not lead to Him? What is the use of philosophy if through it you cannot find life? What is the use of charity unless you appreciate what Dr. Henderson said, “The soul of charity is charity for the soul.” Oh, that the Spirit of Christ might possess more of our teachers as it possessed Prof. Tholuck, that great theological teacher, that successful enemy of German rationalism. In the midst of all his teaching, his work as an exegete, his book-writing and publishing, while walking rapidly to the position of a world-wide reputation, he gave four hours a day, we are told, to talking with students about their salvation, and when he was but a few years in his office as teacher he was able to say that he knew where there were more than a thousand young men that he had led to the Lord. Truly we may believe that he said, as reputed, “I have but one passion, and that is Christ.” ======================================================================== CHAPTER 8: 01.05. V. CHRIST’S FIRST APOSTLES ======================================================================== V CHRIST’S FIRST APOSTLES “Now, as he walked by the sea of Galilee, he saw Simon and Andrew, his brother, casting a net into the sea: for they were fishers. And Jesus said unto them, Come ye after me, and I will make you to become fishers of men. And straightway they forsook their nets, and followed him. And when he had gone a little farther thence, he saw James, the son of Zebedee, and John, his brother, who also were in the ship mending their nets. And straightway he called them: and they left their father Zebedee in the ship with the hired servants, and went after him, and they went into Capernaum.”—Mark 1:16-21. THE lives of some great men make fascinating history. The life of Jesus Christ is superlatively so. For two thousand years men have been studying it, learning from it, marveling about it, and the marvel increases. Other men have had their followers, but no man ever had such disciples as those who became followers of Jesus. The first of these became especially famous, for in that list of four names, three of them became the inner circle of His intimates, Peter, James and John. The manner of their call is elaborated by John, who, being one of them, would know the minor details. The latter half of John 1:1-51 is devoted to this story. Mark, however, makes a briefer and much more graphic account of it, and in some ways a more suggestive one. There is not, necessarily, the least inharmony between these two reports. Mark reports the call of the four, while John gives the manner of their response. It would seem, therefore, from John’s Gospel, that it was not immediate in the instance of all, that two of the brothers, Andrew and John, more readily became inquirers, and that their influence was effectively brought to bear upon the other two, Peter and James. Interpreting Mark’s report in the light of John’s record, we find especial attention called to The Christ of the Apostles, The Call of the Apostles, and The Commission of the Apostles. I. THE CHRIST OF THE APOSTLES. “Now, as he walked by the sea of Galilee.” He—Jesus of Nazareth! He, whom John the Baptist saw coming unto him, and of whom he said, “Behold the Lamb of God which taketh away the sins of the world.” In this remark of John’s we have three fundamental facts regarding the person of Mark’s report. He was Jesus of Nazareth, He was the Lamb of God, He was the world’s only Saviour. He was Jesus of Nazareth! Jesus is His human name! Though it suggests His divine mission, its primary import is His pure humanity. He was born of a virgin; He was flesh and blood! When Pilate said, “Behold the man,” his phrase was properly employed. The famous paintings intended to represent Jesus strikingly signify a historical fact, namely, the debate of the centuries as between His humanity on the one side and His divinity on the other. The artists were doubtless influenced by the opinions of the fathers and early historians. Some of these describe Jesus as angelic in features, and God-like in the magnificence of His form. St. Jerome and St. Augustine, we are told, even reminded their auditors of the Psalmist’s words, “Thou art fairer than the children of men,” and Angelo, da Vinci, Raphael and Titian interpret the thought. On the other hand, great religious teachers, like Clement, Origen and Tertullian, took the prophet’s words “When we shall see him there is no beauty in him that we should desire him” literally, and reminded their auditors of the prophecy that He should be “marred as was never man,” and insisted that He was not only without celestial splendour, but lacked even in human attractions, was “ill-shapen and ignoble.” If one will study the theology of these fathers he will find, to his surprise, that the more sceptical ones of the early age held to this latter view, while those men who believed more implicitly in every word of God, held to the former—a most significant fact! Those who believe only in the humanity of Jesus are liable to depreciate His personal attractions, “He is a man, and no God is to be found in that form.” On the other hand, those who believe in His deity to such an extent as to doubt His real humanity are equally tempted to overemphasize the signs of divinity showing from every feature. We do not know how much of veracity there is in the claim made for the ancient manuscript supposed to have been sent by Fublicus Lentulus, President of Judaea, to the senate at Rome. It reads after this manner: “There lives at this time, in Judaea, a man of singular character whose name is Jesus Christ. The barbarians esteem him a prophet, but his followers adore him as the immediate offspring of the immortal God. He is endowed with such unparalleled virtue as to call back the dead from their graves, and to heal every kind of disease with a word or touch. His person is tall and elegantly shaped, his aspect is amiable, revered. His hair flows in those beautiful shades which no united colours can match, falling into graceful curls before his ears, and agreeably couching on his shoulders, and parting on the crown of his head like the head dress of the sect of the Nazarenes. His forehead is smooth and large, his cheek without spot, save that of a lovely red, his nose and mouth are formed with exquisite symmetry, his beard is thick and suited to the hair on his head, reaching below his chin and parting in the middle like a fork; his eyes are bright, clear and serene. “He rebukes with majesty, counsels with mildness, invites with tender and persuasive language, his whole address, whether in deed or word, being elegant, grave and characteristic of so exalted a being. No man has seen him laugh, but the whole world beholds him weep frequently, and so persuasive are his tears that the multitude cannot withhold their tears from joining in sympathy with him. He is very temperate, modest and wise. In short, whatever his phenomenon may turn out in the end, he seems a man of excellent beauty and perfections, every way surpassing the children of men.” Beyond question this is the conception of Jesus pretty generally held now, and we suspect, as near the true picture of His Personality as any one is likely to present. But, according to the text, He was more than a man! He was the very Lamb of God! The word of John the Baptist was, “Behold, the Lamb of God.” In that language of the Baptist there was the linking up of Scriptures. The Old Testament prophets had pointed forward to One to come; the angel Gabriel had announced His arrival; by His baptism, God Himself unwilling longer to leave men in question, speaking of Him, said, “This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.” It would seem that any man who made an earnest study of the life of Christ would be compelled to the expression of Napoleon: “Everything in Christ astonishes me. His spirit over-awes me; and His will confounds me. . . . His Gospel, His apparition, His empire, His march across the ages and the realms, everything is for me a prodigy, a mystery-insoluble.” And yet, to stand in awe in the presence of Jesus is not enough; one who does that may be compelled to consent “He is the Son of God!” But such an one would not necessarily dwell upon John’s particular thought, “The Lamb of God that taketh away the sins of the world”— the long-looked-for Messiah, the One hope of hurting hearts! How are we to get that knowledge of Him? We believe that the way of the text, especially John’s text, tells. The two disciples spent a day with Him. From His presence they went with a special testimony. It has always been so, and it will always remain so; the men who spend the most time with Jesus will most positively believe in His deity, and will be able to say without equivocation, “We have found the Messias,” and will be able to answer the question of their doubting brothers as Philip replied to Nathanael, “Come and see.” Commenting upon that phrase, one said, “We are not at liberty to urge men to come and see our literature, we are not asking them to look upon the church as an institution, not to come and see the preacher, not to come and look upon the most noted servant the Son of God ever had; we must go beyond the servant and show the inquirer the Lord Himself.” And the man who sees Him in His risen glory and power, must of necessity fall at His feet, as did Thomas, and say, “My Lord and my God!” If one answers that the visible presence of Christ is not in the world and so we cannot see Him, we reply, “If the visible presence of Christ is not in the world, the spiritual presence, which is a presence larger still, more positive, more glorious, is in the world,” dispelling its despair, breaking its fetters, setting at liberty its slaves, lifting the curse of ignorance, the intolerable burdens of poverty, driving before its face its cruel inhumanity, and breathing upon every part of the world where His name has been made known the breath of sweetness, of kindness, of joy; and every doubting Nathanael of the world, if he but study that presence and person alike, would exclaim, “Rabbi, thou are the Son of God, thou are the King of Israel!” Dr. Strong, former President of Rochester Theological Seminary, on his seventieth birthday, expressed his amazement that any man who had ever known Jesus as Saviour could by any process of the intellect whatever doubt His deity. And another equally eminent theological professor said, “If a reference to a personal experience may be pardoned, I may here set my seal. Never shall I forget the gain to conscious faith and peace which came to my own soul not long after the first decisive and appropriating view of the crucified Lord as the sinner’s sacrifice.” So again we remark, the men who come into most intimate contact with Him will find it most easy to believe in His deity. But, according to John, another remark regarding the Christ of the Apostles is justified. He was the world’s only Saviour. It is not many years since a liberal minister of London, in his book, “New Theology,” exploited the theory that when Isaiah wrote the fifty-third chapter of his book he had no reference whatever to Jesus. One of the marked signs of the scepticism of this age is in the circumstance that now many men are mouthing this deliverance of infidelity, and some of them are men who once had reputations for loyalty to both Christ and His Book. By the same process of argument one must deny that any Old Testament lamb slain upon the altar, under the Levitical system, had any reference whatever to “the Lamb of God which taketh away the sins of the world.” The testimony of John the Baptist, then, is disputed, and the interpretations of Philip, as he told the Ethiopian treasurer the meaning of Isaiah fifty-three, was far-fetched and false. Dr. Campbell Morgan, by earnest, honest study, has made himself easily one of the most noted men of the world, and his contributions to literature give positive proof of his versatility in Scripture, and Morgan, with much feeling, defends Isaiah’s prophetic reference as bang the plain finger of prophecy, and going further, he declares that Jesus, the Lamb of God, marked by the finger of John the Baptist, was typified as far back as Isaac’s proposed offering, and the very question of Isaac to his father, “Where is the lamb for the burnt offering?” is answered by John the Baptist, who, pointing to Jesus, said, “Behold the Lamb of God.” He justly contends, “This is no mere accident. It is a part of the great proof of the unity of the Book. The old economy was able to produce the fire and the wood, symbol of judgment, but nothing more. In the New the perfect sacrifice is provided that sin may be put away; Jesus of Nazareth appears as God’s Lamb ‘slain from the foundation of the world.’” Charles Spurgeon, speaking against the world’s effort to provide another way of redemption, says, “Poor sinners, you are still looking to yourselves. You rake the dung-hills of your human nature to find the pearl of great price which is not there. You will look beneath the ice of your natural depravity to find the flame of comfort which is not there. You might as well seek in hell itself to find heaven as look into your own words and merits to find sure ground of trust. Down with your self-reliances! Down with them, every one of them! Away with all those confidences of yours, for “None but Jesus, none but Jesus, Can do helpless sinners good.” The one certain thing about Spurgeon is his scripturalness. Read Acts 4:12, “There is none other name, given under heaven and among men, whereby we must be saved.” II. THE CALL OF THE APOSTLES. “Jesus said unto them, Come ye after me.” His call amounted to an actual demand. If Christ were only a man this would be one of the strangest speeches ever made, and would indicate madness. What right has an ordinary Nazarene to stop at the lakeside and look into the faces of successful fishermen and say to them, “Come ye after me,” demanding that they leave their occupation, take up with Him, sit at His feet, learn of Him, take orders from Him, become not only His disciples, but His very servants? Where in human history has any other man, supposed to be in his right mind, addressed his followers after this manner, excepting he do it in the name of his office as king, or emperor, or caliph? And where did any man who had no such vested authority make such a demand upon his fellows, to have his demands regarded by a full and complete surrender of self? No! What they had seen of Jesus had convinced them that He ‘was more than a man. Already there is an impression at least, profound and deep, to be later voiced by Peter, “Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.” In His voice they heard God’s voice, and did not disregard it. When Joan of Arc undertook her matchless career, there was one impelling force driving her in unwonted ways, demanding of her the most unusual procedure, and in answer to every argument men made against her leadership she felt compelled to say, “My voices!” “My voices!” by which she meant, “God is speaking and I hear and must obey.” That great missionary leader, Robert E. Speer, speaking on “What Constitutes a Missionary Call,” says, “Every time I go down to Asheville, and the train stops long enough in Salisbury, I go out to a little graveyard in the middle of the town and walk to a grave that I found several years ago. Something on a stone caught my eye and when I came up to it I read the inscription, ‘Here lies the body of F. M. Kent, Lieutenant-Colonel of the First Louisiana Regulars, who died in 1864, in the month of April,’ and underneath are these words, ‘He gave his life for the cause he loved’ Near by was the grave of John R. Pearson, First Lieutenant of the Seventh Regiment of North Carolina, who was shot at Petersburg at the age of eighteen, and beneath the name the simple record, ‘I look for the resurrection of the dead.’ ” Spear says, “I took off my hat and stood beside the graves of the eighteen-year-old lieutenant and the older colonel, who had given their lives for the cause they loved. I said, ‘Was that the way men did in those days? Did they answer the call of their leader e’en though they knew they were marching in the face of death, prompted in their response by love for a great cause?’ ” Shall men do less now? Shall the call of Jefferson Davis and the love of the Southland mean more than the call of Jesus, than the love of a sinning and dying world? God forbid! This Scripture also expresses the idea of subservience. “Come ye after me.” “After me” is suggestive. Christ must lead, the Christian must follow. He must forever remain the Master, we must forever be servants. We employ the word “servant” meaning not alone secondary station, but with a view of faithful service. Many writers have spoken of the evident fact that Jesus was a judge of men. He knew what was in them. Have you not been impressed by the historical circumstance that Jesus never called any man from idleness? In the first instance here the brothers were casting their nets, actually engaged in their daily vocation. In the next instance they were mending their nets, not only indicating their expectations of success in future fishing, but possibly suggesting a catch like that which they took once at Jesus’ command, which broke the net. When Levi was called he was sitting at the seat of custom, and so on for every one of the twelve. That professor of the theological seminary who told his students about a man who came to him saying he was sure he had been called to the ministry, and when asked “Why?” replied, “Because I fail at everything else I try to do” was not reporting an exceptional instance. Again and again men talk after the same manner, saying that the Lord has shut all other doors before them and they think it is an evidence that He is opening to them the door of the ministry. It is the poorest recommendation that any man has ever brought. Servants of the Lord God, if they are to do anything for Him, must be busy men and successful ones. We are not surprised that Christ should call men who were successfully engaged. But the next sentence reminds us of another fact, namely, His call looks always to personal and official exaltation. “Fishing” is an honest calling, but “fishing for men” is a more honourable one. That statement is capable of a very wide application. We do not care for what you are fishing, whether it be fish or office or gold. We do not care how successful you are in taking fish, or in securing office, or in heaping up gold; if God calls you from that occupation to be a “fisher of men” He has favoured you with the highest of all honours, and brought you to an exaltation of which the world knows nothing. We have a friend in the ministry, one of the most noted Congregational ministers in the world, who came up from a position of poverty and humble apprenticeship in England, to be pastor, author, lecturer, with international reputation in all. You say “God has exalted him and honoured him.” We have a friend in the Methodist ministry whose name is a household word in America, who began life as a blacksmith. You say “God has exalted and honoured him.” We have a friend in the Baptist ministry, looked upon now as knowing few equals and no superiors, who began life as a farm lad. You say “God has honoured him and exalted him.” We have a friend in the Presbyterian ministry who used to be one of the leading baseball lights of the land. You say “God has exalted him and honoured him.” We say to you that when God called another friend, a man from the office of teacher, to preach, God called him and exalted him; and yet another He called from the office of banker, and that man He also honoured and exalted, and yet another whom He called from a successful practice of law to preach the Gospel, and in the call he was honoured and exalted. Those of us who are parents are very likely to think if our daughters could marry brilliant and rich men rather than go as missionaries, we should see them honoured instead of hidden. But such thought is folly and shows our poor appreciation of real values. We also think if our sons could engage in one of the noble professions and stand at the top in the same rather than serve God in some station of comparative humility, that we could share the honours with them. But such judgment is pitiable in the light of Scripture teaching, and none the less so in the light of Christian experience. It will be confessed that when General Booth died no king of England was more highly honoured in his death. J. Wilbur Chapman says that one day he said to General Booth, “Tell me, what has been the secret of your success?” Before that question the great General hesitated a moment and then, with tears in his eyes, tears which crept slowly down his furrowed cheeks, said, “Chapman, I will tell you the secret. God has had all there was of me. There have been men with greater brains than I, men with greater opportunities, but from the day I got the poor of London on my heart, and a vision of what Jesus Christ could do for them, I made up my mind that God could have all there was of William Booth.” “Then,” said Chapman, “I learned another secret, for immediately the great man kneeled and prayed, and as I listened to him pleading for the outcasts of London, and of New York, the lost of China, and for the great world itself, lying in the wicked one, pleading with sobs and tears, I understood that his success was measured by his surrender.” III. THE COMMISSION OF THE APOSTLES. It was to be fishers of their fellows. “Come ye after me, and I will make you to become fishers of men.” Notwithstanding our modern teaching with the emphasis upon sociology and all the rest, the Son of God set His disciples to one task, viz., to win their fellows, to be fishers of men. Dr. A. C. Dixon is a good example of his own words. On one occasion he said, “Our business is to save some. We may do other things, but they are incidental. As you walk down the corridor of the Astor House towards the restaurant you will see standing in the door a man who never looks into your face, he always looks at your shoes. That man’s business is to black shoes, and I have never seen him look into the face of a guest. His one thought is about the condition of their shoes. A life insurance agent told me that he never saw a respectable man who did not suggest to him a policy. His business was to get policies. Every person you meet should suggest salvation.” When John Wesley was robbed by a highwayman he said to the fellow, “Some time, my friend, you may repent of this, and if you ever do, remember, ‘The blood of Jesus Christ, his Son, cleanseth us from all sin.’” Years afterward that man sought out Wesley and told him that the word spoken then had been as a barbed arrow in his heart, finally compelling repentance and surrender to the Son of God. The apostle of Christ has one supreme call! Take men! For that call Christ has promised to prepare them. “I will make you to become fishers of men.” The essential preparation for every man who would do Christ’s service must come from Christ Himself. Other teachers he may have, this greatest of teachers he must have. Men talk sometimes about “modern education” as if the world had just now begun to believe in scientific research, as if the church had just now begun to think that an educated ministry were desirable. Such conceptions are but the expression of the egoism of the age. There were cultured men in Greece, cultured men in Rome; Gamaliel was a great teacher two thousand years ago, and the apostle Paul a splendid and accomplished scholar. “Modern education” is, for the most part, a boast. Our forefathers believed in education, and in proportion to their opportunities, they secured it, notwithstanding the circumstances by which they were hampered. If anybody doubts this he needs only to look into history a little to be convinced of it. Let our Puritan fathers express themselves upon this subject. Over the north gate of Harvard you will read the inscription, “After God had carried us safely to New England, and we had builded our houses, provided necessaries for our livelihood, reared convenient places for God’s worship, and settled the civil government, one of the next things we longed for and looked after was to advance learning and perpetuate it to posterity, dreading to leave an illiterate ministry to our churches when our present ministry (mark the phrase—an educated one) shall lie in the dust.” The Church of God, wherever it has lived in the spirit of its Master, has been at once the parent and patron of education, but if the day ever comes when she forgets that for the special apostles of Jesus at home and abroad the essential education must come from the great Master Himself, it will be a day darkening into night, a day threatening doom. As the pastor of a congregation including hundreds of young people, I have almost a boundless pride in the number who are students, good students. But I should be a false leader if I did not remind them that no teacher at whose feet men sit is worthy to be mentioned in the same breath with the Teacher who said, “Come after me, and I will make you fishers of men.” No preparation of the schools can ever take the place of that preparation which comes from receiving His Spirit and imbibing His wisdom. And yet one point more in this election of the first apostles. The place of their work was His appointment. For when they forsook their nets and followed Him, He led them “into Capernaum.” When they arose to go after Him they did not know where He would lead, nor does it seem that they asked. That was with Him! He makes no mistakes! It may be in India, it may be in Africa, it may be in China, it may be in America; let the Master say. It is little wonder that He wants some to go to Africa when we are told that oftentimes the delegates that come from the villages and jungles walk hundreds of miles to beg for teachers. It is little wonder that He sent two of my college mates to Korea, Moffitt and Beard, for in thirty-five years there they have seen thousands and tens of thousands turn to the Lord God. It is little wonder that He lays financial demands upon some of those of us He has called to live in this land of light and privilege. The marvel is that with our small sacrifices He accomplishes so much. Some years since we were told that each thousand dollars spent in a year paid the salary of one missionary, supported seven native workers, helped to win sixteen new converts, assisted four Sunday Schools, provided Bible instruction for one hundred and sixty-five Sunday school pupils, gave Christian education to sixty boys and girls, secured $745.00 in contributions from native Christians, gave Christian medical treatment to forty-five sufferers, cared for the administration work, and secured immeasurable spiritual results which no man can tabulate. And so in our giving or going, let Him lead! ======================================================================== CHAPTER 9: 01.06. VI. THE MIRACLES OF CHRIST ======================================================================== VI THE MIRACLES OF CHRIST “This beginning of miracles did Jesus in Cana of Galilee, and manifested forth his glory; and his disciples believed on him”—John 2:11. THE orthodox Christian world has fully consented to the authenticity of this miracle, and does not call into question the record of the many marvels of Christ’s ministry which succeeded this one wrought in Cana of Galilee. But, strange to say, that same orthodoxy is “divided against itself” on the subject of the modern miracle. The creeds of most of the greater denominations are silent touching the issues of this controversy. Atheists, Naturalists, Rationalists, Formalists, and kindred folk have so violently and assiduously assaulted the miracle itself, and spoken with such rage against the thought of a modern miracle, that they have made timid men afraid to talk on this subject lest they should seem to fly in the face of Philosophy or Science, or both; and they have coerced from too many Christian men the humiliating concession concerning the Lazarus at the gate “thy bruise is incurable; thy wound is grievous, there is none to plead thy cause, that thou may’st be bound up.” Is such a concession to the power of the Adversary necessary? What saith the Word? The true prophet’s part was voiced to Samuel by the aged Eli—“What is the thing that the Lord hath said unto thee? I pray thee hide it not from me. God do so to thee and more also, if thou hide anything . . . of all the things that He hath said unto thee.” If men are to be saved from the vagaries and fanaticisms which are more and more multiplying on every side, it must be through the faithful ministry of the Word. Every subject of controversy must be brought to it for settlement, and the honest inquirer will ask but one question, “What saith the Scripture?” Now to the text, “This beginning of miracles did Jesus in Cana of Galilee, and manifested forth his glory, and his disciples believed on him.” This text marvelously compasses what I want to say on Supernaturalism, or The Miracle Ancient and Modern. Following its plain suggestions I call your attention to The Miracle Performed: The Miracle Promised: and, The Purpose of the Miracle. I. THE MIRACLE PERFORMED. “This beginning of miracles did Jesus in Cana of Galilee.” The question asked by every student of this subject is, “What is a miracle?” It is a question not so easily answered. In fact the very difficulty of defining a miracle has been made the ground of its denial alike by sceptics and ecclesiastical scribes. And yet, as Dr. Lorimer has said, “The Gospels have taught that miracles are astonishing and expressive effects of which the Divine energy is the direct and all-sufficient cause.” Whether that definition be accepted or no, the question of miracles is not to be evaded. What men want to know is this, whether what Jesus did at Cana of Galilee in turning water into wine; at Jericho, in opening the eyes of the blind; at the bier of the Nain widow’s son, and again at Lazarus’ tomb in raising the dead, are works so wonderful that God’s power alone accounts for them? If so, it is all one with us whether you speak of them as “miracles,” “signs,” “wonders,” or “power.” The act is defined not so much by words as by the conceded presence and power of God. Edward Gilpin Johnson, in his introduction to “Reynolds’ Discourses,” says of beauty: “Beauty analysed is beauty slain, and it is, after all, wiser to rest satisfied with inhaling the fragrance of the flower of art and enjoying its perfections, than to pull it to pieces, count the petals and stamens, and resolve the perfume into an essence scientifically procurable from wayside seeds.” The ninth chapter of John presents a perfect illustration of our thought: a man blind from his birth had received his sight at the word of the Lord. Being brought unto the Pharisees they asked him how he had received his sight? And yet again they said unto him, “What did He do thee? How opened He thine eyes?” thereby taking the advantage of disputants who would evade facts by entrenching themselves behind the difficulties of a definition. The answer of that man includes one of the best definitions of a miracle possible, “One thing I know, that whereas I was blind, now I see.” And again, “If this man were not of God he could do nothing.” A miracle is some astonishing expression of God’s might. “This beginning of miracles did Jesus” Water was turned into wine by the fiat of His own will. For Him to mentally command it was sufficient, since “all things are possible with God.” It is only the millionth man who rises to any proper conception of the Divine majesty and power. Whenever you meet such a man his faith makes his name immortal. Witness the Centurion who at Capernaum “came beseeching Christ, saying, Lord, I am not worthy that thou shouldst come under my roof, but speak the word only and my servant shall be healed. . . . When Jesus heard that, he marveled, and said to them that followed, Verily I say unto you I have not found so great faith, no, not in Israel.” And yet, why should a man who believes in God exercise less confidence in His power? It is a strange freak of the intellect, to say the least, to consent to Hebrews 11:3—“By faith we understand that the worlds have been framed by the word of God, so that what is seen hath not been made out of things which do appear” (R. V.), and in the next breath call into question whether He who spake the universe into existence can quicken the palsied, cleanse the leper, or raise the dead with a word. O. M. Mitchel, in his “Planetary and Solar World,” says of the rings of Saturn, “It is beyond our power to conceive how this could be accomplished by any law of which we have any knowledge, and we must refer their structure at once to the fiat of Omnipotence. The rings of Saturn are stubborn facts, why should the Scientist who has no possible explanation of their existence and relations, object to Mitchel’s believing disposition of them? Robert Buchanan says justly, concerning the effort of men to reject the miracle and keep the Master, “We may follow Mr. Matthew Arnold in his pitiful feats of literary Jesuitry, and put all the miraculous business aside in order to throw one last straw of hope to the sinking Church of England. We may putter and quibble about “poetry” and “essential” religion just as much or as little as we please, but with the loss of the supernatural pretension, perishes the whole fabric of organised Christianity.” The opinion of Strauss, Baur, Newman and others that a miracle “is unnatural and hence impossible” can carry but little weight with clear thinking men, and still less with Christian believers. The supernatural is in no sense the unnatural. It would be difficult to show that the miracles of the Master were not, every one, a replacement of some dethroned power to its natural position. It is possible for the electric current that drives the street car to be reversed and turn the wheel backward. Will the scientist who witnesses this operation claim an unnatural action when the operator so manipulates the current as to drive his car forward again? What else is sickness than a reversal of all the natural levers of physical life, a backward revolution of the machinery of nature? What else was Christ’s healing than turning again the currents of health into their appointed channels? In some sections of China women’s feet are bound, and that custom prevails so extensively that many a girl grows up feeling it must be so. And yet is it unnatural when Christian teaching takes the bandages from the toes and the feet of a Chinese woman attain their divinely appointed proportions? What else is paralysis and blindness than a binding of the feet and a blinding of the eyes by the Adversary? And what else is the word of Jesus, “Arise, take up thy bed and walk,” “Receive thy sight,” than a tearing away of the same, that Nature may reassert herself? Who can prove that death is natural? Why, then, should these devotees of so-called Law object and count it “a thing incredible that God should raise the dead?” The resurrection of the body from the grave may be as much in keeping with the eternal laws of God as is the coming of the beautiful chrysalis out of the silken bag in which last season’s caterpillar perished. Christian men and women cannot afford to forget either that the miracle is possible, or else “the new heavens and the new earth” promised in the Revelation are a mirage—never to be realised, and believers are, as the Apostle Paul put it, “of all men most miserable” since their “faith is in vain.” II. THE MIRACLE PROMISED. “This beginning of miracles did Jesus in Cana of Galilee.” The water made wine was only the first in a series of wonderful works. It was only the beginning of Christ’s miracles. The very phrase employed is a promise of marvels to follow. To turn water into wine was wonderful, but greater things should they see who walk with the Son of God. Tomorrow He will heal the nobleman’s son, the next day He will still the tempest, shortly the demoniac of Gadara shall be dispossessed, Jairus’ daughter raised, the paralytic freshly empowered, the leper cleansed, the Centurion’s servant healed, Simon’s wife’s mother recovered from her fever, the widow’s son raised from the dead, and many other wonderful works. How many miracles Jesus wrought no man knows. In addition to the thirty odd, detailed, there are those sweeping sentences, “And he healed all that were sick, and oppressed of the devil.” Men, anxious to obscure the miracle, are wont to insist that Jesus gave Himself mostly to wonderful words. But any fair student of the Word of God must know that wonderful works claim at least half of this Divine record, and probably played no less conspicuous part in the life-labours of the Son of Man. True, the opponents of Jesus said, “Never man spake like this man,” but the language of Nicodemus is equally suggestive, “Rabbi, we know that thou art a teacher come from God, for no man can do these miracles that thou doest except God be with him.” The words and works of Jesus were alike only beginnings. The miracle at Cana of Galilee was only a beginning of what Jesus would do in His office as Mediator between God and man. Students of the Word have been profoundly impressed by the opening sentence of Acts, “The former treatise have I made, O Theophilus, of all that Jesus began both to do and teach.” Certainly it never entered the mind of the Master that either His matchless words or His marvelous works would end at Calvary. For three years and a half He had made one of the chief objects of His ministry successors in labour. When His disciples were sorrowing at the shadow of the cross He comforted them by saying, “Let not your heart be troubled, ye believe in God, believe also in me. . . . He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also, and greater works than these shall he do because I go unto my Father.” If any man say that the works to be done by His apostles and disciples did not include miracles, it is sufficient to answer, “How readest thou?” Hear His commission to the twelve, “As ye go preach, saying, The kingdom of heaven is at hand. Heal the sick, cleanse the lepers, raise the dead, cast out devils. Freely ye have received, freely give.” And if any man say, “Yes, but this commission was given only to a select company,” you answer, “If so, the same cannot be asserted concerning the promise of power,” for, lo, these words conclude one of the Gospels, “Go ye into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature. He that believeth and is baptised shall be saved. All these signs shall follow them that believe; in my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues; they shall take up serpents, if they drink any deadly thing it shall not hurt them. They shall lay hands on the sick and they shall recover.” Was James prescribing for apostles only, or for the period in which he lived, when he wrote, “Is any sick among you? Let him call for the elders of the church, and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord, and the prayer of faith shall save him that is sick, and the Lord shall raise him up”? Were Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Tertullian, Origen, and Clement false in their claims of miracles in answer to prayer? Were those godly men and women of the middle ages, who kept the fires of a true faith smouldering when an apostate church smothered inspiration itself, mistaken in supposing that these commissions were theirs, and their associated promises still potent? Was Bishop Simpson deceived when, in the fall of 1858, while at death’s door, he mingled his voice with that of Bishop Bowman, William Taylor, and others, asking to be recovered, and there came a change so sudden that the physician called it “a miracle,” in that he attributed it to the promise and power of God? Years ago, at Northfield, Mass., I met that marvelous woman, Mrs. Whittemore, whose fame is in all the churches, and she told me how she had gone on her knees practically a blind woman and had come up from them seeing clearly. Was she mistaken in attributing the change to the Christ of this text, of whose ministry it was said, “The blind receive their sight”? To come nearer home, who is it that having known the long years of suffering on the part of Miss Hollister, of Minneapolis, and the sudden health that came while praying, but is led to join with the rulers in saying, “That indeed a notable miracle hath been done is manifest, and we cannot deny it”? God forbid that any should add, “but that it spread no further among the people, let us straightly threaten her that she speak no further in this name.” There are those who argue that if miracles were meant to characterise all ages they would not have been so common in the ministry of Jesus and so exceptional among His modern followers. Dr. Gordon tells us of certain South African rivers, which, instead of beginning as tiny brooks and flowing on deepening and widening as they go, burst out from prolific springs, and then become shallower and shallower as they go on, until they are lost in the wastes of sand. It cannot be forgotten that the stream of salvation which began with the ministry of our Lord was at its fullest in the first century, so far at least as conquest against greatest odds was concerned. Why, then, should we be surprised if the Son of God Himself, who had the Spirit without measure, should witness the miraculous more often than appears now on the fields made too nearly desert by the burning sun of secularism and the devastating winds of scepticism? And yet, the failure of present-day believers to appropriate the promises of God no more discredits the Divine purpose in making them than did the discomfiture of the disciples, praying in vain for the relief of the epileptic, prove that Christ had put into His commission to the twelve words which were mischievous and misleading. III. THE MIRACLE’S PURPOSE. “This beginning of miracles did Jesus in Cana of Galilee, and manifested forth his glory. And his disciples believed on him.” It evidenced the deity of Jesus. You will remember that when He performed the miracle of the barley loaves and fishes the men who saw the miracle that Jesus did, said, “This is of a truth that prophet that should come into the world” (John 6:14). It was a natural reasoning. Jesus Himself appealed to the Jews, “If I do not the works of my Father believe me not. But if I do, though ye believe not me, believe the works, that ye may know and believe that the Father is in me and I in him” (John 10:37-38). To John the Baptist’s question, “Art thou he that should come?” Jesus answered and said unto them, “Go and shew John again those things which ye do hear and see, the blind receive their sight, the lame walk, the lepers are cleansed, and the deaf hear, the dead are raised up, and the poor have the Gospel preached to them” (Matthew 11:4-5). It expressed the sympathy of Jesus. It is the custom of all those who call the modern miracle into question to emphasise the fact that miracles attested the deity of Jesus and added authority or weight to His words, but the most of them are silent touching the fact that miracles were ever wrought for their own sake, that miracles were ever wrought because the sight of suffering or distress so appealed to the Son of God that He could no more withhold His beneficent power than He could restrain Himself from tender pity. The glory of Jesus Christ consisted not alone in exhibitions of His deity, but was equally manifested in’ the ebullitions of His humanity. At the grave of Lazarus He “wept.” No man need be surprised, therefore, when He cried to His friend, fallen under the fierce assault of the last enemy, “Come forth!” He who will may believe that that miracle was meant only to attest the divinity of Jesus, or add weight to His spoken words, but I am compelled to think that it was the cry of His human heart calling back to His arms His bosom friend, and causing the hearts of those beautiful sisters, Mary and Martha, to lose their sorrow and leap for joy. Victor Hugo makes Jean Valjean as watchful as the hunted ever are against possible detection on the part of his adversary, but when a driver’s wagon is mired, this same man crawls beneath it, and by his Herculean strength releases its wheels, and in the very process publishes his own name. Did Jean Valjean lift that wagon to exhibit his power? Never! but because his tender human heart could not “pass by on the other side,” seeing the distress of the stalled man. The Samaritan who ministered to the man on the way to Jericho, binding up his wounds, carrying him to an inn, paying his bills, providing against the future, did he do that that Samaria might have a good name, or that anybody might believe in him? Nay, verily, but because in his breast there beat the heart of a brother. And if I know the Christ at all, He healed sick men, opened the eyes of the blind, and raised the dead primarily because His heart was as humane as His character was Divine, His spirit as compassionate as His word was potent. Is it not written, “And Jesus went forth and saw a great multitude, and was moved with compassion toward them, and he healed their sick” (Matthew 14:14)? No wonder John wrote, “The Word was made flesh and dwelt among us. And we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace.” And that glory was never better manifested than in the miracles that Jesus wrought for the help, health and happiness of men. It is while studying this side of His character we realise that our “High Priest” can be “touched with the feeling of our infirmities” and are encouraged to “come boldly to the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy and find grace to help in time of need.” It attested the saving power of Jesus. To do that was to manifest forth His glory. “The Son of Man was come to seek and to save that which was lost,” to grant “remission of sins.” They called His name “Jesus” because He was to save His people from their sins. When He said to the paralytic, “Thy sins be forgiven thee,” they charged Him with blasphemy, saying, “Who can forgive sins but God?” “And Jesus, knowing their thoughts, said, Wherefore think ye evil in your hearts? For whether is easier to say Thy sins be forgiven thee, or to say, Arise, take up thy bed, and go unto thine house.” The Father which sent Him, therein bore witness to Him, “confirming the word with signs following” and proving the power to forgive sins by the fact that He could restore bodies. It is no wonder the sentence follows, “And his disciples believed on him.” God meant that men should be convinced through the senses, that they should accept what they had seen and heard. When John comes to write his first Epistle he lays claim to attention on the part of his readers by reason of the fact that he was speaking of the things which he had seen with his eyes, and heard with his ears, and handled of the Word of life. And if the miracle was potent for penitence and furnished the very basis of belief two thousand years ago, who doubts that the revival of the Word’s plain teaching concerning it, and the practice of claiming its promises, would compel men to cry out again as did Peter, “We are unclean,” and to seek His favour who is alike able to say “Arise, take up thy bed and walk,” or “Son, thy sins are forgiven thee.” Have we forgotten the remark which the many who resorted to Him beyond Jordan made? “John did no miracle, but all things that John spake of this man were true and they believed on him there” (John 10:41-42). Have we forgotten the result when He raised to life the widow’s son and delivered him to his mother? “There came a fear on all and they glorified God, saying, A great prophet is risen up among us, and God hath visited his people.” It is true that every great revival of the past has come in consequence of the recovery of some long lost truth. “The just shall live by faith,” bringing a revival in Luther’s time; the eternal sovereignty of God, adding weight to Calvin’s words; the personal responsibility for rejecting or accepting Jesus making effective the preaching of Wesley; the great commission giving power to Carey and his associates; the enduement of the Spirit—a second blessing, fitting for service— bringing great results in Finney’s day; the pre-millennial return of the Lord making Moody a flaming figure. Do we not recall how in the days of Josiah— the good king—the high priest when he searched through the house of the Lord found the book of the law given by Moses, and “Hilkiah answered and said to Shaphan the Scribe, I have found the book of the law in the house of the Lord. And Hilkiah delivered the book to Shaphan. And Shaphan carried the book to the king. . . . And it came to pass, when the king had heard the words of the law, that he rent his clothes,” and confessed “great is the wrath of the Lord that is poured out upon us, because our fathers have not kept the word of the Lord, to do after all that is written in this book. . . . Then the king sent and gathered together all the elders of Judah and Jerusalem. And the king went up into the house of the Lord and all the men of Judah, and the inhabitants of Jerusalem, and the priests, and the Levites and all the people, great and small, and he read in their ears all the words of the book of the covenant that was found in the house of the Lord. And the king stood in his place and made a covenant before the Lord, to walk after the Lord, and to keep his commandments and his testimonies, and his statutes, with all his heart, and with all his soul, to perform the words of the covenant which was written in this book. And he caused all that were present in Jerusalem and Benjamin to stand to it. And the inhabitants of Jerusalem did according to the covenant of God, the God of their fathers. And Josiah took away all the abominations out of all the countries that pertained to the children of Israel, and made all that were present in Israel to serve, even to serve the Lord their God. And all his days they departed not from following the Lord, the God of their fathers” (2 Chronicles 34:15-16; 2 Chronicles 34:18; 2 Chronicles 34:29-33). I am persuaded that the truth, which when recovered, shall empower an enfeebled church and cause “strawberry festivals to give place to the festivals of the saints,” and which will make men depend not so much upon the music in the gallery, or the eloquence in the pulpit, or the culture in the pew, as upon the power of God, and finance committees to look not to the latest fads in fair or festival, but to the Father who owns the cattle upon a thousand hills, and preachers to hope for successful meetings not from the coming of some famed brother, but rather from waiting in the upper room until they themselves have been baptised;—the truth, I say, that will accomplish this change, is in those plain texts which prove that God is present in His own world, and His arm is not shortened that He cannot save, nor His ear heavy that He cannot hear. When men see the lesser miracles, once performed by the Son of God, being repeated in answer to prayer, they will be encouraged to look for that greatest of all His marvels, the salvation of sinners from sin. It is no mere accident that Charles Spurgeon, who prayed for many people to see them made well, prayed again, and preached to see men saved in soul. It is no mere accident that George Mueller, who believed that God was present in His world and was working wonders, turned evangelist in the very last years of his life, and revivals were in his wake wherever he went. It is no mere chance that John Wesley, who when disabled with pain, fever, and cough, called on Jesus to restore him, that he might continue to speak, and found, as he himself said, “When I was praying my pain vanished away, my fever left me, my bodily strength returned,” was able to effectually call sinners to repentance, and pray successfully for their pardon. All over this country good preachers of the Gospel and noble souls in the pew are praying for a revival. In recent years plans for evangelism have been more extensive, expensive and emphatic than the church ever before knew; and right at the time when “the new century movement for evangelism” ought to be at its height, in the very season when the reapers should be gathering whereon we have sown, there come to us annual reports that strike the prophets of optimism into silence, and send the church flat on her face again to cry to God for help. But our cry will be like that of the prophets of Baal. Though it increase in agony, and we torture our souls as they cut their bodies, no fire will fall from heaven while we bow before the false gods of Naturalism, or worship at the superstitious shrines of Social Philosophy or Scientific Culture! Only by acknowledging God, by believing that what men have pronounced “impossible” is easy to Him, by seeing that whoever may pour on the extinguishing waters, He is yet able, and yet willing, and forever pledged, setting aside your so-called natural law, by His own right and power, to let the flames fall, can we hope for that conflagration which shall revive God’s people, overthrow the prophets that oppose them, and bring even the unbelieving in penitence before Him to acknowledge that “He is God.” ======================================================================== CHAPTER 10: 01.07. VII. THE MINISTRY OF CHRIST ======================================================================== VII THE MINISTRY OF CHRIST “ And Jesus went about all Galilee . . . preaching the gospel of the Kingdom . . . and his fame went throughout all Syria . . . and there followed him great multitudes of people from Galilee, and from Decapolis, and from Jerusalem, and from Judea, and from beyond Jordan.”—Matthew 4:23-25. ONE afternoon, riding with two of my aged deacons, they talked to me about some of the orators it had been their privilege to hear, Wendell Phillips, Horace Greeley, Elihu Burritt, Henry Ward Beecher, and others. What a privilege to have heard such men! No wonder the memory of it was fresh. But to have heard Jesus Christ, to have listened to Him who “spake as never man spake,” to have given attention to the oratory of the Nazarene,—who can understand that experience, who can imagine that privilege? After two thousand years, yea, after six thousand years of human history, He is the incomparable orator, the peerless preacher, the only perfect prophet of God. We invite your attention to Christ the Preacher. We want to speak on four phases of this subject. I. THE SPIRIT Of JESUS THE PREACHER. It was that of a commissioned man. It was that of one who never had, who never would, who never could question His divine call. After thirty years of silence He begins to speak, and in His very early ministry He gives His auditors to understand that He preaches because God appointed Him to that work, for in Luke 4:16 f. we read, “And he came to Nazareth where he had been brought up, and as his custom was, he went into the synagogue on the sabbath day, and stood up for to read. And there was delivered unto him the book of the prophet Esaias, and when he had opened the book, he found the place where it is written, The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor: he hath sent me to heal the brokenhearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and the recovery of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised, to preach the acceptable year of the Lord; and he closed the book, and he gave it again to the minister and sat down, and the eyes of all them that were in the synagogue were fastened upon him, and he began to say unto them, This day is this scripture fulfilled in your ears: and all bare him witness and wondered at the gracious words which proceeded out of his mouth.” The first essential to success in the Gospel ministry is a profound conviction that God has called one to preach. His spirit was that of a conscientious man. He said on one occasion, “I must preach the kingdom of God, for therefore am I sent.” You must have noted in the study of history that the world’s most eloquent men have been the world’s most conscientious men. Socrates’ philosophical convictions accounted for his fervour and oratory. Savonarola was heard by thousands because he so honestly believed what he said. Martin Luther moved all Europe when he became convinced of the truth. Wesley, Whitfield, Edwards were orators from conscience. The Puritan fathers who protested against the religion of the old world and the tyranny of England were peerless speakers, because they felt so deeply upon these subjects. Wendell Phillips, Abraham Lincoln, Henry Ward Beecher moved their auditors as they did because they saw in the slavery they denounced a Devil’s invention. No man can be truly eloquent until he is honest. The plainest man, the man ignorant of letters can hold the crowd if he speaks about a subject over which his heart is burdened. Some of you know the history of the Chinaman named Wang. His features rendered him almost hideous to look upon, but he became the most wonderful teacher and preacher of Hankow and Chung King, and when he died the native Christians said of him, “there was no difference between Wang and the Bible.” That was the secret of the eloquence of Jesus of Nazareth. His spirit was that of a confident man. He never intimated that He felt Himself unequal to any occasion. He knew His intellectual power, and so made no apologies when Nicodemus appealed to Him, And when the young lawyer came with his questions, He answered as if He were conscious of the fact that divine wisdom were with Him, and notwithstanding the subtility of scribe, and the insidious purpose of Pharisee, He was serene before their catch-questions. The intellectual supremacy of the Son of God has not been sufficiently insisted upon. There was no philosophy with which He was not familiar; no sophistry before which He feared to stand; no subject to which He hesitated to speak, and His confidence was not that of an inflated spirit, but that of the man who felt His sufficiency and was not deceived. It is told that Napoleon, in his best day, would lie down to sleep soundly where other generals would not, have dared close their eyes, because of confidence in his own ability and in that of his battalions. And it does seem to me that Jesus, the Preacher, put before His successors in office a good example at this point. If I am to speak for God, what have I to do with fearing the face of man? If my gospel is His gospel, what have I to fear from “the oppositions of science, falsely so-called”; the sophistries of unbelieving men, the scepticisms of the hour, or all of them combined? The preacher who does not believe with Paul, that “the gospel is the power of God unto salvation,” and cannot preach it in confidence that it will conquer, needs to sit at the feet of the Man of Nazareth and learn of Him, for His spirit was that of a confident man. II. THE STYLE OF JESUS, THE PREACHER. It is a fact, I suppose, that no preacher has ever made a profound impression upon the public mind without having peculiarities of style that in some measure accounted for his success; and there were elements that entered into the way that Jesus uttered His words that account for the statement of our text, “His fame went throughout all Syria.” He was energetic in preaching. The record gives abundant evidence of that fact. In Luke 4:28 we read, “And all they in the synagogue, when they heard these things were filled with wrath.” No tame speaker ever excites his auditors to any frenzy. The trouble with the style of many men is that it is not energetic enough to arouse the vilest sinner to opposition. When He ministered in Jerusalem, some of the Jews asked, “Is not this he whom they seek to kill; but lo, he speaketh boldly, and they say nothing unto him.” Indeed He did! In human language there are no such sweet sentences as dropped from the lips of the Son of God, “Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven; Blessed are they that mourn, for they shall be comforted; blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth,” etc. “Come unto me all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest.” But the man who supposes that Jesus was always using soft, sweet sentences is unacquainted with the New Testament record. When He spoke to His own disciples, to those who were trying their utmost to do right, He used such sentences. But when He spoke to the scribes and Pharisees, the high-headed, hypocritical pretenders of His time, His words cut like the surgeon’s lance, or the simitar of the Saracen. That accounts for the fact that some of the people who heard Him thought that He was Jeremiah, the sweet, soft-speaking prophet, while others said that He was Elijah, God’s Son of Thunder. None of us like to listen to the preacher who stirs us too deeply, who brings our faults before our faces, who convicts and condemns us. I cannot say I enjoy having my nose frostbitten and my ears nipped, and when that occurs, I complain against the cold; and yet I discover, after all, that the bitter season brings to me the most exuberant health. Long since we learned to listen with the greatest interest to the man whose words stung us deepest, because we knew that he was the man that could break our slumbers and bring us to the light of God’s day, and quicken our pulse to the healthiest point; and of all the preachers the world has seen, Jesus of Nazareth employed the style best suited to this desirable end. His style was dogmatic also. It could not be otherwise. He was no student feeling his way after the truth and always filled with fear that he had not found it. He was no reasoner who had to call into question every conclusion reached. He was no philosopher spinning out of His own inner consciousness untenable theories, as spiders weave their webs from their own bowels to have them swept away with the first breath or brush. In the Gospel of John (John 12:49-50) He tells us the source of His information. “I have not spoken of myself, but the Father who sent me, he gave me a commandment what I should say, and what I should speak, and I know that his commandment is life everlasting. Whatsoever I speak, therefore, even as the Father said unto me, so I speak.” The world is full of people that rail against dogmatic utterances and seem to think it an evidence of intellectual superiority, and of personal modesty for a man not to be quite certain of anything. Our so-called liberalism boasts itself at this point, and well it may, for in proportion as we depart from the Word of God, our conclusions are uncertain. But the true preacher has nothing to do with such conclusions. It is not his business to dabble with them. He is not set to originate truth, but to repeat it; not set to formulate theories, but to declare God’s revelation, and he who keeps to that has no occasion of apology, no occasion of hesitancy, no right to be uncertain, and of him the people have no right to complain any more than you have to complain of the messenger boy that brings to you a telegram the purport of which is not exactly what you like. He did not form it; he delivered it. It is all he has to do with it. He has no right to change it in one iota, e’en though he discover that it is not what you expect, or what you would like. It seems strange that people should not understand this fact, but the bitterest complaints that we have ever heard uttered against preaching have been lodged against the most Biblical statements, and oftentimes against the exact quotations from the Word. A man present in the Calvary Church, Chicago, listened to my reading of Matthew 3:8-9; of Mark 1:35 following of Acts 8:1-40; and Romans 6:4-5, and by the time I had finished these he was in a white heat, although I had not uttered a word of comment upon any passage; and to one of my deacons he declared he would never enter my church again, for he would not have any preacher dogmatising to him upon the subject of baptism. That is what they said to Jesus, but He only replied, “My Father gave this to me to say, and I will say it,.” And that is the only reply that any preacher needs to make. Dr. Lorimer, in his “Argument for Christianity,” affirms that “a preaching based upon God’s revelation cannot be anything else than positive.” His style was illustrative. Perhaps no preacher the world has ever heard used as many illustrations as the Son of Man. Pastor Stalker says of His sermons, “They were plentifully adorned with illustrations.” . . . “Christ illustrated truth so constantly that the common objects of the country in which He resided are seen more perfectly in His words than in all the historians of the time.” His speech was like a lecture with a magic lantern, scene after scene thrown upon the canvas. He made use of the cup, the platter, the lamp, the candle-stick, the millstones, the sewing, of the mother, of a new piece of cloth into an old garment; the putting of wine into old bottles. He pictured the hen gathering her chickens, the children playing in the streets. He painted the lilies of the field. He illustrated, by the crow picking up the seed, by the birds building their nests in the branches of the trees, by the doves, sparrows, dogs, and swine; by the fig tree, by the bramble-bush, by the south wind, by the red sky, by the vineyard and winepress, by the yellow grain, by the sheep and the shepherd. He told stories of the Pharisee and the Publican. He told stories of the Priest and Levite, and of the Samaritan, of Dives and Lazarus, of the unmerciful servant, of the robbers in the vineyard, of the prodigal son, of the wicked husbandman, of the marriage of the king’s son, of the ten virgins, of the talents, of the two debtors, the friend at midnight, the barren fig tree, the great supper, the lost sheep, the lost piece of money, the unjust steward, the unjust judge, the unprofitable servants, the pounds; and so we might go on! Years ago I was preaching in a Southeastern city. They were without a pastor, and at a dinner table some brethren were discussing certain men, and I spoke most warmly of Dr. D. A small fellow present, who thought himself some great one, said, “I don’t like Dr. D. He is not logical enough. He tells too many tales in the pulpit. I have heard him put eight or ten into a single sermon.” I have no doubt that the very circumstance of his copying his Master in that matter accounted for his standing later in the strongest pulpit of England and also of this land, and being reckoned as one of the best Gospel preachers of his day. The difficulty with the audiences of many men that stand in pulpits is not with the people, but with the dry-as-dust preaching to which they have been subjected until they at last have departed one by one and left the preacher, and the choir and forty of the faithful to hold Sunday night services alone. Charles Spurgeon, who was himself a good illustration of his claim, said to his students, “Illustrate your sermons. I have heard of a tailor who made a mighty fortune, and who, on his deathbed, called his tailor friends about him and said, ‘Before I go, let me give you the secret of my success. Always put a knot in your thread,’ ” and Spurgeon adds, “Some preachers put in the needle all right, but there is no knot in their thread, so it slips through and they have accomplished nothing. Brethren, what your people will best remember of the sermon preached will be the illustration.” In this matter Jesus is the Master, and no successor in office has so made heaven and earth, and all human history contribute by illustration to preaching. III. THE SUBSTANCE OF HIS SERMONS. If there were time we should like to speak to you in the third place on the substance of His sermons, and to show that it was serious. Read His sermons to see if it be not so. It was Scriptural! Read His sermons to see if it be not so. It related to salvation. Read His sermons and see if it be not so. But with this mere outline we pass to the more interesting point. IV. THE SUCCESS OF HIS MINISTRY. It varied with circumstances. There are those who think that the proper preacher will succeed anywhere, under any circumstances whatsoever; and if failure occurs, it must be the preacher’s fault. There were several occasions upon which the Son of God Himself failed or succeeded but measurably! At Nazareth He accomplished nothing, because the people knew Him, and met His wonderful words with the statement, “Is not this the Son of Joseph, and are not his brethren and sisters with us?” The world is full of folks who can never quite consent to unusual ability on the part of a boy with whose birth and breeding they are perfectly familiar. There is not one church in twenty that ever calls to its pastorate a man who is born of God within its sanctuary, and brought, by the Spirit, into its membership. The record is that “He could do no mighty works there because of their unbelief.” In John 6:1-71 we find Him failing at another point. He had taught the people the necessity of receiving Him as the one through whom they should be saved, and had said “the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit and they are life,” and immediately there was a scattering of His congregation, “and from that time many of His disciples went back and walked no more with Him,” and there were only the twelve left, and Jesus said, “Will ye also go away?” In Gadara, where He healed the man and some of the people lost their hogs in consequence, they insisted that He should depart out of that land. So let us learn once for all that it is not the business of any preacher to be popular, to hold every auditor that ever gives him attention, and to keep the good will of all his people. His first business is to declare the counsel of God, and his second business is to sweetly abide the consequence. Popularity is not the most difficult thing. I have no doubt Dr. S. enjoys it since he has turned dancing master. Dr. Robert F. Horton, an Englishman with higher critical tendencies, but one who wields a facile pen, says, “There is a clergyman here in a fashionable English watering place who lives to suit himself, and tells his people not to follow his practice, but to act upon his precepts instead. His conduct was notoriously out of harmony with the Gospel, and yet his church was always crowded with young men and women who were only too glad to find a doctrine which could reconcile a certain religious profession with an unmodified worldliness.” There is much of truth in what a socialist writer said, “It is through the sacrifice and failure of the individual that human emancipation has proceeded from the beginning. Our ability to divinely fail for right’s sake is the real measure of our faith. It is the victory of failure that overcometh the world.” And we are glad to say this, because there are some of our brethren who could not without being charged with self-defense. If our house were empty, if the people to whom we have preached had turned away, such utterances would appear to be in self-defense, but in the presence of a company which for twenty-seven years has not waned but waxed, we say that the Son of God was not a success under all circumstances, and that when the preacher fails the fault may be his, and it may be also the people’s to whom he has ministered. There are churches in which no mortal man could succeed unless the Spirit of God should come upon them to regenerate, and we cheerfully attribute the blessing that has been upon the people in our sanctuary as much, yea much more to the spiritual atmosphere that the godly people of the membership have created, than to the pastor’s work. And if the Son of God failed or succeeded according to whether the people refused Him or exercised faith, the preacher of this present hour ought to pass through exactly similar experiences, and will if he is faithful to his commission. But the failure of Jesus Christ was not His common experience. There were those who denied that He had any success, and yet our text tells us that the multitudes followed Him. His words moved the people of all Syria, and of all Galilee, and of Decapolis, and of Jerusalem, and of Judea, and beyond the Jordan. It is amusing to see how certainly some people will insist that the preacher they do not particularly fancy is a failure. In Chicago, years ago, I talked with a man about the one Baptist pastor of that city who was winning more souls, planting more missions, raising more money for the spread of the Gospel, and addressing larger congregations than was any man in the entire city, and he said, “Oh, he is a failure!” God send us more such, for we believe that in some measure with him, as we know it was in full measure with the Man of Nazareth, “God was satisfied”! And therein is the preacher’s success. God said of Him, “This is my beloved Son in whom I am well pleased,” and of His work Christ Himself said, reviewing it all as He was compelled to do while hanging on the cross, “It is finished. Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit.” I am asking myself, How may I be the best preacher to you? I am inquiring by what means I may lead you, my people, into the richest experience and up to the noblest heights. I am wondering how I can make this First Baptist Church the effective institution God would have it become, and I am compelled to believe the only secret of success for me, the only hope of good for you, the only prospect of power for the First Baptist Church, the only promise of victory for time to come, is in looking unto Jesus and learning of Him; is by putting that peerless Preacher before our eyes to see Him; is by opening our hearts to listen to Him, that our souls may catch His Spirit and our success become the sort that characterised His efforts. I am so constituted nervously that I cannot sit under any speaker for a few days without imitating his tones, his gestures. It matters little whether I admire him or not, these things make their impression and it takes weeks for me to shake them off. I remember the struggle to get rid of Mr. Varley’s style after he had once visited our church, and for three or four weeks after the departure of dear Dr. Munhall I was chagrined by the consciousness of imitating him and feared that somebody would speak about it. Mrs. Riley did, and was answered, “Dear, don’t say a thing about it. I know it, but I cannot help it at the present. It will take me some time to shake it off.” But there is one Preacher at whose feet I want to sit, whose spirit I want to study, into whose style I want to come, so that the success which characterised His ministry and pleased His God may come to pass in some little measure in my ministry, and that man is Jesus of Nazareth, the peerless Preacher of the centuries. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 11: 01.08. VIII. THE MISSION OF CHRIST ======================================================================== VIII. THE MISSION OF CHRIST “And whosoever of you will be the chiefest, shall be servant of all. For even the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many.”—Mark 10:44-45. THIS text is born out of one of the trying experiences of Christ’s life. James and John, the sons of Zebedee, were apostles in great favour with their Lord. Together with Peter they shared in the very secrets of His life, and were privileged to pass with Him into some realms whither the other nine could not come. But just as Jesus was destined to suffer denial on the part of Peter, and that in the hour when a courageous witness would have been most comforting, so James and John uncovered the weakness of their characters at the very moment when any proper consideration of their Master’s interests would have shown them the shame of their words. Jesus had just finished saying, “Behold, we go up to Jerusalem; and the Son of man shall be delivered unto the chief priests, and unto the scribes; and they shall condemn him to death, and shall deliver him to the Gentiles; And they shall mock him, and shall spit upon him, and shall scourge him, and shall kill him. And after three days he shall rise again.” Ah, what a chance that prediction presented for the apostles to press about the Master, and pour out their hearts’ love in some fitting expression; assure Him of their sympathy; pledge Him their presence to the last; and promise Him that, when these things were finished, and He had been taken from them, they would heroically, bravely, and faithfully carry on what He had begun to do and to teach. But alas, for the weakness of men, for the inconsiderateness of even Christians; yea, for the utter selfishness of chosen apostles:—“There came near unto him James and John, the sons of Zebedee, saying unto him, Master, we would that thou shouldest do for us whatsoever we shall ask of thee. And he said unto them, What would ye that I should do for you? And they said unto him, Grant unto us that we may sit, one on thy right hand, and one on thy left hand, in thy glory. But Jesus said unto them, Ye know not what ye ask. Are ye able to drink the cup that I drink? or to be baptised with the baptism that I am baptised with? And they said unto him, We are able. And Jesus said unto them, The cup that I drink ye shall drink; and with the baptism that I am baptised withal shall ye be baptised; but to sit on my right hand or on my left hand, is not mine to give; but it is for them for whom it hath been prepared. And when the ten heard it, they began to be moved with indignation concerning James and John, and Jesus said, Ye know that they that are accounted to rule over the Gentiles lord it over them, and their great ones exercise authority over them. . . . But, the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many.” Such is the ability of the Son of man to turn our selfish motives, our most unwarranted words, to our advantage; to take them, and by their very perverseness, teach the contrasting truth. And oh, what truths are in this text. Let us set them in order before us and then see His own application. Three things here about the Son of Man. I. HIS SERVICE WAS VOLUNTARY. “The Son of Man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and give his life a ransom for many.” He came of His own accord. “The Son of man came.” I know that there are passages of Scripture which speak of Him as being sent of the Father,— for instance His words, “He that receiveth me; receiveth him that sent me”; “I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the House of Israel”; in the parable of the king—“He sent unto them his son”; etc. But there is no warrant for the idea that some seem to have, that Christ came because the Father commanded it and compelled it. In the first place Christ is the Father’s equal, and not His inferior, to be commanded. “He thought it not robbery to be equal with God.” In the next place He and His Father are so essentially one that no purpose could be indulged by one of them and not enjoyed by the other. Then, the Word is absolutely convincing touching the fact that Christ’s visit to earth was as voluntary on His part as was His commission from the Father clear. It is commonly conceded that the words of the Psalmist are Messianic, “Then said I, Lo, I come: in the volume of the book it is written of me, I delight to do thy will, O my God: yea, thy law is within my heart” (Psalms 40:7-8). That is why Paul, in his epistle to Titus, could speak of our Saviour, Jesus Christ, as one who gave Himself for us, “He gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity, and purify unto Himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works.” If one turn back to the Old Testament he will find that the deliverers of the people had to be persuaded to undertake their tasks—Moses argued with God against his commission to Egypt; Joshua needed to hear the command of the Lord and be encouraged by the fairest and fullest promises; while Jonah must be sent to the bottom of the deep ere he is ready to execute his commission to Nineveh. It is not unusual for men to require coercion in acceptance of duty. But, as Spurgeon says, “The King of kings and Lord of lords, the Mighty God, the Everlasting Father, the Prince of Peace, voluntarily, cheerfully descended that He might dwell among the sons of men, share their sorrows, and bear their sins, and yield Himself up a sacrifice on their behalf.” “He made himself of no reputation and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men. And, being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.” His compassion was His commission. He loved us and gave Himself for us. Ah, that is the motive that makes the most sacrificial service voluntary. I often think of what Victor Hugo wrote into his “Les Miserables.” He was speaking of the good Bishop Myriel, and he says, “Sometimes in the midst of his reading, no matter what book he might have in his hands, he would suddenly fall into deep meditation, and when it was over, would write a few lines on whatever page was open before him.” And the author tells us that this note was found upon the margin of one volume—“Oh, Thou who art! Ecclesiastes names thee the Almighty; Maccabees names thee Creator; the Epistle to the Ephesians names thee Liberty; Baruch names thee Immensity; the Psalms name thee Wisdom and Truth; John names thee Light; the book of Kings names thee Lord; Exodus calls thee Providence; Leviticus, Holiness; Esdras, Justice; Creation calls thee God; man names thee Father; but Solomon names thee Compassion, and that is the most beautiful of all thy names.” It is a name that is warranted by the Word and by His work. “For the Lord is gracious, full of compassion.” “His compassion fails not”; “To the Lord our God belongeth mercy and forgiveness, though we have rebelled against him.” II. HIS SERVICE WAS UNSELFISH. “He came not to be ministered unto but to minister.” He sought no idle sovereignty. There is a vast deal of theology to the effect that Christ was in the world for His own glory, a theology which has no foundation in philosophy or Scripture. Christ’s coming to the world was not that He might be enthroned here, and come a prince with power, for men to wait upon Him, and serve Him. One needs to change Henry van Dyke’s words but a little to make them speak the very truth here suggested:—Christ’s thought of Kingship was not such as is to be found in the luxurious and licentious palace of the Shah of Persia; but, rather, as in the hospitals of Naples, where the king of Italy bends to help and comfort the poorest of his subjects. He doffed the crown and accepted the cross; He quit the throne for the theatre of suffering and sorrow and the place of heeded assistance. “He courted no self-aggrandisement. “Not to be ministered unto but to minister.” There was nothing for Him to gain, so far as position or any place of honour was concerned. As one has said—“What could the Infinite God gain? Splendour! Behold the stars; far away they glitter beyond all mortal count. “Servants! Does He want servants? Behold angels in their squadrons; twenty thousand, even thousands of angels are the chariots of the Almighty. “Honour! Nay: the trump of fame forever proclaims Him King of kings and Lord of lords. Who can add to the lustre of that diadem that makes sun and moon grow pale by comparison? Who can add to the riches or the wealth of Him who hath all things at His disposal?” “Not to be ministered unto” did He come. Have you not His own words, “If I honour myself my honour is nothing”? And have you not read the writings of the apostle, “Christ glorifieth not himself to be made an high priest. Though he were a son, yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered.” The Scriptures are authority for the claim that He kept nothing from the altar of sacrifice. The Revised Version shows that Paul wrote to the Philippians concerning Christ, “He being in the form of God counted it not a prize to be on an equality with God, but emptied himself, taking the form of a servant.” And the very term “emptied” is indicative of the fact that He poured out the last particle of a precious life. His service was unselfish! III. HIS SERVICE WAS SUBSTITUTIONARY. “And gave his life a ransom for many.” He gave His life. Who can tell what that means? Far back in the Old Testament and among the Levitical laws was the one, “Ye shall eat no manner of blood, whether it be of fowl or of beast, in any of your dwellings. Whatsoever soul it be that eateth any manner of blood, even that soul shall be cut off from his people.” And later, the reason for this restriction is assigned, “For the life of the flesh is in the blood.” But when the Roman soldiers thrust the sword into the heart of Christ and there followed its receding point water and blood, that was not the whole of the life Jesus laid down. The beasts can lay down life after that manner, and they do it when the veins and arteries are open and the life is let out. Nor was it merely the life of a common man that was contributed on this cross. There is a difference in men. All life is precious, but all human lives are not equally valuable. When, some years ago, the strike was on in the city of Chicago, a friend of mine, serving in the Illinois Infantry, heard his captain say in defense of the command to shoot, which he had given, and which resulted in the death of a number of labourers, “Oh, it doesn’t matter so much. They are cattle anyhow. One well-bred life is worth a dozen of theirs.” That remark struck revolt into the heart of my Christian brother—as it ought. And yet no two lives are equal. There are poor lives and there are rich lives—in the best use of those terms; lives associated with an abused body, a starved intellect, and a withered soul. Poor indeed! Existences they are. And then there are lives rich in all that makes for nobility—rich in thought, rich in experience, rich in noble ambitions, rich in resource, rich in service. And to give such a life is a gift indeed. Who shall estimate even the finite life, much less the Infinite? Who shall tell us the value of the highest human life, much less speak the meaning of the life Divine? Henry van Dyke, speaking of redemption, says of Christ, “Through loneliness and sorrow He descended into our grave. If it were merely a human being who had done this for us it would be much, but since it was a Divine Being it was infinitely more precious. Think of the Almighty One becoming weak, the glorious One suffering shame, the Holy One dwelling amongst sinners. The very Son of God pouring out His blood for us upon the accursed tree! It is this Divinity in the sacrifice that gives power to reconcile and bind our heart to God.” “Herein is love, not that we loved God, but that he loved us, and sent his Son to be the propitiation for our sins” (1 John 4:10). He gave His life a ransom. In his first epistle to Timothy, Paul confirms our text by saying, “There is one God and one mediator between God and man, the man Christ Jesus, who gave himself a ransom for all to be testified in due time” The word ransom refers always to a price paid to procure again liberty—-lost by debt; to recover the slave, who has sold himself, to his freedom. And, strange to say, the Jews in olden time seemed to have had an idea that they had sold themselves to the Evil One, and must be bought back unto that God who rightly owned them. Consequently there was a redemption price. For every Israelitish soul, the tithe drachma must be paid by the rich and the poor alike, ere one could be enrolled as the redeemed of the Lord. The day has come when men are trying to disavow the whole theory of redemption at the cost of Christ’s life. Wm. Fredrick, in his volume “Three Prophetic Days,” after having written most logically and Scripturally for 190 pages, strangely turns aside to say, “The Bible nowhere teaches that Jesus was our substitute, and was crucified for us, or in our stead. It does teach that He is our example, and the way to eternal life.” And again, “Jesus does not bear any of our sins and griefs, but He does what is infinitely better for us, in that He teaches us to bear our own sins and griefs. He can no more bear our sins than the mother can walk for her child.” “To the law and to the testimony, if they speak not according to this Word there is no light in them.” The text says, “He gave his life a ransom for many.” Long ago, Isaiah, by the pen of inspiration, fully elaborated the atoning work of Christ, and, contrary to the claim of these modern writers, Isaiah says:—“Surely he hath borne our griefs (or, as the Hebrew says, our sicknesses) and carried our sorrows. He was wounded for our transgressions; he was bruised for our iniquities; and the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed. All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the Lord hath laid on him the iniquity of us all.” Paul writes to the Romans in these words, speaking of Jesus—“He was delivered up for our trespasses”; and again that “He died for the ungodly.” And yet again he says, “I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins, according to the Scripture.” Peter, in his first epistle, says, “Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the righteous for the unrighteous, that he might bring us to God” (1 Peter 3:18). And this strong expression is employed by the same apostle: “who his own self bare our sins in his body upon the tree, that we, having died unto sins, might live unto righteousness; by whose stripes ye were healed.” It will be a dark day for the Church of God when it departs from the teachings of the Word on this essential truth. “ He gave his life a ransom.” In his sermon on “Conqueror from Edom,” Phillips Brooks says—“My friends, far be it from me to read all the deep mystery that is in this picture. Only this I know is the burden and soul of it all, this truth, that sin is a horrible, strong, positive thing, and that not even Divinity grapples with him and subdues him except in strife and pain. What pain may mean to the Infinite and Divine, what difficulty may mean to Omnipotence, I cannot tell. Only I know that all that they could mean, they mean here. This symbol of the blood bears this great truth, which has been the power of salvation to millions of hearts, and which must make this conqueror the Saviour of our hearts, too, the truth that only in self-sacrifice and suffering could even God conquer sin. “Sin is never so dreadful as when we see the Saviour with that blood upon His garments. And the Saviour Himself is never so dear, never wins so utter and so tender a love, as when we see what it has cost Him to save us. Out of that love, born of His holy suffering, comes the new impulse after a holy life; and so, when we stand at last purified by the power of grateful obedience, binding our holiness and escape from our sin close to our Lord’s struggle with sin for us, it shall be said of us that we have ‘washed our robes and made them white the blood of the Lamb.’” Major Whittle tells a story of a company of bushwhackers in Missouri under arrest during the days of the Civil War. They were sentenced to be shot. A boy touched the arm of the commander and said, “Wouldn’t you allow me to take the place of the man standing yonder? He has a family and will be greatly missed.” When the officer gave his permission the boy stepped forward, and the command to shoot was given. The boy fell dead, and in that land today is a grave inscribed, “Sacred to the memory of Willie Lear. He took my place.” If I understand the Book in any measure that is the meaning of this text, “He gave his life a ransom.” My life and yours were redeemed at such a price! The Son of God stood in the sinner’s place, and in His own body and spirit endured the judgment due sinners; and having paid the redemption price, demands as His eternal right your pardon and mine; your freedom and mine; your life and mine! I am glad for the concluding word: He redeemed a multitude. A dying monk is said to have put aside extreme unction, all the ceremonies of the church, and lifting his eyes to heaven he said, “Tua vulnera Jesu”—“Thy wounds, my Jesus! Thy wounds, my Jesus!” It is blessed to know that that monk was only one of a multitude whose hope of life rests in the same crucified one. If one would like to know how many, turn to the book of Revelation, the seventh chapter, and read, “After this, I beheld and lo, a great multitude which no man can number, out of every nation, and of all tribes and peoples and tongues, standing before the throne and before the Lamb, arrayed in white robes, and palms in their hands; and they cry unto our God which sitteth on the throne, and unto the Lamb.” There is a glorious passage in the epistle to the Romans which reads:—“Therefore, as through one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin; and so death passed unto all men, for that all sinned:—for until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law. Nevertheless death reigned from Adam until Moses, even over them that had not sinned, after the likeness of Adam’s transgression, who is a figure of him that was to come. But not as the trespass, so also is the free gift. For if by the trespass of the one the many died, much more did the grace of God, and the gift by the grace of the one man, Jesus Christ, abound unto the many” (Romans 5:12-15 R. V.). IV. HIS SERVICE WAS AN ENSAMPLE. Jesus distinctly tells us so in the text of this chapter, “Whosoever would be first among you shall be servant of all.” And then illustrates, “for the Son of man came not to be ministered unto but to minister.” Christ’s conduct, then, is choice, not coercion. The grace of giving sums up God’s whole sentiment of service. “Every man according as he purposeth in his heart so let him give. Not grudgingly or of necessity, for God loveth a cheerful giver.” And again, “The Lord spake unto Moses, saying. Speak unto the Children of Israel that they bring an offering. And every one that giveth it willingly with his heart, they shall take my offering.” There is not a service we are to render to God, but this same spirit of willing response is to characterise it. What would God have you do? Teach in the Sunday School; take a class in a mission; go on the street and give out invitations to the Gospel services; go sit down beside some convicted or indifferent soul and speak the words of truth and life; give of your means for the advance of the Gospel; give your children for work on the foreign field; give yourself for whatsoever He saith. It must be done willingly, cheerfully. Aye, even gladly, or else it can hardly be acceptable unto God. Years since, at a Christian Alliance camp meeting at Round Lake, Saratoga, there was present a Miss Louise Shepherd. Her home was in New York, and the season before she had been a society belle in this city of Saratoga. But the grace of God had come into her heart and she had professed conversion. One morning the hour was given to a study of foreign mission work. An earnest address had been delivered by Dr. Simpson, and an appeal was made for money to send the light to men and women who sit in darkness. And to the surprise of many, Miss Shepherd walked forward, stripped the diamonds from her fingers, and laid them down on the table, saying, “I purpose to give these now to carry forward the work among the heathen. I regard them as useless ornaments, but I know their value to the cause of Christ and I gladly contribute them.” There were thousands of dollars that immediately followed. But you will agree that if Miss Shepherd had made that sacrifice with tears and agony, and because God had commanded it, the people would not have been stirred, and such a spirit take possession of them that day when they saw this young woman twenty-two years of age, illustrating Moses’ words, “All things come of thee, and of thine own have we given thee.” When, some time ago, Miss Edna G. Terry returned to China for her second term of service as a missionary, in a degraded section, she said:— “If we went for money there is not enough money to induce us to live amid the depressing influences of this heathen darkness, But when we consider that it is for Christ’s sake, and feel the necessity, we willingly, aye, gladly undertake the service for Him.” And this same Miss Terry was one of the young women who, in the Boxer trouble, just as willingly laid down her life. Oh, beloved, living as so many of us this day in a beautiful land, swept about on every side with surpassing scenery, surrounded with luxuries, and enjoying the fruitage of the first civilisation of the world, and the favour of the very God of the heaven, Himself, can we not be Christians in the best sense of the word, “ministers and servants of the Lord Jesus Christ”? Christ’s supremacy comes through service. Christ never said to these two ambitious apostles that there was no higher place in His Kingdom. But He did say that the highest place was appointed for the man who rendered the best service, who could endure the most suffering, who could make the greatest sacrifice. The longer I live the more profoundly I am impressed with the fact that these opportunities for service are varied and all suited to the conditions of every man who has in him the spirit of service. One doesn’t have to be a preacher in order to prove the truth that service to Christ makes for the highest character. He does not necessarily need to express himself in words; gifts and deeds are as eloquent as language, and sometimes even more effective, and the humblest service and the smallest gifts may be the means of one’s exaltation to the highest honour. In 1877 Mr. Moody was holding meetings in Boston. Following his usual custom, he went to a fine-looking man in the front seat and asked, “Are you a Christian?” “Yes,” replied the man. “Then go over and talk to that woman.” “Oh, I can’t do that. I never tried to speak to an inquirer.” “But she is a woman just ready to come to Christ, and you said you were a Christian, didn’t you?” “Yes, but I can’t do it.” Mr. Moody left him and went to the woman at once. The babe in her arms was so restless that she could pay but little attention to his words. And that fine fellow, seeing the situation, came down where they were, and, smiling at the baby, and taking a piece of candy from his pocket, carried her off to another part of the room and for an hour kept her while Mr. Moody was able to lead the woman to Christ. And speaking of it afterward Moody said, “I think an especial blessing rested upon that service, for not only was the mother converted, but her little girl became a Christian at the age of twelve, through her mother’s influence, and proved to be one of the most aggressive workers.” Beloved, service for God has the way of success. It is not mine to say how you shall render it. The Spirit Himself alone can prescribe that, but I tell you the chief places in heaven are reserved for the man who can be baptised with the baptism Christ was baptised with—the baptism of service; the baptism of suffering, of sacrifice. All Christ’s sacrifice is substitutionary. We never put aside a single pleasure for Christ’s sake; we never crucify a single lust of the flesh in His name; we never make a sacrifice of time; but we are illustrating the doctrine of substitution—we are doing this that another might be blessed by it— whether we know it or not. There are plenty of people who are willing to tell you that you are foolish to be giving of your means and your money to help other people out of their poverty; to bring benighted souls out of sin, and consequent suffering. They think that charity begins at home. And one is to consider himself first, last and all the time. And yet the sanest judgment of the civilised world is to the fact that a man who makes sacrifices for another’s sake is the one living an ennobling life. I never think of Gov. Briggs, of Massachusetts, without remembering how perfectly he illustrated the great principle of this chapter’s text. You know that for years he went with a cravat on his neck, but no collar. People attributed it to eccentricity, and he permitted it and was silent. After his death the secret came out. One day, talking with a drunkard, he was trying to persuade him to let the drink alone, and among other things said, “You know there are many things we do that are not necessary.” “Yes,” said the man, “for instance, it is not necessary for you to wear that collar.” Governor Briggs immediately replied, “If you will agree never to take another drink, I will agree never to wear a collar.” “I will do it,” said the inebriate. And so one man was saved. And when the Governor died they laid him in the coffin without a collar, and one man, looking down into his face, was strengthened in his resolve to be true to his pledge, as he remembered what another had done for his sake. And it is in the power of many of us to part with comforts, that men under the power of sin may be brought to Christ. “No radiant pearl which crested fortune wears, No gem that twinkling hangs from beauty’s ears Shines with such lustre as the tear that flows Down manly virtue’s cheek for others’ woes.” ======================================================================== CHAPTER 12: 01.09. IX. THE ATONEMENT OF CHRIST ======================================================================== IX THE ATONEMENT OF CHRIST “There is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus; who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time.”— 1 Timothy 2:5-6. THE Apostle’s assertion is warranted by His Master’s words in Matthew 20:28 and Mark 10:45. This was a part of the faith once for all delivered. The age in which we are living is ripe with scepticism. Young people are in danger of believing a sneer at the faith of the fathers a sign of smartness. As Dr. Lorimer once said: “Young men, very young men have been known to talk flightily of the world’s dispensing with religion; of this age having outgrown its authority; and of themselves having attained to such enlightenment of mind and of liberty of thought as to be quite delivered from subjection to its influence and teaching.” Some older men who take their knowledge at second-hand, hearing of the work of higher critics, have concluded that Jehoiakim’s pen-knife has at last prevailed, and the Word of God is cut to pieces, and the pillars of Christianity are removed, and the whole system is ready to collapse. At the time of the Imperial Diet at Augsburg in 1630, when the teachings of the Bible seemed in imminent danger of being overthrown and Chancellor Bruck was filled with alarm, lest that should be accomplished, Martin Luther, the master of logic, wrote to him: “I have lately seen a miracle. As I looked out of the window at the stars and God’s whole heavenly dome, I nowhere saw any pillars on which the Master had placed such a dome, but the heavens fell not, and the dome still stands fast. Now, there are some who seek such pillars, and would like very much to fed and grasp them, but because they cannot do it, they tremble and writhe, as if the heavens would certainly fall for no other reason than that they do not see or grasp the pillars”; but I would sooner expect to see the heavens fall than one jot or tittle of all the Word fail. The Psalmist said: “The counsel of the Lord standeth forever,” and Paul wrote to Timothy touching Hymenaeus and Philetus, who had erred from the truth, and had overthrown the faith of some, “Nevertheless, the foundation of God standeth sure. Having this seal the Lord knoweth them that are his.” The test to which Isaiah subjected the philosophers of his time is the true test for all philosophy and all scepticism. “To the law and to the testimony, if they speak not according to this Word it is because there is no light in them.” Some time since there was talk of a heresy trial for a noted minister because he was supposed to have departed from the Presbyterian standards. In our judgment, it amounts to very little whether a man stand by the standards of his church or not except those standards be supported by the Scripture. It makes little difference whether one speak the shibboleth of his sires or not, unless those sires rightly studied and understood the Word of God. But so far as the faith of the fathers is in accordance with the law and the prophets, it is the faith to which we must hold fast or else go utterly adrift. Now, in the light of our text, let us consider some of the great subjects involved in the same, and included by our subject. I. SIN. “The law and the prophets” spoke to this subject, and the fathers formulated their opinions. The law and the prophets agreed: “The soul that sinneth, it shall die.” The apostle said: “If we say we have no sin we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us; if we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins.” Both Moses and Ezekiel agreed in their definition of sin,—“the transgression of the law.” “Of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil,” the law said, “thou shalt not eat of it, for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die,” and in his first epistle, John wrote: “Whosoever committeth sin, transgresseth also the law, for sin is the transgression of the law.” For hundreds of years now, the Christian fathers have not so much interpreted Moses, Ezekiel and John as they have accepted their statement. This modern fad of a faith which says in so many words, “God or goodness could never make men capable of sin; that it is the opposite of good, that is, evil which seems to make men capable of wrong, and that evil is but an illusion, and error had no real basis except belief,” is as far removed from the Law, the Prophets, and the Gospel as it is from the faith of the Christian fathers, and instead of calling it “Christian Science,” it ought to be named “Unchristian Scepticism.” Again, the fathers reckoned sin a voluntary iniquity. Dr. van Dyke, in the face of much argument to the contrary, says: “It can only be regarded as a ‘ deliberate choice.’ ” And again, “nothing that Jesus said or did led His disciples to minimise or disregard sin, to cover it up with flowers, to transform it into a mere defect or mistake, to deny its reality and explain it away, to say, ‘the evil is nought, is null, is silence, implying sound.’ The whole effect of His mission, whatever form it may have taken, whatever His teachings may have been—its undeniable effect was to intensify the consciousness of sin as a fatal thing.” It ought not to be difficult for one who loves the Scripture to decide between that definition of sin which declares “it is nothing, silence, implying sound,” and the teaching of our fathers concerning the same sad experience. Saint John says: “This is the condemnation, that light is come into the world and men loved darkness rather than light because their deeds were evil.” Paul declares: “All have sinned and come short of the glory of God,” and again, “Death passed upon all men for that all have sinned.” James adds: “For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all,” while John of Patmos writes, “If we say we have not sinned, we make God a liar and his truth is not in us.” When one listens to that modern argument, to the effect that Satan does not exist, and that sin is only an illusion, and the only power in this world is God, he is strongly reminded of the discussion that occurred at Northampton between Dr. Emmons, who boldly taught that God was the author of sin, and some Christian men of that place who emphatically denied it. When the discussion had waxed hot, one of Emmons’ opponents said: “Recently, while travelling in West England, I had a vision, and saw a great black cloud out of which gradually developed a figure much like a man, only hideous in his mien. He told me he was the Devil, and when I inquired where he was going he flew into a great rage and said that every mean crime, great or small, committed in England was laid to his charge, and that he was starting to Northampton, America, where such transactions were charged to the Almighty instead.” “Let no man say, when he is tempted, I am tempted of God, for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man.” The fathers also believed that sin was deadly and destructive. We have seen that “the law and the prophets” were responsible for this faith of our fathers, the first teaching, “the soul that sinneth, it shall die,” and the second saying, “sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death.” The great Dr. Guthrie, speaking of this universal derangement of humankind, said: “Look now at sin. Pluck off that painted mask, and turn upon her face the lamp of God’s Word. We start—it reveals a death’s head. I stay not to quote texts descriptive of sin. It is a debt, a burden, a thief, a sickness, a leprosy, a plague, a poison, a serpent, a sting: everything that man hates it is; a load of curses, and calamities beneath whose crushing, most intolerant pressure the whole creation groaneth. Name me the evil that springs not from this root—the crime that I may not lay at its door. Who is the hoary sexton that digs man a grave? Who is that painted temptress that steals his virtue? Who is this sorcerer that first deceives, and then damns his soul? Sin. Who with icy breath, blights the fair blossoms of youth? Who breaks the hearts of parents? Who brings old men’s gray hairs with sorrow to the grave? Sin. Who, by a more hideous metamorphosis than Ovid fancied, changes gentle children into vipers, tender mothers into monsters, and their fathers into murderers of their own innocents? Sin. Who casts the apple of discord on household hearths? Who lights the torch of war, and bears it blazing over trembling lands? Who, by divisions in the church, rends Christ’s seamless robe? Sin. Who hurls reason from her lofty throne, and impels sinners, mad as Gadarene swine, down the precipice, into a lake of fire? Sin.” But it is only saddening to listen to the Scripture teachings concerning sin, unless one searches farther into the Word to find out a second subject in which the Apostles, Prophets, and the fathers were interested, namely,— II. ATONEMENT. I hardly need to define this term. Break the word up and it reveals at once its own meaning, “at-one-ment.” It is simply the process of reuniting those who, rightfully belonging together, have wrongfully separated. Years ago a young man came to me for a private conversation. Between sobs he managed to tell me how drunkenness on his part had resulted in his wife’s separating herself from him. And as the great waves of sorrow surged over his sobered spirit, he said: “I shall die unless we can be brought together again.” I managed, a day or two later, to get them together in my study, and, through counsel and prayer, effect a permanent reconciliation. By my counsels I made atonement for them. But, when in Hall Caine’s “Bondman,” Michael Sunlocks and his beautiful Greeba had been separated, and he was living under the condemnation of civil law, and labouring under false impressions and going blind at the same time, there was but one way in which to effect atonement for them, and that way Jason the Red took when he turned the key that unlocked Michael’s cell, and led him out to be again with Greeba, and to have his misunderstandings corrected, his eyes opened, and to come into a perfect knowledge of her unspeakable and unfaltering affection; and turned the key again to lock himself in until the time of sunrise when Jorgen Jorgenson’s soldiers should come and pour lead into his body, and leave him a lifeless corpse on the sunlit hill. He effected an atonement. And it was this method of atonement our Master employed for the sake of sinful men. He brought them back to God by standing in their stead, and dying, so that they living could enjoy the Infinite’s love. The old faith was that “man’s need made such atonement necessary.” The law declared it, the prophet affirmed it, the fathers believed it. We listened one day to a talk on Prohibition by Oliver Stewart, in which he made tender and beautiful reference to the death of Nathan Hale. He told how, when he walked down Broadway, New York City, near the City Hall, he came in view of the bronze statue. The arms are pinioned, the feet are tied with cords, the shirt collar is thrown open, the handsome face is marred with the shadows of the sufferings that preceded death. And, at first thought, you might imagine that the statue was the statue of a criminal, but when you read the inscription on the pedestal, “I regret that I have but one life to give for my country,” and underneath that splendid sentence the name, “Nathan Hale,” it leads your thought back into the history of that Revolutionary time, and back to the day when the American forces found it necessary to send one of their men in disguise into the English camp. And when the commanders said, “The man who undertakes this may be detected, and if detected, will certainly be executed by the enemy,” Nathan Hale stood forth and said: “For my country’s sake, I will go.” He knew that it might mean death. But he also knew that it might effect deliverance and bring victory. Do you remember what Caiaphas the High Priest said, when the chief priests and the Pharisees were arguing concerning Jesus, “If we let him alone, all men will believe on him, and the Romans shall come and take away both our place and our nation.” Caiaphas said unto them, “Ye know nothing at all, nor consider that it is expedient that one man should die for the people, and that the whole nation perish not; and this spake he not of himself; but being high priest that year, he prophesied that Jesus should die for that nation, and not for that nation only, but that also he should gather together in one the children of God that were scattered abroad.” The law and the prophets are agreed that in His grace God provided atonement. The fathers have been faithless concerning some doctrines of Scripture and confused regarding others, but never once have Christian men misunderstood John 3:16,—“God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son that whosoever believeth on him should not perish but have everlasting life.” It does seem that a proper understanding of that single Scripture ought to suffice to bring men to the keenest sense of sin and also to show them the way of salvation out of it. Dr. Chapman tells us, that just over the line that separates Indiana from Ohio and on the Ohio side there lived an old woman who was the terror of all who had seen or heard of her. She was finally arrested, and sent to the Columbus Penitentiary. She broke every law of the institution, and they exhausted every form of punishment upon her. Times without number they had sent her to the dungeon, and for weeks at a time she lived on bread and water. Finally an old Quaker lady from the same part of the state asked permission to see her. The prisoner was led into her presence with the chains upon her hands and feet. With downcast eyes she sat before the messenger of Christ. The old Quaker lady simply said: “My sister.” The old woman cursed her, and then she said: “I love you.” With another oath, she said: “No one loves me.” But she came still nearer, and taking the sin-stained face in both her hands, she lifted it up and said: “I love you, and Christ loved you.” She kissed her face first upon one cheek and then upon the other, and she broke the woman’s heart. Her tears began to flow like rain. She rose to her feet. They took the chains off, and until the day of her death they were never put on again, but like an angel of mercy she went up and down the corridors of the prison, ministering to the wants of others. It is the goodness of God that leadeth thee to repentance, and the man who is not brought to reconciliation with the Father by the sight of His suffering, dying Son, whose agony on the cross was the only adequate expression of God’s pity and love for the sinner, is a lost man, and his heart is already turned to stone. Finally, the fathers held that Christ’s atonement was the one and only way of salvation; and the law and the Gospel agreed together in confirming the fathers in this faith. It was Moses who wrote of the seed of woman, and of the serpent, “it shall bruise thy head,” and it was the great apostle who said: “God commendeth his love toward us in that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us. Much more then being justified by his blood we shall be saved from wrath through him, for if when we were enemies we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life; and not only so, but we also joy in God through our Lord Jesus Christ by whom we have received the atonement” (Romans 5:8-11). Dr. F. B. Meyer tells the story taken from Adelaide Procter, of a young girl who had lived centuries ago in a convent in France. She was sweet and pure and admired of all who saw her. Her work was to care for the altar of Mary, and answer the portal. Wars swept over France, and brought the soldiers to the convent, and one that was wounded was given into her care. When he recovered he persuaded her to leave the convent. She went with him to Paris, where she lost her good name and everything that made life worth living. Years passed, and she came back to die within the sound of the convent bell. She fell fainting upon the steps, and there came to find her, not such a one as she had been, but such a one as she would have been, a pure and noble matron. She picked her up and carried her into the convent, and placed her on her bed. All the years that she had been gone, she had faithfully done her work, and none knew of her disgrace; so she glided back into her old place, and until the day of her death no one ever knew of her sin. All this Christ has done for me. I like to think that I was chosen in Him before the foundation of the world, that He had me in mind when He suffered and died, that He has made up before God for all that I have failed to do, and when I stand before Him, it will be as if I never had sinned in all my life. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 13: 01.10. X. CHRIST’S RESURRECTION AND ASCENSION ======================================================================== X. CHRIST’S RESURRECTION AND ASCENSION “He is risen, as he said.”—Matthew 28:6. “While they beheld, he was taken up; and a cloud received him out of their sight.”—Acts 1:9. THE question proposed for this discussion involves the very citadel of Christianity. The apostle Paul reasons, with a logic that cannot be gainsaid, that “if Christ be not risen from the dead our faith is vain.” The dead have perished and the living are without hope. But the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead is in itself not sufficient. The ascension is absolutely necessary to the completion of His claims, and the exercise of His powers. Our question, then, couples two words which are complementary. The resurrection without the ascension would prove nothing more than a reanimation; a Lazarus and not a Lord. An ascension without a resurrection would demonstrate nothing better than translation—a prophet Elijah perhaps; but not the Son of God with whom is all power. It was a marvelous thing that Jesus was begotten by the Holy Ghost. But even that would not demonstrate, above discussion, His essential deity. Adam was the generation of the Spirit and not that of a human father. The working of miracles on the part of Jesus is not a sufficient evidence of His claim. Miracles occurred under the hands of Moses, and Elijah, and others, who were nothing more than men of marked faith in the Almighty. The one who sets up a claim as the very Christ of God must not only bring us certain evidence of Divine appointment, such as mortal men have enjoyed, but a chain of evidences stretching from His first appearance in the world clear on to His second coming, and every link thereof must bear the imprint of the superhuman. It will be conceded, I think, that the central argument, of all the arguments presented in the name of Christ, rests with this question, Did He rise from the dead and ascend into heaven? In answer to that I bring you first of all these texts from the Scripture, and in elaboration of these suggest some thoughts for solemn reflection. I. ARGUMENT FOR THE RESURRECTION. It is not begging the question to appeal to the Bible for arguments of the resurrection. Even infidels concede that the Old Testament Scriptures were in the hands of men when Jesus of Nazareth walked the earth; and very few intellectually honest men question that the New Testament was born within a century after His reputed ascension. If, therefore, they are not trustworthy, scepticism has already enjoyed two thousand years of opportunity to disprove their statements. If, at the end of this time, the statements stand and gather to themselves an ever-increasing company who consent that they have made good their right to a place in the catalog of historical facts, why should we not appeal to them in discussing the very subject that gave them their existence? According to the Scriptures there are many lines of argument for the resurrection. Let me make mention of four. The argument of the Empty Tomb. “In the end of the sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week, came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see the sepulchre. And, behold, there was a great earthquake: for the angel of the Lord descended from heaven, and came and rolled back the stone from the door, and sat upon it. His countenance was like lightning, and his raiment white as snow; and for fear of him the keepers did shake, and became as dead men. And the angel answered and said unto the women, Fear not ye: for I know that ye seek Jesus, which was crucified. He is not here: for he is risen, as he said. Come, see the place where the Lord lay” (Matthew 28:1-6). That statement is either true or false. If false, why did not the enemies of Christ expose the deception? That He had enemies not even infidels question. That He was hunted to the cross, no one now disputes. That He was buried is as certain as the execution of Roman law. What became of the body? This was the very thing His enemies had feared. They had reminded Pilate of His prophecy, “After three days I will rise again,” and had asked that the sepulchre be made sure until the third day. And Pilate had said unto them, “Ye have a watch: go your way, make it as sure as ye can.” “So they went, and made the sepulchre sure, sealing the stone, and setting a watch.” But when the resurrection was accomplished “some of the watch came unto the city, and shewed unto the chief priests all the things that were done. And when they were assembled with the elders, and had taken counsel, they gave large money unto the soldiers, saying, “Say ye, his disciples came by night, and stole him away while we slept. And if this come to the governor’s ears, we will persuade him, and secure you. So they took the money, and did as they were taught, and this saying is commonly reported among the Jews until this day.” It is a singular thing, yet a certain one, that people can never manufacture a falsehood the various parts of which can hang together. And when they asked the watchers to testify that they had slept on duty until Jesus had been stolen away from His grave, they confessed to a fault, of which Roman watchers dare not be guilty on the very peril of life itself; and yet, from that hour no better explanation of an empty tomb has been furnished the world. Within a century after these reputed events the whole Roman empire was permeated by the doctrines of Christ, and men by the thousands and tens of thousands believed on Him as risen from the dead. The argument that entered into the conviction of the first century was that of the empty tomb. There is the argument of the word of the angel to the women. When you get together a company of spiritualists, everyone expecting to see a spook, it is fairly easy to fool the crowd. Turn the lights low, secure a ventriloquist, or even a good actor, and your purpose is accomplished. But when the sceptical are present, the performance is commonly balked. They are not looking for spooks and they do not see them. These sceptics are valuable in uncovering fakes and pretenders. But Christ convinced sceptics in every instance. The women who went to His tomb were sceptics. As much as they loved Him they never expected to see Him alive again. They went not for the purpose of anointing a risen Christ; but to embalm a dead One. They would not believe in the resurrection even on the authority of the angels’ testimony; and that, notwithstanding the fact that the two angels were in shining garments and they felt compelled to bow down their faces to the earth in their very presence. They were not even convinced when the angels reminded them of the prophecy, “The Son of man must be delivered unto the hands of sinful men, and be crucified, and the third day rise again,” though it is distinctly declared that “they remembered his words.” Not until they had seen Him, not until they had heard His voice, were they convinced. The apostles were sceptics everyone. It is reported that the words of these women “seemed to them as idle tales, and they believed them not.” Peter and John went on a tour of personal investigation; and when they beheld “the linen clothes laid by themselves” they were not convinced, but “departed wondering.” The two on the way to Emmaus were sceptics when Christ fell in with them, for He had to argue with them from the Scriptures that He was to be “condemned to die and be crucified and raised again the third day.” Thomas would not even take the testimony of his brethren, and insisted that nothing short of his own senses would cause him to believe. Paul was so unbelieving that he persecuted every man who named the name of Christ. And yet, one after another, they were compelled to capitulate and accept as true what the angels had said to the women, “He is risen.” The word of an angel might, in itself, seem to have some authority, but when that word is attended by such evidences as to convince man after man against his expectation, utterly setting aside his scepticism, who will question its weight? Again, there is the argument of the sight and statements of sane men. Paul splendidly sums this up in his epistle to the Corinthians. He says, “He was seen of Cephas, then of the twelve: after that, he was seen of above five hundred brethren at once; of whom the greater part remain until this present, but some are fallen asleep. After that, he was seen of James; then of all the apostles. And last of all he was seen of me also, as one born out of due time” (1 Corinthians 15:5-8). When Mahomet expired it is reported Omar rushed from the tent, sword in hand, and declared that he would hew down any one who should dare to say that the prophet was no more. But the apostles of Jesus Christ behaved quite to the contrary. They consented that their Hero was dead; they mourned Him as gone forever; they could not believe what their ears heard concerning His resurrection, and it required the indisputable evidence of His personal presence to convince them. When five hundred sane men and women stand up to testify to one thing, who would dispute them without the most overwhelming evidence to the contrary; and where is the evidence that opposed their testimony? The speech of Christ Himself also must be considered. Matthew does not finish his report of this evidence until he has recorded the words of Jesus, for the eleven disciples went away into Galilee, unto the place where He had appointed them, and Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, “All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth. Go ye, therefore, and teach all nations, baptising them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world.” From that time until His ascension, He talked with them again and again. Every touch was a new revelation of Himself. Every word an additional proof. It was the forty days between the resurrection and the ascension that confirmed the faith of His followers, and made them ready to do, to dare, to die! Dr. Lorimer, in his “Argument for Christianity,” remarks upon a time when, more than a hundred years ago, a little Baptist Association deliberately resolved on “the reduction of heathenism, and determined on sending out an army of occupation. The stupendous audaciousness of the purpose excited the ridicule of not a few worldly-wise individuals, and indeed was without a parallel except in the earliest aggressions of the church. And what rendered the movement more entertaining to the scoffers, and what imparted to it more and more of the spirit of desperate rashness and presumption, was the fact that the enterprise was entrusted to the generalship of a ‘consecrated cobbler’ who himself constituted nearly all that there was of the expedition.” But bold as was that endeavour, and marvelous as was the faith that attended it, bolder still was the faith of those poor, plain fishermen in their march upon the heathenism of the world, and infinitely greater was the confidence which they reposed in the Man of Nazareth! What is the explanation? For forty days, He (who had been crucified before their eyes and buried in the tomb of one who had befriended Him, against which a stone had been sealed, and about which a watch had been set,) walked with them, and inspired them, and finally ascended into the heavens before their very eyes! Aye, that was the foundation of their faith. That is the explanation of their courage. That is the secret of their willingness to be martyrs! That the rationale of the rise of the Church. II. CERTAINTY OR THE ASCENSION. To this subject of the ascension the Scriptures also speak. They had prophesied it should come. What is the meaning of the Psalmist’s language, “Thou wilt not suffer thy Holy One to see corruption”? What is the suggestion except that He was to rise from the dead? And what is the suggestion of the same Psalmist, “ Thou hast ascended on high; thou hast led captivity captive: thou hast received gifts”? Christ Himself had said to the officials who had been sent to take Him to the chief priests, “Yet a little while am I with you, and then I go unto him that sent me. Ye shall seek me, and shall not find me: and where I am, thither ye cannot come” (John 7:22-34). To Mary He replied, also, “I ascend to my Father and to your Father; and to my God and to your God.” And it came to pass even as He had said. People believe far more easily in the natural than in the supernatural. They accept the scientific with a relish they know not for the spiritual. When I was a student at college the transit of Venus occurred. At Aiken, South Carolina, some German scientists drew their meridian circle on a stone and took their observations from it, and then enjoined upon the people to leave that stone in place so that in the year 2004, when the transit of Venus should again occur, observations might be taken from the same meridian circle. Dr. Pierson, speaking of this, said, “Thrones will have been emptied of occupant after occupant; empires will have been lost; and changes, whose number and gravity are too great now to be conceived, will have taken place. Nay, human history may have come to its great last crisis, and the millennial march may have begun. Yet, punctually to the moment, without delay or failure, these students of nature will expect Venus to make her transit across the sun.” They will hardly be disappointed. God’s order in nature is such that the great grandchildren of those scientists will see their forebears’ predictions fulfilled. But God’s order, in the prophecy, is equally dependable. , He ascended, even as He had said. What a demonstration this of His deity! John had testified after this manner, “That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon and our hands have handled of the Word of Life, declare we unto you.” It included not only a risen Saviour, but an ascended One. They had seen Him go! His ascension had been their most conclusive proof of His deity. A mortal man might be resuscitated from what seemed to be death; but when resurrection from the grave and ascension are combined who can stand against the argument for Deity? Charles Spurgeon says, “Whenever I read modern thoughts—and you cannot read long without coming across them—I am glad to get back to facts. And here are some facts. Jesus Christ did rise from the dead—that is true! He did also ascend into heaven, for His disciples saw Him.” Is not Spurgeon’s faith weir grounded? If the testimony of men can be taken touching anything that ever occurred in this world to what fact can you bring better witnesses; witnesses more surely convinced against their expectation; witnesses more perfectly in accord with what they say; witnesses more ready to seal their testimony with their blood, than were the five hundred who saw Him at once, and who perhaps waited upon one of the hills of Judea and watched until the very moment when the cloud received Him out of their sight? No wonder Charles Wesley wrote: “Hail the day that sees Him rise, To His throne above the skies; Christ, the Lamb, for sinners given, Enters now the highest heaven. There for Him high triumph waits; Lift your heads, eternal gates! He hath conquered death and sin, Take the King of Glory in.” In that ascension is the explanation of the Church. This great institution must be accounted for. The early apostles did not hesitate to rest their claims to the conquest of the world on the fact of the ascension. They had their commission from an ascended Lord. Their very gifts were imparted by the same ascended Lord. And, in all their services, they looked to heaven “whence also he Was to come” again. Christians of the present hour, who have never seen Him, yet know He is in the heavens; this with them is a matter of both history and inner consciousness. Someone tells the story of a lad, standing in the street holding tightly to a string which stretched away into the very clouds. A man passing asked him what he was doing. “Flying my kite!” The man, looking into the heavens, said, “How do you know that you have a kite, I see nothing?” “Neither do I,” he replied, “but I can feel it pull.” That is the universal testimony of Christ’s men and women. The great Magnet of our souls is the Son of God. Our drawings heavenward are not natural but supernatural. They are not born of the flesh, but begotten by the Son Himself, who hath ascended on high. “He is gone! and we remain In this world of sin and pain: In the void which He has left, On this earth of Him bereft, We have still His work to do, We can still His path pursue; We can follow Him below, And His bright example show.” III. THE SIGNIFICANCE OF BOTH. What of it if Christ be raised and ascended up on high? “Much every way.” Prominent among other things let me mention three. He, then, is in the Priest’s place. When they stoned Stephen unto his death the record says, “He looked up steadfastly into heaven and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing on the right hand of God.” When they banished John to the Isle of Patmos he turned from the barren wastes about him to the bright world beyond, and oh, what a vision was vouchsafed! “In the midst of the seven golden candlesticks was one like unto the Son of man, clothed with a garment down to the foot, and girt about the paps with a golden girdle.” What is the significance? Priesthood! That is the girdle the great high priest wore. Hence the significance of the apostle’s words, “Seeing, then, that we have a great high priest, that is passed into the heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold fast our profession. For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin. Let us, therefore, come boldly unto the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy, and find grace to help in time of need.” He, then, has the power to put away sin. The old priest could do that only by Divine appointment. In fact he did not do it at all, but God did it, sending the message of remission through him. But this ascended One dares to say, “Thy sins be forgiven thee.” On what ground? Because He was the very God! Sins had been committed against Him; He, therefore, could remit them, and He only. David said, “Against thee and thee only have I sinned.” The person who can forgive you is the one against whom you have sinned, and not another. How gracious to know that the One against whom we have heaped our sins is the Son of God who has ascended to the very heavens and with Him is not only the power, but the spirit of forgiveness. Truly, as Maclaren says, “In Christ’s exaltation to the throne a new hope dawns on humanity. . . . This Christ Jesus has tasted death for every man, and so, brethren, sad, and mad, and had as men may be, the Conquering Captive at the right hand of God’s throne is the measure of the pattern of what the worst of us may hope to be.” Why? Because He hath power to put away sin. Again, if He be the High Priest He proffers a free salvation. What is the message from the right hand of the throne? “I will—Be thou clean.” What is the message? “Thy sins which are many are all forgiven thee.” What is the message? “If ye confess your sins I am faithful and true to forgive you your sins and to cleanse you from all unrighteousness.” Oh, marvel of marvels, that men should neglect this, and run greedily after lesser good! When, several years ago, Dr. Lorenz came to this country he was brought by a millionaire of Chicago to put into place the dislocated hip of Lolita Armour. The attempt was supposed to be successful. The newspapers made a great ado about the marvelous man and his accomplishments. People went wild; his way was thronged, cripples were carried into the light of his presence, and in a southern city strong policemen wept as they were compelled to say to mothers, bearing their crippled darlings in their arms, “He cannot give you attention,” and so turn them away. Such is the enthusiasm for lesser good. I grant you it is a great thing to have a whole body. I do not blame those mothers for running after Lorenz, a mortal man of very limited power. No, I do not blame them. But I say that men and women will rise up to blame themselves when they wake at last to discover that they have gone through the world crippled in soul, and treating with indifference the claims of that Christ in whom is “all power in heaven and in earth” and who is as willing and able to make them every one every whit whole. Have you ever looked upon that masterpiece, “Christ—the Consoler,” painted by Friedrich Dietrich? One strange feature about it is that he presents Christ as among the European peasants of the present day, His personality and garb contrasting with their rude figures and homely faces. Before Him are the lame, the halt, the blind, the aged, the wounded soldiers, and the toilers, and as He passes His very presence seems to heal and enhearten, and the text for it is, “The whole multitude sought to touch Him, for there went virtue out of Him and healed them all.” Oh, will you cry the praises of a Lorenz, who at best could only give one temporal aid and possibly relieve a bodily deformity, and pass with indifference the risen and ascended Christ who, by His word, can put away sin, restore the soul to the image in which it was created, and send it forth in health and happiness for time and eternity? ======================================================================== CHAPTER 14: 01.11. XI. CHRIST, THE INCOMPARABLE ======================================================================== XI CHRIST, THE INCOMPARABLE “Have this mind in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: who, existing in the form of God, counted not the being on an equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied Himself, taking the form of a servant, being made in the likeness of men; and being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, becoming obedient even unto death, yea, the death of the cross. Wherefore also God highly exalted him, and gave unto him the name which is above every name; that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven and things on earth and things under the earth, and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father”—Php 2:5-11. THE phrase, “Christ, The Incomparable,” is extremely popular at present. It has come to be a custom with all liberal theologians, and almost a habit with outright infidels to pay tribute to the character of Jesus. Unitarians, and even atheists, have well nigh exceeded evangelicals in their laudation of the Man from Nazareth; and the present-day higher critics all say “Amen,” when we pay tribute to Him. Renan said, “In Jesus is condensed all that is good and exalted in all nature.” Thomas Paine remarked, “The morality that He preached has not been exceeded by any.” Disraeli, the Jew, confessed, “Jesus has conquered Europe and phanged its name to Christendom.” Rousseau remarked, “If the life and death of Socrates were those of a martyr, the life and death of Jesus were those of a God.” When, therefore, a conservative talks either about the accomplishments or character of Jesus, he will find no liberal theologian, and but few infidels, to oppose him. It is only when we come to the question of His deity, involving as it does, atonement for sin through sacrifice and cleansing by the shedding of blood, that they revolt and reveal their real estimate of Christ’s claims. It is a marvelous thing that any man could so live and die as to compel even His enemies to pay tribute to Him; as to force from the lips of the most malignant opponents masterly encomiums, and yet Christ has accomplished that. When Paul penned this epistle to the Philippians this name was not so popular, and yet, by inspiration he proclaimed its coming power, and, for the moment, turned prophet, and the civilised of all later centuries consent to the circumstance that he spake truthfully. There are three things he says about this Incomparable One. First of all, God gave to Him AN INCOMPARABLE NAME. “Have this mind in you, which was also in Christ Jesus; who, existing in the form of God, counted not the being on an equality with God a things to be grasped, but emptied himself, taking the form of a servant, being made in the likeness of a man, he humbled himself, becoming obedient even unto death, yea, the death of the cross. Wherefore also God highly exalted him, and gave unto him the name which is above every name.” Did you ever ask yourself the question why God gave to Him “a name that was above every name”? In how many respects is that an incomparable name? I shall not attempt to answer that in full; but a few suggestions: He was incomparable in mental ability. Every apocryphal gospel tells remarkable things about the youth of Jesus. The true Gospels mention little of His youth, but when it is touched, His mental abilities are uncovered. At twelve years of age His parents at the feast, in leaving, miss Him. After they had gone a great way toward home they made the discovery that the lad was not with them, and went back, “and it came to pass, after three days they found Him in the temple, sitting in the midst of the teachers, both hearing them, and asking them questions; and all that heard him were amazed at his understanding and his answers.” Again in the Word of God we are told that “He grew,” not only “in stature,” but “in wisdom,” and that is easily accepted as a fact. The moment His public ministry begins men stand astounded, and even His enemies consent “never man spake like this man.” On one occasion, when He had finished with the delivery of certain parables, He came into His own country, and taught them in their synagogue, “insomuch that they were astonished, and said, Whence hath this man this wisdom, and these mighty works? Is not this the carpenter’s son? Is not his mother called Mary? And his brethren James, and Joseph, and Simon and Judas? And his sisters, are they not all with us? Whence, then, hath this man all these things?” He was a product of no school and yet His speech has given rise to the great schools of the centuries. He was the author of no code of laws, yet His declarations determine the righteousness of all law. He engaged in no philosophical speculations, yet all philosophers are compelled to sit at His feet. He formulated no distinct system of theology, yet the only theology worthy the attention of men, and calculated to do aught for a sinning, dying world, is that which is in the strictest keeping with His wonderful words. Truly, as Dr. Robert F. Horton, of the Old World, once said, “Churches and theologies”—(he might have added, schools)—“have failed us and confused us, but when Christ speaks from the mount all is clear.” He was incomparable in mighty accomplishments. Dwight Hillis never said a truer thing, than when he wrote, “Our wonder grows apace when we remember that He wrote no book, no poem, no drama, no philosophy; invented no tool or instrument; fashioned no law or institution; discovered, no medicine or remedy; outlined no philosophy of mind or body; contributed nothing to geology or astronomy, but stood at the end of His brief career, doomed and deserted, solitary and silent, utterly helpless, fronting a shameless trial and a pitiless execution. In that hour none so poor as to do Him reverence. And yet could some magician have touched men’s eyes they would have seen that no power in heaven and no force on earth for majesty and productiveness could equal or match this crowned sufferer whose name was to be ‘Wonderful.’ The ages have come and gone; let us hasten to confess that the carpenter’s Son hath lifted the gates of empires off their hinges and turned the stream of the centuries out of their channels. His spirit hath leavened all literature; He has made laws just, governments humane, manners gentle, even cold marble warm; He refined art by new and divine themes, shaped those cathedrals called ‘frozen prayers,’ led scientists to dedicate their books and discoveries to Him, and so glorified an instrument of torture as that the very queen among beautiful women seeks to enhance her loveliness by hanging His cross about her neck, while new inventions and institutions seem but letters in His storied speech. Today His birthday, alone, is celebrated by all the nations. All peoples and tribes claim Him. None hath arisen to dispute His throne. Plato divides honours with Aristotle; Bacon walks arm in arm with Newton; Napoleon does not monopolise the admiration of soldiers. In poetry, music and art, and practical life, universal supremacy is unknown. But Jesus Christ is so opulent in His gifts, so transcendent in His words and works, so unique in His life and death, that He receives universal honours. His name eclipses other names as the noonday sun obliterates by very excess of light.” He was incomparable in essential character. In all the days of my life I have never fallen upon an attack of the character of Christ until recently. Rousseau admitted it, Paine paid it tribute, Hume honoured it, and our countryman, Ingersoll, declared, “For the man Jesus, I have infinite respect.” Even erratic minds denying the deity of Christ and deriding the claims of the Church, never had the hardihood to decry His character. It remained for a modern, to attempt that defamation and exercise that blasphemy. The world for many centuries, so far as it has read the Scriptures at all, has been well nigh a unit in its exalted judgment of Jesus. In fact, the picture given in the four Gospels is just exactly such as to confirm the basis for Dr. Carnegie Simpson’s claim that no such character could ever have been conceived apart from its actual existence. He quotes J. S. Mill as having declared, “It is no use to say that Christ, as exhibited in the Gospels, is not historical, and that we know not how much of what is admirable has been superadded by the traditions of His followers.” It is no use, because, as Mills adds, “who among His disciples, or their proselytes—he might have added, ‘who among the poets and dramatists of all the world’—is capable of inventing the sayings ascribed to Jesus or of imagining such a life and character. The only way in the world to account for their work is to suppose that they spoke in utter veracity. They had a model and they copied it faithfully, and because the model was faultless, the reproduction, being faithful, was perfect, also.” This character of Jesus becomes the more resplendent when one remembers the day in which He was born and lived. As another says, “It was an hour when tyranny and crime had gone upon a carnival. It seemed as if despots had determined to leave on earth not one of the gifted children of song or eloquence or philosophy or morals. Julius Caesar, the writer and ruler, had been murdered. Cicero, the orator, had been assassinated. Herod, who ruled over Christ’s city, murdered his two brothers, his wife, Mariamne, slew the children of Bethlehem, and, dying, ordered his nobles to be executed, that mourning for the king might be widespread. Yet in such an era, when He saw a thousand wrongs to be achieved, Christ maintained His serenity, and reigned victorious over life’s troubles.” And one might add, He provided a solution for every sorrow and a salvation from every sin. But the apostle speaks in the next place of A CONQUERING NAME. “He gave unto him the name which is above every name; that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven and things on earth and things under the earth.” His triumph in heaven is complete. Two schools of interpreters—yea, twenty—have attempted the book of Revelation. But the two great schools are Praeterists and Futurists. The first of these says that most of the things prophesied in the book of the Revelation have passed already, and the second insist, “Not so; they are all yet to come.” Neither is right! Some of them have transpired and others of them are yet to come to pass. Two thousand years ago John, on the Isle of Patmos, was vouchsafed a vision of the open heaven. He saw Jesus in His glorified estate. From Him he received messages for the seven churches in Asia; and then the Faithful and True Witness turned his attention to “the things that must shortly come to pass,” and among them He granted to him a vision of the war in heaven. Michael is shown going forth to war with the dragon, “and the dragon warred and his angels; and they prevailed not, neither was their place found any more in heaven. And the great dragon was cast down, the old serpent, he that is called the Devil and Satan, the deceiver of the whole world; he was cast down to the earth, and his angels were cast down with him. And I heard a great voice in heaven, saying, Now is come the salvation, and the power, and the kingdom of our God, and the authority of his Christ; for the accuser of our brethren is cast down, who accuseth them before our God day and night. And they overcame him because of the blood of the Lamb, and because of the word of their testimony; and they loved not their life even unto death. Therefore rejoice, O heavens, and ye that dwell in them. Woe for the earth and for the sea; because the devil is gone down unto you, having great wrath, knowing that he hath but a short time” (Revelation 12:7-12). Where Christ is, this arch fiend cannot reign; he cannot even remain. He will accomplish the supremacy of the earth. “At the name of Jesus every knee shall bow, of things in heaven and things on earth.” O, how that declaration from Paul’s pen fits into the teaching of the Old Testament worthies. The Psalmist, catching a vision of the ages to come, wrote, “He shall have dominion also from sea to sea, and from the River unto the ends of the earth. They that dwell in the wilderness shall bow before him; and his enemies shall lick the dust. The kings of Tarshish and of the isles shall render tribute; the kings of Sheba and Seba shall offer gifts. Yea, all kings shall fall down before him; all nations shall serve him. For he will deliver the needy when he crieth, and the poor, that hath no helper” (Psalms 72:8-12). Daniel, also, you remember, says, “I saw in the night-visions, and, behold, there came with the clouds of heaven one like unto a son of man, and he came even to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him. And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all the peoples, nations and languages should serve him; his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed” (Daniel 7:13-14). This is that of which Paul wrote in 1 Corinthians 15:24-25 : “Then cometh the end, when he shall deliver up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall have abolished all rule and all authority and power. For he must reign, till he hath put all his enemies under his feet.” All civilisation moves to one end, whether it knows it or not; and all Christianisation has one object, whether it be thoroughly apprehended or not, and that is the conquest of Christ in this world, and the making of a new earth in which dwelleth righteousness. And it shall be done! I know the discouragements of the days intervening, and I know how the delays trouble even the dutiful; I know how apostacy from the faith filches the place of genuine prophets, and yet I know, on the authority of God’s word-prophecies many of which have already found a fulfilment, that we move directly to this conquering by the Christ! God shall bring it to pass. Someone has said, “The century plant takes a hundred years for root and trunk, but blossoms in a night. And nations also shall in a day be born into culture and character.” And this same writer says, “And every knee shall bow to the name that is above every name, and He whom God has lifted to the world’s throne shall, in turn, lift the world to a place beside Him.” His victory over hell will be acknowledged. There are some people who seem to think that hell is to beat heaven out; that the final victory is to be with the underworld. The text says not so; “At the name of Jesus every knee shall bow, of things in heaven and things on earth and things under the earth” Satan and his entire host perfectly understand that fact. That is the interpretation of the speech of the devils at the sight of Jesus. They trembled when He drew nigh; begged Him not to “torment them before their time” as if it were perfectly understood that there was a time fixed when every devil that had ever allied himself with the great Dragon, and become a permanent rebel against the Divine government, should cringe at the mention of His conquering name, and perish at the touch of His conquering hand. We wonder, after all, if that is not the interpretation of Revelation 22:10, where Satan and his associates and all followers, find their fate in the pit, hurled thence by the mighty Son of God. O, His is a conquering Name! At its mention everything of earth is destined to bow: at its mention every saint and angel of heaven will fall on the face; and at its mention every devil in hell will fear and flee away; then “every tongue shall confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.” His, then, is A GOD-GLORIFYING NAME. It would be an interesting study indeed to run the Scriptures through and see in what respects the name of Jesus glorifies God. O, there are so many! Let me pick out three of these and with that finish. In that name men are saved from sin. “They shall call his name Jesus, for he shall save his people from their sins.” There is an eighth wonder in the world today, namely, the denial of sin. The denial of the most evident, the most potent fact of human experience and sane observation. SIN! It is the author of all sorrows; it is the occasion of all doom; it is the call for hell. The whole world is under its blight. Not one noble man has escaped; not one fair woman has gone unscathed. Discouragement, disease, despair and death lie over the earth like a pall. The name that is an antidote for sin, the man that can withdraw its sting, is the name, the man, that brings to God the greatest glory. In the Orient one of the commonest effects of sin is blindness, consequently when the disciples of Jesus saw one totally stricken by this affliction they addressed their Master, “Rabbi, who sinned, this man or his parents that he should be born blind? Jesus answered, Neither did this man sin, nor his parents”; the effect upon him is more remote, it has come down a greater distance, “but that the words of God should be made manifest in him.” And Christ healed him, and God was glorified. The blind are everywhere, the lame lie at many gates, the fevered are found under a multitude of roofs; the deaf, the dumb, the demonised; O, how sin has made havoc with the sons of men. Dwight Hillis spake truly when he said, “Long ago Cleopatra, the daughter of supreme beauty, received sin into her arms, counting it to be an angel of light; but alas, sin broke her heart, and soon she welcomed the viper to her bosom. It was sin that wrecked the palace of David. It was sin that ruined the genius of Solomon. It was sin that stole the purple from Alcibiades and gave him instead the robe of a slave. It was sin that, serpent like, crawled over the threshold of the palaces in Rome and left its slime within court and banqueting hall. Sin was the flame which blackened the Doge’s palace in Venice. Sin was the earthquake that toppled down the treasure houses of Florence. For Bacon sin was a worm in the bud of his heart. For Byron sin was moth and rust that consumed the mind. For Shelley sin was a vandal that grew by the rapine and murder of the poet’s soul.” We are told that when the work of excavation was done in the streets, and the houses of Pompeii were uncovered, and the gathered treasures in bronze and marble and ivories and mosaics were assembled, in a museum, not one single object of them all had escaped some form of injury. The Winged Mercury had arms and legs broken, the white forehead of Venus had a black stain, every precious tablet was cracked to a greater or less degree, while the very rolls found in Pliny’s tomb had their writings too faded to read. This is only a type of the havoc sin has made in men. The chief products of the divine artist, broken, scarred, stained, are we all. And Christ came to replace, to heal, to cleanse, to save. No wonder the men who looked upon Him in the old day when He both recovered the sick and forgave the sinner, glorified God, saying, “We never saw it on this wise.” O, His is a God-glorifying name! He glorifies God by transforming the saved. His work is not that of reformation only; it involves transformation. “For whom he foreknew, he also foreordained to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the first-born among many brethren.” “We all with unveiled face beholding as in a mirror the glory of the Lord, are transformed into the same image from glory to glory, even as from the Lord the Spirit” (2 Corinthians 3:18). Henry Drummond, in his matchless booklet, “The Greatest Thing in the World,” speaks wonderfully of this transformation, accomplished while we behold the face of the transfigured Christ, and looking on Him, grow like Him in character. Horace Stanton says, “In the gallery of the Vatican at Rome, said to contain of art more genuine treasures than any other on the earth, there hangs a work which stands not only supreme above those others there, but, by the consenting judgment of three centuries and a half, at the head of all the oil paintings in the world—The Transfiguration, by Raphael. It was in the noonday of his life that he began it, and the sublimest conceptions of that peerless spirit are here displayed. A genius of amazing brilliancy, in imagination never yet surpassed, but tender, sensitive, and reverential, was portraying that single scene when the Saviour was manifested to the disciples in His future celestial light, the only time that earthly eyes had yet seen Him in His glory. And, as the artist bent his might upon it, the splendid vision rose; in drawing, grouping, and dramatic power, a work unequalled. It is called the grandest picture ever limner wrought. But, as the last lines were almost done, God called Raphael. And, over his shadowy bier, they hung this picture; its colours still wet upon the canvas, the last work of that lifeless hand. What a funeral was this—that graceful figure covered with the painter’s cloak, the throng of mourners kneeling weeping there; but over all, the breathing beauty and immortal radiance of that heavenly scene, which showed the lustre of the Transfigured Christ. As Raphael in art, so we in spirit, speech and life may delineate the transfiguration of our Lord. And, at our death, the lustre of Christ—crowned and regnant—shall fall on us, to give each his proper splendour. For, “as there is one glory of the sun, another glory of the moon, and another glory of the stars, though many stars may draw their radiance from that one central sun; so Christ’s glory shall be chiefest; and each of us will have a proper share, all unlike one another, though we all shall be like him.” Yet once more, God receives glory in that Christ is Lord over death and the grave. He is our hope of a resurrection. When Lazarus lay dead and was revived—the great New Testament type of the resurrection of the saints—Jesus said to Martha, “Said I not unto thee, that if thou believedst, thou shouldest see the glory of God? So they took away the stone. And Jesus lifted up his eyes, and said, Father, I thank thee that thou hearest me. And I knew that thou hearest me always; but because of the multitude that standest around I said it, that they may believe that thou didst send me. And when he had thus spoken, he cried with a loud voice, Lazarus, come forth,” and the glory of God was revealed. He is the Lord of life out of death; of victory over the grave. In His name saints shall conquer against the last enemy, and troop up in bodies incorruptible, powerful, glorious, spiritual. I have attempted at times, in speaking of the resurrection, to tell my auditors something of what the resurrection body will be. It was an impossible proposition! The most physically perfect man the world ever saw was Jesus on the day of the crucifixion. In His prime at thirty-three years of age, uncorrupted by sin, untouched by any infirmity of body, soul or spirit; and in that body, risen from the dead, one finds the model in the likeness of which all saints shall come forth. Stanton tells us that, “In the museums of Europe, you see statues of Antinous, that young man of antiquity who was noted for his symmetry and grace. There is the Apollo Belvidere, an artist’s sublime conception of the godlike form. In Frankfort you visit Dannecker’s famous group of statuary, ‘Ariadne on the Panther.’ It is in a building especially erected for it. There is the lithe and agile beast. Upon his back the beauteous maiden sits. The drapery half reveals, and half conceals her fine proportions. The expression on her face most sweet. The crimson curtains, which surround the alcove, mellow the light, so that she almost seems to live. The group is mounted on a revolving pedestal. And, as it turns, you survey it from every side—matchless in its perfect beauty. The Antinous shows the ideal mould of man; the Ariadne the ideal form of woman. But who shall prove that, in the coming world, yea, in the millennium of this world, every man and every woman will not be as beautiful of face and figure as the Antinous and the Ariadne? Those Greek statues were largely representations of the living figures seen in the gymnasia. They were illustrations of the superb physiques of the actual persons of that day. Modern statues are largely copied from them. But surely the figures of the glorified children of God in the New Jerusalem, will be more beautiful than were those of the children of men in ancient Greece.” “This is the first resurrection. Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection, over these the second death has no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years.” It is a glorious prospect, and God Himself is glorified in the sure promise of Christ’s victory over death and the grave, and He will be in its final and unspeakable realisation. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 15: 01.12. XII. CHRIST AND THE CHANGING ORDER ======================================================================== XII CHRIST AND THE CHANGING ORDER “For many deceivers are gone forth into the world, even they that confess not that Jesus Christ cometh in the flesh. This is the deceiver and the anti-christ. Look to yourselves, that ye lose not the things which we have wrought, but that ye receive a full reward. Whosoever goeth onward and abideth not in the teaching of Christ, hath not God: he that abideth in the teaching, the same hath both the Father and the Son. If any one cometh unto you, and bringeth not this teaching, receive him not into your house, and give him no greeting: for he that giveth him greeting partaketh in his evil works”—2 John 1:7-11. THE theme of this chapter is somewhat akin to that of a considerable volume brought from the press some years since by another writer. The speaker has no fear, however, lest this discussion should in any wise be confused with that volume. The theological cleavage will clearly distinguish them. However, they will have one feature in agreement, namely, “history is at one of its turning points,” and the Twentieth Century represents a crisis in the experience of the Christian Church! If it be true that since the days of Kant in philosophy, and Darwin in science, we have lived in a world of thought peopled with new intellectual citizens,” one need not be surprised to find the thinking of the century rather confused since these gentlemen, approaching kindred themes from the separate standpoints of philosophy and science, came to exactly opposite conclusions, Kant contending that in the trial life the strongest and best equipped will finally fall while Darwin insists that the result will be “the survival of the fittest,” conclusions which really gave occasion to Schopenhauer’s dictum, “We are all fools living in a fool world.” When one gives himself to a study of the progress of that so-called “modernism” which is supposed to have originated with these men, he is compelled to consent that Schopenhauer had much basis for his remarks. Paradoxical as it may sound, John, writing twenty centuries ago, was dealing with the exact propaganda of certain present-day teachers known as “Modern,” and we should give candid consideration to what he has to say upon the subject. Describing their theology he denominates its representatives as the apostles of deception and brings against their propaganda the indictment of infidelity, declaring that all who participate with them are alike members of the anti-Christ. Is he justified in this somewhat rabid arraignment? THE APOSTLES OF DECEPTION. He describes them after this manner—“Many deceivers have gone out into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is coming in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an anti-christ.” Careful consideration of the language used brings out three suggestions. These are nominal disciples! The phrase employed by John, “have gone out,” indicates that they had been members of the Christian fraternity, and had used their place in the church as a vantage point for the propagation of false teachings. In 1 John 2:19 we read of certain ones—perhaps these same—“They went out from us, but they were not of us, for if they had been of us, they would have continued with us; but they went out that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us.” In other words, men who confessed loyalty to Jesus Christ became apostles of another gospel, the advocates of anti-Christian teaching. Even modern warfare, with all its devices for the destruction of an army, has been able to hit upon nothing more effective than to get an enemy within the camp. No men in all England, during the late war, were able to do her injury as those men who dwelt within her borders, even joining her army, wearing her uniform, using her language, but secretly communicating with and aiding her enemies. The word “spy” has long been a detested one. As a rule, a man who plays that role is not held in esteem by any save those whose interests he directly represents. Paul, writing a letter to the Galatians, declared that he had encountered “false brethren, brought in unawares who came in privily to spy out the liberty he and his friends enjoyed in Christ Jesus, the intent of whose business was that they might bring them into bondage.” We do not desire to be harsh, nor would we consciously entertain an uncharitable spirit, but we must declare our deepest conviction, namely that the greatest enemy of any church of Jesus Christ is the man who remains in her, assumes to be one of her teachers, calmly wears her good name and yet denies the deity of Him who brought her into being, and disputes the authority of the Book upon which she has, for full twenty centuries, rested her every contention. I regard myself as declaring a most patent truth when I say that “modernism,” so-called, is just such an enemy. By lip and pen it has alike rejected Jesus and repudiated the Bible. It is a matter of more than passing interest also to trace the parallelism between the opponents of John’s epistle and the present-day opponents of Jesus. They denied His physical manifestations! The language in which John indicated them is this, “They confess not that Jesus Christ is coming in the flesh.” The King James version, as you recall, has it “is come in the flesh.” If that translation were correct it might refer to the first appearance of Jesus. If the text of the 1911 version is correct, “who confess not that Jesus is coming in the flesh,” then the second coming is in the mind of the sacred writer. But in either event that which these false teachers opposed was the physical manifestation of God in Christ Jesus. Truly they have their successors. God manifest in the flesh is a miracle of such transcendent import as to be utterly rejected by our advocates of evolution! They almost universally resort to the statements that Jesus, while being God’s best representative, was yet born of Mary and begotten by Joseph. This doubtless is one of those “New Testament concepts,” mentioned by a Modernist, “which the. modern world, under the dominion of science, finds it impossible to understand, much less to believe.” Concerning the second appearance of Jesus in personal visible form, known as Messianism, we are blithely told that it is a “survival of Judaism and its influence and implications must be removed before we can see the essential elements of the gospel.” Of course the resurrection of Jesus is another physical manifestation which, while not expressly mentioned in the text, is involved in the question, and it is now well nigh the common custom among new theologians to hold that New Testament contention to ridicule. In fact, we are plainly asked the question, “If a man believes in a risen Christ without believing in the events of the first Easter day or in the objective character of the appearances of Jesus to Paul and the other apostles,” should “he be excluded from preaching the gospel of salvation?” and are answered “Assuredly not,” and we are told that “He, too, can bring and must bring his conviction of the continued life of Jesus to bear upon men and women.” But this raises the logical and inevitable question—“What Jesus is he preaching and whence does he bring either his Master or his message?” Manifestly it cannot be the Jesus of the Bible, for He was “flesh and blood” before His crucifixion and “flesh and bones” after His resurrection, physical and visible in His ascension, and destined to be visible and personal in His glorious second appearance. What nonsense, then, to imagine that by the adoption of a name to which there was never a corresponding reality, one has created a personality and provided a message. Such “poetry” as the following is of the essence of inanity:— “If He lived or died, I may not know, For who shall disprove the words of the dead, Or who may approve of the wisdom they said? For me He is not of the long ago, But speaks in the mom of my life, I know.” Who speaks; and what does He say? Is it not true, as one of their own company has confessed, that “When we take away the historical Jesus, we take away the only Jesus,” and “remove the Gospel” and thereby “change the very definition of Christianity itself,” “ for Christianity as an embodiment of the Gospel is a phase of religion determined by historical facts”? Any Jesus not begotten by the Holy Ghost, born of Mary, crucified on Calvary, raised the third day, ascended to the right hand of God and destined to descend to the earth and take His throne and reign from sea to sea, is as much the figment of a distempered imagination as are the dreams resulting from an overdose of meat, and any message based upon it has no more claims upon intelligent thinking men than do the unintelligible, incoherent babblings of a Mary Baker Eddy. What would you think of a man who said he believed in George Washington, but not the George Washington who was born in 1732 in Westmoreland County, Virginia, who was the first President of the United States, who led in the Revolution, and whose opinions gave rise and final form to the very constitution of the country itself. He believed rather in a Washington who never had a visible, physical existence, but whose ideas and spirit dominated the colonies in the Puritan days and still lives. Candidly, one finds it difficult to be patient with men who name themselves “Rationalists” while dispensing with reason and call themselves “ thinkers” while giving proof that they are incapable of clearly stating premises or reaching logical conclusions. There never was a more just and justifiable indictment made against men than I. M. Haldeman brings against these self-named Moderns when he says: “The Christ they preach never rose from the dead in the body.” “The Christ they preach has no body.” “Their Christ is a boneless and fleshless Christ.” “The Christ of the modern theologian is an immaterial ghost.” “Over the doors of some modern theological institutions might well be written, ‘Erected to the Ghost Christ!’ ” “Over the pulpits of some modern preachers might be written, ‘Here the Ghost Christ is preached.’ ” Their message is as baseless as their Christ is bodiless. These John denominated the Anti-Christ. His language is, “This is the deceiver and anti-Christ. Look to yourselves that we lose not those things which we have wrought, but that we receive a full reward.” A careful study of the Bible will show that the anti-Christ is a person destined to head up the final but fatal rebellion against God, and yet the Sacred Scriptures equally teach that preliminary to His appearance and preparatory unto the same is a whole school of men who shall speak against Jesus Christ, incessantly striving to bring God to the level of man and exalt man to the level of God. Fundamental to this whole Satanic scheme is the discrediting of the Sacred Scriptures. The man who attempts that is brought to book in John’s catalog of the Anti-Christ. Before one can successfully dispute the claim that “Jesus is the Son of God, that God dwelleth in Him and He in God,” he must discredit the whole doctrine of inspiration; and yet unless he do that adroitly, he may fail even in the judgment of his coveted followers. What could be more adroit than to insist that the denial of inspiration is not necessarily a denial of a divine Saviour? They tell us that Jesus is the foundation in our religion and whatever else we lose we shall not lose Him. It is written, “Other foundation can no man lay than that which is laid, which is Jesus Christ.” But back of the foundation laying is work in the quarries. The Scriptures are the quarries of truth. Discredit them and no Christ remains save that moral phantom of the Modern’s intellect. If man bow before him or “it,” he must concede Mrs. Eddy’s contention that our behaviour is determined by the “illusions of mortal mind,” and once and forever part company with the whole goodly company of New Testament apostles and teachers, for in the language of John McDowell Leavitt, “That company of notable names knew Jesus Christ by the same sufficient crowning proofs the chemist employs when he analyses salt; the geologist uses when examining a rock; the astronomer engages when he observes the stars: namely, the senses. These witnesses affirmed that they had seen and heard and touched Jesus both before and after the resurrection. To the visible, the audible and the tangible they gave evidence with their blood before the earth and heaven, and with it they sealed their testimony. Thus their sincerity is unimpeachable, while they witnessed not to a philosophical opinion, not to a scientific explanation, not to a religious dogma, but to the plain perceptible fact that Jesus arose from the dead and ascended unto glory.” The author of our text voices it after this manner, “That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled of the Word of Life: that which we have seen and heard declare we unto you.” He it is that says, “Deny that and you are ‘a deceiver and an anti-christ,’” and do become THE PROPAGANDIST OF INFIDELITY. “Whosoever goeth onward,” as the expression in the original is, “and abideth not in the teachings of Christ, hath not God.” It is a significant fact that in the very word here employed, “proagan,” and correctly translated “goeth onward,” we have the very word “progressive,” a term which has been voluntarily assumed by the critics of the times. They profess to be the solitary progressives of the hour. They speak of themselves as “men who really think.” In their advanced circle they claim to include practically “every biblical teacher in the world of any scholarly significance.” In youth their mothers must have told them that if they did not think well of themselves no one else would, and forgot to warn them against its vociferous expression. Against the “Thus saith the Lord” of the conservatives they have, in the language of another, set up a sacramental phrase, namely, “Scholarship is agreed.” If they ever name an exception they are careful not to name more than one or, at the most, two who are not trailing with this self-elected tribunal. In spite of the fact that some of us are privileged to minister to many men who represent the most complete scholastic training and who in circles of their respective sciences are widely known and justly honoured, and whose loyalty to the authority of the Scriptures and very deity of Christ is as unswerving as was that of Paul, it is even denied that the church now numbers among its members any considerable company of the “scientifically trained” and “professional classes.” We are even asked, “What has become of these college bred men and women who went out from graduating classes into the wide world?” Possibly these Progressives might make a discovery if they sat down and studied the membership roll of the greater churches of this land which are, without exception, under conservative leadership. If it be true that “in the church at large, not one in fifty members are college graduates,” it might bring another revelation than that which our Progressives imagine. The discovery may be made that the conservative churches far exceed this proportion. The speaker knows well one church that multiplies this number many times over, and bears testimony that these college and university men and women are not only among his most capable members, but are notable in their theological conservatism. It is not “education” that is taking the generation away from the church, but it is “scepticism masking under the name of scholarship.” It is as impossible to make science oppose Scripture as it is to compel God to contend against Himself, and if culture oppose the Church, then the child fights its own mother, yea, even the creature its Creator. But “Science falsely so-called” has bespattered the pages of Scripture with interrogation points, and many a college and university student has thereby stumbled. Darwinism, a dogma without scientific data, or, in the words of the famous French scientist, Fabre, “A theory exploited in big words but destitute of even little facts” has undone alike the superficial student of both Scripture and Science. It is impossible to start from false premises and reach true conclusions. If, therefore, we have been able, as charged, to create a test of church membership that “compels a man under the influence of today’s scholarship to abandon not only a life of evil thought and evil action, but also the results of his education,” it may be because that education was as far wrong as either his thought or action. The outcome will not only vindicate the church but re-enthrone the Christ. Exclusive leadership on the part of Moderns is a mere assumption. Mrs. Eddy has illustrated the fact that you may state a thing so positively, and repeat it so often as to bring the superficial to accept it. She took two of the noblest words known to human speech, “Christian” and “Science,” and by combining and adopting them has brought the unthinking to imagine her an expert in both, and that in spite of the fact that her writings reveal no knowledge whatever of either. For fully fifteen years or longer, our self-styled “Moderns” have been asserting their leadership alike in, “Science” and “Scripture.” Some have supposed that a thing so often spoken must necessarily be so, and so Modernism has accomplished its following. Such students would have been profoundly impressed by the Pharisee’s prayer and from the hour of its utterance would have been his devoted followers. The claim of “assured results” has made its easy dupes in both the oil enterprise and the hyper-critical profession. Almost without exception the devotees of that modern scepticism which discredits the deity of Jesus Christ and questions the authority of the Bible, are either still in their tender youth or else had their thinking fatally twisted before they were far out of their teens. Not once in a hundred instances do mature men turn from conservatism to liberalism; and, in that instance, the rule is that while the man was mature in years, his early education was both poor and partial, and at forty he had only the intellectual equipment of a lad. Who knows a single man in whom ripened years and scholarship have combined to produce a sceptic? But there are scores of men, many of them world-famed, in whom additional study and experience have wrought an utter revolt from the doubts of youth. But the greater seriousness of all this John does not disregard. He charges those who reject the Son with having lost the Father also. Unitarianism, masking under the term “Evangelical,” proposing to retain God even though Christ be rejected, has no God, unless John be disputed. “He that hath not the Son hath not the Father.” “Whosoever goeth onward and abideth not in the teaching of Christ hath not God.” The New York Presbytery, in ordaining men who dispute the virgin birth, and thereby deny the inspiration of plain Scripture statement, if it continue to wear the name of “Christian” will do nothing better than cloak an infidel form with a profession of faith. The life of Presbyterianism as a positive Christian force will depend in no small measure upon its regard for the Cincinnati and Philadelphia Presbyteries’ request that such Unitarians be disfellowshipped. The history of the past has provided abundant proof of the utter powerlessness of the Unitarian propaganda. It has created no ministry worthy of mention, it has started no missions that have proven virile, it has established no colleges that play conspicuous part in the educational process. It has effected so few converts from sin to holiness that one sometimes wonders how it keeps courage enough to build an occasional church. Its people are almost universally disciples of Charles Darwin, and with equal unanimity they emasculate the writings of Moses, repudiate the prophecies of Daniel, or give them late date, and laugh to scorn the Apocalypse of John, while Jesus is to them Mary’s bastard son. Is it any wonder that John dares to say, “Whosoever goeth onward and abideth not in the teachings of Christ hath not God”? But now what is to be the attitude of true Christian men and women toward all of this? Let John speak again, “If anyone come unto you and bring not this teaching, receive him not into your house, nor bid him Godspeed, for he that biddeth him Godspeed is partaker of his evil deeds.” THE PARTICIPANTS IN THE ANTI-CHRIST. According to John, Christian fraternity is not for Christ’s opponents. One of our best commentators tells us that the phrase, “If anyone come unto you and bring not this teaching, receive him not,” looks not to a social reception but rather to a reception into the house of God, unto Christian fellowship. The true Christian will not be unfriendly toward an infidel, nor refuse social fellowship with a sceptic; on the contrary, he will show neighbourliness for every man visiting his door and kindness to any one coming to, or going from the same. But that does not mean his reception into the fellowship of God’s family, nor a benediction upon infidelity in God’s name. I have no creed to which my neighbours must subscribe, no doctrinal standards to which my acquaintances must come. The Unitarian may be my closest personal friend, and the Universalist my fishing companion, and it is alike my privilege and pleasure to return the bland smile of Mrs. Eddy’s disciple. But the fellowship of faith is altogether another thing, and cannot be accorded to any who “bring not the teaching of Christ,” “God manifest in the flesh.” The moment you create a church that exceeds fellowship in Christ, you introduce into it the seeds of self-destruction. The weakness of present-day Protestantism is at exactly that point. We are wondering why we are not marking greater progress. We are worrying over subjects of secondary concern. We are searching every nook and corner of church life to discover the elements of weakness in our work. We are saying that by a “further federation of forces” we will “engender power.” The exact opposite is true! We are over-federated now. Our affiliations are our fundamental weaknesses. Better a Gideon’s three hundred that believe God and lap the Water of Life from the fountain of His Word than the thousands that now leisurely drink from the springs of scepticism that gush from multiplied schools as water does from the mole holes of the Southland in a wet season. But John has a further word, He makes our commendation of sceptics a self-condemnation. “He that biddeth him Godspeed is partaker of his evil deeds.” Frankly do some of us confess “to making it a part of our life work to mark the man who brings not the teaching of Jesus, God manifest in the flesh, and to refuse to recommend him to any church seeking our advice. How can we do otherwise and keep conscience at all? Would we advise you to take into your house as a boarder a man who would alienate your affections from your husband, and by criticisms finally dethrone him from the headship of the family? Can we advise any church to receive as a pastor a man who denies the deity of Jesus, and removes from the headship of the church her own and only rightful Lord? Believing as we do that He is the very God, the one and only basis of hope for time and eternity, the one and only sufficient moral ideal, and inspiring personality, the one and only Saviour from sin, in fact, the one and only way for the world’s redemption, how can we recommend the man who proposes to tear the crown of deity from His brow, dispute His authority over the conscience and His Lordship over life? John McDowell Leavitt said truly, “Take Jesus from the world and you turn it into gloom. Let Him reign and humanity realises its dream of light and love. In His system and character are all the marks of a divine Messiah. But Jesus false, how black the picture and how inconceivable the consequences. No middle place for this Christ so perfect in character and so matchless in career. If not from the Holy Ghost in the Virgin, His conception a lie! If angels did not sing at His birth, and after temptation and amid agony, and watch at His tomb, narratives of their appearances falsehoods! If no divine voice at His baptism, His ministry of holiness opening with imposture! If no suffering mortals relieved by His touch and word, His miracles of love fabrications! If no power over Hades, His promise to the thief on the cross a deception! If no resurrection and ascension, fraud carried over life into death itself! If no return in power, then no millennium for this world is possible, and the future will grow increasingly bloody and eventuate in the darkest of nights. He who mars the Jesus of the Bible unmakes mankind. He who blots the sentences of sacred Scripture, flings a blackness over future history” Commend him as a teacher? Ask a church to appoint him to its leadership? Write letters, dexterously dodging the facts involved, in aiding him to cover up his unfaith long enough to be comfortably seated and begin to uncover his scepticism, and thereby break the hearts of his aged parishioners and destroy the faith of his youthful ones? Never! For this would be to be a partaker of his evil deeds. The compromise of truth is a crime against Christ! The crisis is on! The injunction of Joshua lives again, “Choose ye this day!” “He that hath felt the spirit of the highest, Cannot confound or doubt Him, or deny; Yea, with one breath, O world, though thou deniest, Stand thou on that side, for on this am I.” ======================================================================== CHAPTER 16: 02.00.1. MY BIBLE ======================================================================== MY BIBLE AN APOLOGETIC By W. B. RILEY, A.M., D.D. Author of: The Perennial Revival Inspiration or Evolution. Revival Sermons The Bible of the Expositor and Evangelist, 40 vols., etc. “This I confess unto you, that after the way which they call heresy, so worship I the God of my fathers, believing all things which are written in the Law and in the prophets.” Acts 24:14. WM. B. EERDMANS PUBLISHING CO. Grand Rapids, Mich. 1937 ======================================================================== CHAPTER 17: 02.00.2. FOREWORD ======================================================================== FOREWORD The Bible has increasingly become the battleground of the “War in the Churches.” Since the first century, interpretations of Scripture have incited debate and even divisions in the Christian body. But the twentieth century has witnessed a more serious defection from the Christian faith, namely, a partial, and with many, a complete repudiation of the doctrine of Divine inspiration. That such opposition should characterize men of the world is neither new nor strange; but that church leaders should become proponents of this denial is the ecclesiastical scandal of the twentieth century. However, the sympathetic and understanding student of Scripture experiences no surprise in this procedure. The prophetic Scriptures have prepared him for this apostacy. That it has come into this century with such wide-spreading and devastating effect, has not even been discouraging for the Spirit-instructed. On the contrary, it but confirms his faith in the authority, integrity, and inspiration of the Holy Word. The twentieth century is characterized by parallel apostasies. One repudiates the full and final authority of the Bible; and the other proposes “a world redemption” by human endeavor. They are alike signs of the times, and suggest an approaching “end of this age.” In this volume we voice our defense of inspiration; and in another, coming from the press simultaneously, we sound forth our convictions concerning “the Kingdom of God.” But in both we rest our case absolutely upon a God-given REVELATION. W. B. Riley. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 18: 02.01. WHENCE AND HOW CAME MY ENGLISH BIBLE? ======================================================================== WHENCE AND HOW CAME MY ENGLISH BIBLE? In beginning this series of eight talks on the subject of My Bible, I plan “an apologetic hoping to produce both a series for pulpit employment as occasion may arise, and, at the same time, a textbook for use in our theological schools. The subjects to be discussed are eight in number: Whence and How Came My English Bible? Is My Bible Scarred by Discrepancies? Is My Bible Marred by Reputed Miracles? Is My Bible a Blood-stained Book? Has Archaeology Discredited My Bible? Is My Bible an Unscientific Book? Is My Bible a Divinely Inspired Book? How May I Best Master My English Bible? There are two motives that influence this series: First—The instruction of our young men and women who, in their educational program, will necessarily touch, at some time, skeptical instructors— false teachers! We would equip them with solid facts as a standing ground. Second—This volume, we also trust, may prove of value to students of our Northwestern Theological and other like schools. To the task then! In this chapter we propose to compass The Origin of the Bible, The Organization of the Books, and The Translations of Scripture. THE ORIGIN OF THE BIBLE The Bible, unlike its Author, had “beginning”. There was a time, lasting from 1500 to 3000 years, when the world was without a Bible; or, if you please, from the creation of Adam until the time of Moses or Job. That is not to say that the world was without Revelation; for reason and Scripture alike insist that a wise God would not leave sinful, stumbling man without direction or warning. Upon the assurance of Scripture itself, men of that early period enjoyed the inestimable privilege of direct communications from God. For instance: in Genesis 2:8-19 God speaks to Adam and Eve directly concerning their sin and His determined judgment against the same. In Genesis 4:6 f God addresses Cain mi a kindred subject. In Genesis 6:13 God talks to Noah about the bad behaviour of men and affirms His purpose to destroy with a flood. In Genesis 12:1 God speaks to Abraham, calling him out of his country and makes to him promises of blessing almost unthinkable in extent and well-nigh eternal in time. There are also many other reports of direct communication—to Abimelech in Genesis 20:3; to Isaac in Genesis 26:2; to Jacob in Genesis 28:13, and later to Job 38:1-41 f. But the very multiplication of men upon the face of the earth and their dispersion from one center to varied parts, would create the necessity of a general revelation such as is existent in the Book called “The Bible.” On examination of this volume we discover certain facts and factors of first importance. These we put in order The Bible is the product of many authors. Our text tells us that “prophecy came not in old time by the will of man,” but “holy men of God spake as they were moved (or borne along) by the Holy Ghost.” It was not written by one man nor created at one man’s option. On the contrary, it eminated from the pen of many, as they were moved by the Divine will. It is commonly conceded that there were about forty different writers for these sixty-six books. Moses accounts for five of them; Solomon for three or four; Paul for possibly fourteen; Peter for two; John for probably four; and so, while we have fewer authors than books, yet there are many contributors. For the last fifty years uninspired and skeptical men have attacked, in turn, practically every one of these writers and have sought to prove in some instances, that no such man ever lived; and, in others, that probably the author named in the Bible never saw the writings now assigned to him. But, notwithstanding this determined and, at times, concerted attack, these forty authors—as a noted Modernist admits—cry cherrily to each frightened defender of the Sacred Canon, in the language of Paul from the Philippian jail—“Do thyself no harm; for we are all here”! No author has as yet been discredited much less removed, and not one book of the sixty-six has been pried from its place, much less rendered obsolete. These authors represent different countries and Centuries. Palestine provided the majority, but not all of them; and something like 1600 years probably swept in between the day when Job laid his inspired pen aside and the hour when John finished the Apocalypse. These facts will take on increasing importance as we continue this study, for one of the proofs of Divine inspiration is discoverable at this point, namely —the absolute unity of thought running from Genesis to Revelation. That unity can only be explained on the ground of a common authorship in the Person of the Holy Ghost. Forty writers—the most of them not acquainted with their fellow-contributors or even belonging to the same century with them— yet so expressing themselves as to produce an absolute harmony in thought and objective, find no explanation in the words “accident” or “coincidence”. In fact, the very employment of these two words “accident” and “coincidence” reminds me of an illustration, used in my pulpit nearly forty years ago, and lately given place in an attractive and profitable volume by an intimate personal friend, namely the story of Pat who had his doubts about miracles, and whose priest, in order to convince him, engaged in a hypothetical argument, saying: “Now, Pat, suppose you were working on a ten-story building and you fell off and struck head first, on the pavement below, and picked yourself up and walked away; wouldn’t you call that a miracle?” “No,” said Pat; “not necessarily! I would call it an accident.” “Very well; but suppose you fell again the next morning from the same height and hit on your head in the same place and picked yourself up and walked away, wouldn’t you call that a miracle?” “No,” said Pat, “not necessarily; that would be a coincidence.” “But,” said the priest, “suppose you fell the third time and hit again in the same place and picked yourself up and walked away, what would you call that?” “Begorry,” answered Pat, “I’d call it a habit!” Some of us have come to think that the skeptics and the critics of the Bible are merely experiencing a habit, namely the habit of unbelief. Forty authors writing independently of one another through a period of 1600 years and yet producing, not only a readable book, but a book that has outlived and transcended all others, is, to say the least, the miracle of the millenniums, and fails to yield to any other explanation. There is an additional fact which dissipates the fogs for men of Faith, namely this— These writers uniformly claim Divine inspiration. Moses, the first of these writers, multiplies that claim so often that it becomes a refrain with him. He records—“And God spake all these words” (Exodus 20:1); as for his own part, he says, “And Moses wrote all the words of the Lord” (Exodus 24:4). In addressing the children of Israel he claims—“These are the words which the Lord hath commanded,” etc. The late Dr. James M. Gray once affirmed, in my presence, what any doubter may test at his own pleasure, namely that in the Book of Leviticus, containing 27 chapters, there were 56 assertions—or more than an average of 2 for every chapter—assigning its authorship to the Lord Himself. Moses stands not alone in this matter. David said: “The Spirit of the Lord spake by me and His Word was in my tongue.” Isaiah declared: “Hear, oh heavens, and give ear, oh earth, for the Lord hath spoken.” Jeremiah affirmed: “The word of the Lord came unto me.” Ezekiel assigned his visions to God, and declared—“The word of the Lord came expressly unto Ezekiel.” Daniel claims the same source for his interpretations; and so on to the end; for in the last Book of the Bible John introduces it as—“The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him.” (Revelation 1:1). The superiority of the Bible over all books of all ages finds its explanation in that claim, and that alone; for if God is its Author, perfection is to be expected, and we have a reasonable ground for the statement of that versatile, talented preacher and author, A. T. Pierson, who wrote—“The Bible is the Golden Milestone of the ages. It has been for thousands of years the grand center of all the noblest thought, purest love, and holiest life of the world. From this great book proceeds the inspiration of the best literature, the most unselfish philanthropy, the most faultless morality, which the world has ever known.” In the language of the poet— “A glory gilds the sacred page, Majestic like the sun; It gives a light to every age, It gives but borrows none. The hand that gave it still supplies The gracious light and heat; His truths upon the nations rise; They rise, but never set.” But we proceed to the second point— THE ORGANIZATION OF THE BOOK We have seen that sixteen centuries and forty authors were required for the creation of this library of 66 volumes. Having been written by different authors at different stages of the world’s history, and at points remote one from another, the 66 books that constitute the Bible had to be assembled by someone, at some time; and, the agents thus employed by God are fairly familiar to the students of history. It is not at all unusual for people who get hold of one book by an author, and finding both pleasure and profit in the same, to begin to search for further eminations from the same mind. The very claim of Divine authorship written into these books would have, especially with the Jewish people, a tendency to bring the books together; and so effective had been this custom that by Ezra’s day they were all known and named, and his was the lighter task of arranging them in the order, which, in about 457 B. C., he accomplished, and to which Nehemiah and Malachi, under the inspiration of the same Spirit, later added their volumes. The New Testament books passed through a kindred experience, to be authenticated by the Council of Carthage A.D. 397. That the Council was Spirit-led in this action seems demonstrated by the circumstance that the intervening centuries, all their critics included, have not been able to change to the extent of one book or one chapter of the Canon, the volume then declared Sacred. It was after this manner that the Book we call our “Bible” was made up. This Sacred Canon has been carefully conserved. Other books that certain would have included such as the Apocryphal books, 14 in number—were tested “and found wanting.” They contain some valuable history to which modern writers often refer, but their condemnation and exclusion resulted from known historical errors, wild legends and other internal, but discrediting evidences. All other endeavors to change the Canon by subtracting or adding have equally failed. Modernism would feign convince us that valuable additions should have been made to this Book had not prejudice and popular opinion kept them from their rightful place between its covers For instance: Horton in lecture pleaded for the great poets, from Homer and Hesiod down to Browning and Walt Whitman, as inspired men. He would also lift to apostolic level, Origen, Irenaeus and Tertullian. He insists that inspiration had not ceased in the days of Athanasius and Augustine; and he seems almost angry that Martin Luther, John Wesley, Frederick Denison Maurice, F. W. Robertson, Macleod Campbell, Thomas Erskine and Horace Bushnell are not recorded as among the prophets. He goes so far as to say— “Our study of theology, in a sentence, should be, as the term itself implies, a study of the God-word that came in Biblical times, supplemented and completed by the God-word which has been coming ever since.” But alas for the inconsistency and the unScripturalness of such a contention! In the first place these men never claimed to be either spokesmen of God or the amanuenses of His Spirit. In the second place, had they made such claim, Horton himself concedes their inability to make good; for later in the same series of lectures he makes this fatal concession: “The Bible itself is in so unique and peculiar a sense the Word of God, that, just in proportion as we receive a veritable word from God in other directions, we return to the Bible to find the message there more luminous, more harmonious, more Divine.” It is a strange freak of un-faith that seeks to glorify the light of a distant star and insist that men should walk therein, and at the same time admit that the sun is still shining in his strength. This new Bible, so-called, of Horton’s, and that of the equally mistaken Wells, when placed beside the Book Divine, would so suffer by comparison as to remind one of the story told of the American girl who was being courted by an Englishman. Her remote cousin was not making the progress that she reckoned desirable, and with her American ingenuity she sought to aid him a bit by saying: “Mr. Laird, don’t you often have thoughts that you find difficult to express?” To which he answered: “Yes, I do, you know; and awfter I get them expressed I cawn’t help wondering why I went to all that trouble.” We leave the Modernist to make the application. This conservation of the Canon is extended to the text. The world has never known another book copied so often and with such dogged accuracy as has characterized the multiplications of Scripture—volumes. We are told that the law of the scribes was, three mistakes, no matter how extensive the parchment, the whole had to be destroyed. We have now in business what we call “check” and “double-check”, and here was a business where even a double-check was only a beginning. Not only every book, every chapter, but every word, yes every letter had to be checked and double-checked, and oftentimes the copy had to be a facsimile of the original. When one makes himself familiar with the Hebrew language and knows how slight the difference between some of its letters—as for instance “R” and “DH”, “W” and “Z”—he faces the painstaking task to which these copyists were subjected; and yet so wonderful was their expert work that the scholarship of the ages has stood astounded at the result; and scholars of no less note than Westcott and Hort have been able to affirm that not one word in a thousand, in the New Testament, was the product of mistake! “Father of mercies, in Thy Word What endless glory shines! Forever be Thy name adored For these celestial lines.” THE TRANSLATIONS OF SCRIPTURE But, we have not yet answered the question How We Got our English Bible? You know, the Bible was not written in the English language, nor was the English spoken at the time of its birth. It came to us by the way of Hebrew. Aramaic and Greek, with a few words only from still older tongues. The Septuagint Version reduced the Old Testament to one tongue. This Version, in the Greek language, involved the work of 70 scholars who, at the order of Ptolemy II, affected this painstaking translation sometime between 285 and 247 B.C. probably about 277. Many were the Jews who, scattered among Greeks, had lost their own language and learned the Hellenistic, and they craved and secured a version of their own Scriptures that they could then read and understand. The Septuagint has been criticized by some as clumsy and inaccurate, but it is doubtless the Version with which Christ Himself was familiar and from which He brought His quotations; and it has been basal for all translations to date. This original translation does not exist, but three world-famed copies—The Vatican, The Sinaitic, and The Alexandrian Manuscripts— are prized possessions. A few years ago the Greek Church was in possession of one, the Roman of another, and the Protestant of the third; but so atheistic did Russia become as to willingly part with her prized possession—The Sinaitic—for the fabulous sum that Protestant believers were willing to pay. When the bloody Bolsheviki reign comes to an end, as it will if the Lord long delay His return, and when Russia—cleansed by the fires of persecution and taught by the practice of “hate” to appreciate the Gospel of “love,”—shall turn to God again, the grief of this loss will be uniform. However, that grief will not be well based since now they have the Bible in far better form, namely in the “tongue wherein every man is born.” How many and how oft-repeated should be the expressions of gratitude on the part of God’s people over that fact; and how sensible of favor all English speaking people should be, that centuries ago godly men translated the Sacred Scriptures into our, or the English tongue! The King James Version has been a world-benediction. It is not necessary at this time to go into details of this Version, to trace the endeavors to bring the Bible into the English tongue through the hands of the venerable Bede, the Orders of Alfred the Great, the arduous labors of not less than twenty-two years of John Wycliffe, or the revision of Richard Purvey. Neither need we stop long with William Tyndale who, in the 16th century, faced opposition, poverty and banishment for his translating fervor; nor yet dwell too long upon Coverdale’s transcendent accomplishments. Nor need we expend time on the dire attempts of kings and queens of the Catholic faith to crush its circulation. If there were time we would like to pay King Edward VI proper compliment for his boyish affection for the Bible, and his favor alike for its multiplication and distribution. But, there is a Version worthy of time and thought, known to us as the King James Version. Under James I, at the hands of 54 scholars— the best in the land if not in the world—the task was undertaken, and in 1611 the product was published, and even marginal references were adopted. For more than 300 years, therefore, that Version of Scripture, in millions upon millions of books, has gone to every civilized land on earth to carry light to the darkened, hope to the downcast, and life to the spiritually dead! From the standpoint of the English language, there is no book in existence that holds higher place in literature; and from the point of ethics and morals it has known no competitor. Wherever it has gone, clouds of ignorance have lifted and the light of intelligence has shone. Wherever it has been accepted, new men have been the result; and wherever it has been extensively studied, newer and higher civilization has resulted. “Let everlasting thanks be thine For such a bright display, As makes a world of darkness shine With beams of heavenly day.” But we must not conclude without a word concerning— The Versions of the present. Like the demons that possessed the man of Gadara, their name is “legion”; and, in the judgment of some of us their multitude is not much less distressing to the souls of men than were the demons to the body of the Gadarene! Every man and woman in America, who has a fair degree of familiarity with Hebrew and Greek, and who has a flare for possible fame, has seemed to feel the temptation to translate the Bible; and so we have versions out of number. I shall not take time to pay attention to the Polyglot Bible; it is a buried issue; nor to the Shorter Bible of Kent which is rapidly falling asleep; nor to the Goodspeed translation which never took a far flight; nor the Helen Montgomery edition which will doubtless follow its authoress to the cemetery, nor are we enamored of the Revised Version even, since Modernism utilized it as an opportunity to express at points a new theology which was no theology: and as for the Concordant Version, few people have ever heard of it, and still fewer will ever consent that a word must always mean the same, no matter what the connection employed. Too many will remember the experience of the Frenchman in America who said: “Ze language of ze country is so strange; I see a woman on the sidewalk. She have flashy dress, brilliant hat, dog on chain; they call her “fast”. I see a horse; he tied to post. They call him “fast”. I see the train go by the station seexty miles an hour. They call that “fast”. What do you mean by “fast”? “It is ze same word, but in one case it stands still and in ze other it sweep by.” Certainly! Only people who are easily duped can ever give consideration to such non-intelligent suggestions as the so-called concordant, but discordant, version. But I strike higher still— The Moffatt Translation makes no particular appeal to me. It may have some virtues; beyond all question it has some vices. Take, for instance, the translation of Luke 23:44-45, where we read— “By this time it was about twelve o’clock, and darkness covered the whole land till three o’clock, owing to an eclipse of the sun; etc.” Where did he get that phrase—“owing to an eclipse of the sun”? It is nothing else but an attempt to rationalize the miracle; and it is an insult to the scientist who knows that the eclipse of the sun was not due at that time, and to the God, Who darkened the heavens to voice at once His rebuke of the sins of men, His sorrow over His Son’s suffering, and yet to reveal the righteous judgment against sin. What will be the result of all these multiplied versions—many still in the making? Exactly what Modernism desires — an interrogation as to whether there is any one Book that can be called “The Bible”, a doubt as to whether there can be any Divinity with such a fusilage of puny endeavors. I do not stand for the King James Version, because I believe that its translators were Divinely inspired but I stand for it because 54 scholarly men—more than 300 years closer to the use of Greek and Hebrew and Aramaic than are the children of this generation, and consequently better equipped by so much to bring the meaning into their own tongue—gave it to us; and I simply cannot imagine the consummate egotism of the present-day individual whose self-conceit is so outstanding as to bring him to believe that his wisdom, at this more remote date outshines the 70! If I can send you home today to a King James Version of the Bible, whether it be the one from which your fathers and your mothers read, to be made saints—fit for translation, or the newest and latest Oxford output, I am not so much concerned; but I am deeply anxious that you take it from the table, brush the gathering dust from its covers, confess sinfulness in its long neglect, and begin a study that shall never stay until you have gone from Genesis to Revelation! ======================================================================== CHAPTER 19: 02.02. IS MY BIBLE SCARRED BY DISCREPANCIES? ======================================================================== IS MY BIBLE SCARRED BY DISCREPANCIES? When Paul, at Jerusalem, was before Felix the governor, he answered the charges of Tertullus that he was “a pestilent fellow, and a mover of sedition among all the Jews throughout the world, and a ring-leader of the sect of the Nazarenes” by denying every charge, and adding— “But this I confess unto thee, that after the way which they call heresy, so worship the God of my fathers, believing all things which are written in the law and in the prophets.” (Acts 24:14). In discussing the inspiration, authenticity and authority of the Bible, we face the charge of “discrepancies,” of which the critics of the Christian Scriptures have made much; and we stand with Paul in Bible defense, declaring our convictions that the charge is unfounded and false. With him we believe “all things which are written in the law and in the prophets,” and we are ready not only to give frank consideration to the indictment of “discrepancies” but to show that the charge itself is begotten by superficial thinking and born of a skeptical spirit. Following the lines of the apostle’s statement, we propose to discuss this question under three heads: A Confession of Faith, A Call to Worship, and An Unshaken Confidence. A CONFESSION OF FAITH The apostle’s words involved such a confession. Paul believed “all things” that were “written in the law and in the prophets.” In other words, Paul had what he regarded as “an inspired Bible.” On many occasions he made perfectly clear his confidence in inspiration. His statement in Acts is confirmed as often as the apostle touches upon the subject. Writing to the Corinthians he says— “Now we have received***the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God; which things also we speak, not in the words which man’s wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth;***” (1 Corinthians 2:12-13). In his Second Epistle to the Corinthians he defends his claim of “Christ speaking in him,” (2 Corinthians 13:3), while to Timothy he declared—“All Scripture is given by inspiration of God.” (2 Timothy 3:16). In other chapters we call attention to the fact that this is practically the uniform claim of all Biblical authors; and since that is readily conceded, we need not here and now burden you with proof texts. John placed such emphasis upon the Spirit’s authorship of the Apocalypse that he wrote these warning words against its sacrilegious touch: “For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book. And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.” (Revelation 22:18-19). In other words, no Old Testament prophet or New Testament apostle will consent to the charge of falsity, misrepresentation, or discrepancy, if lodged against the Holy Word. As the tables of the Law were protected by the four sides of the Ark, and defended by the Divine Person whose presence was seen in the Shekinah Glory, so the entire Old and New Testaments are within the sacred enclosure of Divine Inspiration, and only the sacrilegious dare to lay upon them critical and destructive hands; and, whether they believe it or not, all such despoilers approach this evil work at the expense of their own souls. This confession has been the warp and woof of organized Christianity. The believers of all ages have exercised a kindred faith in the integrity of the Scriptures. That such was the view of the apostles we will make clear in this treatise; that such was the opinion of the early church fathers, no man would have the temerity to dispute. Rudelbach says “Hardly is there a single point with regard to which there reigned in the first eight ages of the church a greater or more cordial unity.” And as to the more recent declarations, church history is replete. The French Confession said,: “We believe at the word contained in these books has proceeded from God. It is not lawful for men nor even for angels to add to it, to take away from Lit, nor even to change it.” The Belgic Confession declared: “We believe that the Holy Scriptures fully contain the will of God and that whatsoever men ought to believe unto salvation is sufficiently contained therein.” The Westminster Confession asserted: “The whole counsel of God concerning all things necessary for His own glory, man’s salvation, faith and life, is either expressly set down in Scripture or by good and necessary consequence may be deduced therefrom, unto which nothing at any time is to be added.” The Church of England said: “The Holy Scripture containeth all things necessary to salvation, so that whatsoever is not read therein, nor may be proved thereby, is not to be required of any man.” The Congregationalists said: “Like our Pilgrim Fathers, we acknowledge no rule of faith but the Word of God, and declare our adherence to the faith and order of the apostolic and primitive churches.” The Baptists have never, unless it be now, stood elsewhere than on this ground—“We believe that the Holy Bible was written by men divinely inspired and is a perfect treasure of heavenly instruction; that it has God for its Author; salvation for its end and truth without any admixture of error for its matter.” If you please the Methodists, (certain present unbelieving Bishops to the contrary notwithstanding), lack the temerity to attempt even to change their declaration that “The Holy Scriptures contain all the things necessary to salvation, so that whatsoever is not read therein, nor may be proved thereby, is not to be required of any man.” The perils of departure from this opinion have been written in the blood-ink of both believers and unbelievers. More than a century and a half ago France, temporarily captured by Rationalists, rejected the doctrine of Revelation, and the history of that movement was written in rivers of human blood. For the last twenty years Russia has also sought to substitute for Revelation atheistic Evolution, and the death of thirty millions, of innocents by reason of imprisonment, starvation, freezing and shooting, is only a slight reflection of the terror and afflictions that have befallen the nation. When Germany developed, as her teachers, the opponents of Revelation, she introduced an educational program that wrecked her government by 1918 and threatened a world with ruin. It is no light matter, therefore, to charge the sacred Scriptures with sin of any sort; and the indictment of “multiplied discrepancies” is a monstrous charge! Discrepancies, could they be proved, would end the Bible’s Sacred Influence. It is very doubtful if Biblical critics would be willing to face the results of their own unbelief. Joseph Fort Newton, made famous, over night, by his call to the City Temple, London, England, was never charged with conservatism. In fact, the world stood amazed to have so confessed a liberal step into the shoes of the great Conservative Joseph Parker. That could not have occurred without the mediation of Reginald Campbell in “breaking in” of those shoes to modernist foot-form; and yet Dr. Newton was recently quoted as having recited afresh the famous parable of how England awoke one day to find the Bible and all trace of its influence absolutely erased from the public mind, and is reputed to have said— “Something like this has happened in America. We are faced by an amazing spectacle—a generous, charming, candid generation without the Bible. Life has become cheap, literature is filthy and law is no longer respected. Our most brilliant writers seem to find life a kind of disease. Its activities—religion, culture, ambition, sex, song—are so many forms of dope that men take to deaden the pain, or the folly, of living.” And so this critic of the Scriptures, seeing that the attacks of his fellow-despoilers have succeeded beyond expectation, cries out for the recovery of that which he himself sought to discredit, admitting— “There is a spirit in the Bible which, if it gets into men, makes them tall of soul, tender of hear, just, gentle, patient, strong, faithful in life and fearless in death.” And then he dares to cry: “We must recover the Bible!” But to some of us “recovery” is not the word! We have never lost it! We have stood, and shall stand, with the apostle’s confession of Faith “believing all things which are written in the law and in the prophets.” With the apostle we find in this fact— A CALL TO WORSHIP We esteem the sacred Word as our fathers did. The “fathers” referred to by the apostle Paul were not the early church fathers. They were rather the Old Testament prophets instead. If one would know what their faith in the Bible was, let him consult them. The task of inquiring of all the Old Testament writers is too extensive for the limits of a single address; but certainly if one select the most outstanding from among the lawyers, poets and prophets who contributed to the Old Testament creation, it should prove satisfactory even to the critical. We propose, therefore, to consult Moses, David and Isaiah—Moses, the chief of its law givers; David the sweetest singer in Israel, and Isaiah the tallest among the prophets. In Exodus 4:15 we have the Moses’ view. He held that his own words were from the Lord Who, addressing him directly, said— “* * * And I will be with thy mouth, and with his (Aaron’s) mouth, and will teach you what ye shall do.” There are literally hundreds of statements in the five books of Moses to the same effect. How significant that in the last words of David there is found this remark— “The Spirit of the Lord spake by me, and his word was in my tongue.” (2 Samuel 23:2). In that circumstance you have a reason for the immortality of David’s utterances and an explanation of their immeasurable effect. But we turn to the tallest prophet. Among the major prophets even, Isaiah, like Saul, is from his shoulders and upward above the heads of his contemporaries. At the very center of his great prophecy he puts this statement— Then came the word of the Lord to Isaiah, saying” (Isaiah 38:4). Forty times in this volume the prophet lays claim to being the mouthpiece of the Most High, voicing what God had given him. These three incomparable authors are both fine and fit representatives of the inspired company who collaborated in creating the Old Testament Scriptures. For 2100 years, and more, that sacred Canon has remained unchanged. The Septuagint Version for that entire length of time has been the unchanged basis of the Best translations, and also the very Book From which Christ quoted again and again, always to approve the utterance and affirm its reliability. To Him these Scriptures “could not he broken.” In His hand they were “the Sword of the Spirit” with which He resisted all attacks upon their content. “It is written” was the statement with which He put to flight Pharisees, Sadducees and Satan himself. Never once did He even intimate the untrustworthiness of the sacred Word. The New Testament writers entertained a kindred confidence. To them neither the Jewish Scriptures nor other inspired confederates were guilty of introducing actual discrepancies. On the contrary, they counted all such charges a contortion of the Divine intent. Peter in his second epistle 2 Peter 3:16 voices his mind in the matter. He pays tribute to Paul as a “beloved brother” to whom “wisdom” had been given in “the things written.” While he admits that some things in the Pauline Epistles may be hard to understand, he does not concede mistake or discrepancy; but charges, instead, that they are “wrested” by the unlearned and unstable, “as they do also the other Scriptures, unto their own destruction.” Paul’s confession, therefore, is consonant with that of his co-apostles. In fact, his declaration constitutes a part of the apostolic faith, “the faith once delivered,” the faith in which the heaven-taught stood and to which they bore glad testimony. In fact, that faith took the form of— AN UNSHAKEN CONFIDENCE Discrepancies they never discovered, and true believers do not now admit them. However, our faith is not the product of mere prejudice. Our confidence is not born of personal preference; it rests in fact, and is wholly capable of adequate defense. In three statements, with their development, let me conclude this discourse—(1) There are apparent discrepancies in .Scripture; (2) Each and every one of them is capable of comparatively easy explanation; (3) In the light of reason the Bible is an infallible revelation. There are apparent discrepancies in Scripture. Superficial critics have searched out what seemed to them a veritable multitude of such; but the contention of the intelligent believer is that these discrepancies exist in the critics’ mind, not in the sacred Book. No less a scholar than Dean Farrar, speaking of the writers of the Bible, and especially of the authors of the New Testament, says: “That they did err, I am not so irreverent as to assert; nor has the widest learning and acutest ingenuity of Scepticism ever pointed to one complete and demonstrable error of fact or doctrine in the Old or New Testament.” In this view, Prof. A. B. Davidson is known to have heartily concurred; so James Orr! Simpson, and other equally great and notable scholars, who have taken the same position, are a multitude which it would be difficult to enumerate. However, to be perfectly fair to the attorneys for the prosecution, we propose to accept for the consideration of the Court of Public Opinion, seven of their best exhibits. We elect this number, first because it is God’s numeral for perfection, and second because it will certainly suffice to include their strongest cases against Bible infallibility. Three of these we take from the Old Testament, and four of them from the New. Some years since there came a call on my phone from the keeper of a rooming and boarding house, situated under the eaves of the State University of Minnesota. The speaker said: “Dr. Riley, I make my living by the care of students. Boys and girls who elect to live with me through their college days become extremely dear. I feel toward them almost as one might feel toward her own flesh and blood, and I confess a genuine interest in both their mental and spiritual reactions. It is not at all an unusual thing for certain skeptical professors at the University, to disturb the faith of these children and, oftentimes I am sorry to say, destroy it.” “The questions raised by such teachers are often thrashed out at my table, and today they have one for which I feel myself insufficient; hence my appeal to you. A professor this morning called attention to the statement in 1 Kings 15:28— “ ‘Even in the third year of Asa king of Judah did Baasha slay him, and reigned in his stead.’ ” And then in 1 Kings 16:1-34 he called attention to 1 Kings 16:8— “ ‘In the twenty and sixth year of Asa king of Judah began Elah the son of Baasha to reign over Israel in Tirzah, two years.’ ” “And in 1 Kings 16:15— “ ‘In the twenty and seventh year of Asa king of Judah did Zimri reign seven days in Tirzah****’ ” “And he laughed at such a record, showing a king dead twenty-three and twenty-four years respectively, and yet sitting on the throne. How do you reconcile the discrepancy?” I was able to answer, “There is none! If the professor had taken pains in Bible study he would have discovered that Asa reigned as king of Judah forty-one years, and the context shows that it was not Asa king of Judah at all who was slain by Baasha, but it was Nadab instead. Read 1 Kings 16:27. That discrepancy was not in 1st Kings but in the mind of an inattentive teacher. However, to be perfectly fair, we take up now the stronger cases of the prosecution— In 2 Samuel 24:24 we have this statement: “And the king said unto Araunah, Nay; but I will surely buy it (the threshing floor) of thee. * * * So David bought the threshing floor and the oxen for fifty shekels of silver.” In 1 Chronicles 21:25 we have— “So David gave to Oman for the place six hundred shekels of gold by weight.” The context goes to prove that this is the same threshing floor. That looks bad for the Bible! Surely here there seems to be a plain contradiction. Our answer is, “Yes, but only a seeming one!” Sir Robert Anderson, one of the world’s greatest detectives—a long time Head of Scotland Yards—and at the same time one of the world’s most consistent Christians and astute students of Scripture, says of this discrepancy: “It is extraordinary that any honest and intelligent mind could find a difficulty here. Fifty shekels of silver were presumably a fair price, though to us it seems very little, for the oxen and for the temporary use of the threshing floor, for the purpose of the sacrifice. And this was all that the king had in view at the moment. “But does anyone imagine that the fee-simple of ‘the place’—the entire site of the Temple— was worth only fifty silver shekels? David went on to purchase the entire homestead out and out; and the price he paid for it, was 600 shekels of gold. And this is what the ‘Chronicler’ records.” 1 Chronicles 21:25. Turn with me now, if you will, to Genesis 1:1-31 :— the storm center of modern criticism, and you will find in Genesis 1:31, the statement that the Lord completed His creative acts on the sixth day. “Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them. “And on the seventh day God ended his work which he had made; and he rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had made.” (Genesis 2:1-2). One moves only to Genesis 2:4 when he reads— “These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the Lord God made the earth and the heavens.” Critics say: “There it is again! Moses gets into a shindy with himself. In one chapter he tells you it took six days, and in the next he states that it was done in a day.” That would make of Moses a man, non compos mentis. In view of his matchless mind, there must be a sane explanation; and Moses himself makes it. Turn to Psalms 90:1-17 :—A Prayer of Moses the man of God—and read: “ * * A thousand years, in thy sight, are but as yesterday when it is past,” (Psalms 90:4) and concede, as the greater scientists, who were also the greatest of Bible believers—have uniformly agreed, that God’s creative day is not man’s solar day at all; and there is no trouble to enclose six shorter periods in one longer one. And since “day” is always an elastic word in Biblical uses, there is no inharmony whatever between Genesis 2:1 and Genesis 2:4. But, we turn, from the Old Testament Scriptures to the New Testament, to take up four apparent discrepancies. The first relates to the birth of our Lord. Matthew and Luke record His ancestry, and they are not in agreement. Many have stumbled over this, supposing it to be a discrepancy, in fact a contradiction. But here the explanation is extremely simple, for one traces His lineage through his Mother back to Abraham, or for fourteen generations, while the other traces it through His legal father, Joseph, forty-two generations back to Adam. Who would expect identity save the most superficial student? But, we proceed, and take a second point. The Healing of the Bind man outside Jericho. This incident is recorded by Matthew 20:29-34, Mark 10:46-52, and Luke 18:35-43. Matthew mentions two men as healed; Mark and Luke speak of only one: but that is not a contradiction nor a discrepancy. Mark and Luke fix attention upon the well-known man Bartimaeus and make no report of the other instance. Christ might have healed scores of blind men, but not all are reported. But there is a greater difficulty involved. Luke says the healing occurred as the Lord was approaching Jericho, while the other Gospels report it as having occurred when He was leaving the town. That looks serious, doesn’t it? Either of two explanations would suffice. If the translation “come nigh” means “in the vicinity,” there is no inharmony; or if a practical duplicate of healing of the blind took place one as He entered the city and one as he left, as was likely, you have no discrepancy. Still further—Take the instance of the superscription placed on the Cross, and the report of the separate evangelists. Matthew says: “This is Jesus, King of the Jews”; Mark says: “The King of the Jews”; Luke says: “This is the King of the Jews”; John says: “Jesus of Nazareth, the King of the Jews.” The wonder is not the discrepancy; the marvel is in the harmony, when four men recorded the impression made by that inscription. Naturally a man will set down the thing that impresses him; and in defense of plenary inspiration let it be remembered that there is not a particle of inharmony in these four reports. John seems to have given the whole of it, while each of the others records what he regarded as the essential part. Finally—take the accounts of the Resurrection of Jesus as recorded in the four Gospels. Matthew says “they saw an angel”; Mary said “They saw a young man”; Luke reports that, entering the sepulchre, they saw two men.” Is this “a contradiction” or “a discrepancy”? Hardly! Angels take the appearance of men and are commonly so reported. The presence of one man does not exclude that of another. The full reading of the four rather indicates what one writer has called a simple solution—that there was an angel outside of the tomb when the women approached it and another sitting in the tomb as they entered it. If the former followed them in, you would have a full explanation of John’s statement that there were two angels—one at the head, and one at the feet, where the body of Jesus had lain. Let it be remarked again that the so-called mistakes and discrepancies of Scriptures are creations of uninformed minds or prejudiced attitudes. As the mists of the morning vanish when the sun looks full upon them, so the mistakes of Scripture flee the sacred pages upon careful and intelligent study. In the light of Reason Revelation shines Resplendent. There are men who imagine that the use of Reason undermines Revelation, that the study of Science cuts the foundations from Scriptures, that keen and careful study discredits the Holy Book. But the exact opposite is true. The greatest Bible students have ever been, and will ever remain, the most ardent believers. The Bible itself teaches us to “prove all things” and to “hold fast only to that which is good.” Therein is set forth a principle and a practice to which only knaves and fools would ever object. We accept the Bible, then, as God’s Revelation to men first—because, as the Master said of it—“The Word is truth”; and second—because, when applied to life, it proves the “power of God unto salvation.” To believe what it says concerning Jesus is to discover a Saviour from sin. To believe what it says concerning the efficacy of His sacrifice on Calvary’s Cross is to discover, in His shed blood, the element of “cleansing from all sin.” To believe what it says concerning His Resurrection from the grave is to be filled with the hope of the saints’ resurrection from the same Charnel House; and to believe what it says concerning His soon and glorious return is to anticipate that Blessed hour when the sin-cursed world shall be snatched from the hands of the Adversary, and sin-cursed rulers shall abdicate in His behalf, and sin-cursed society shall not only come into a Utopia of uniform blessing, but also into a millennial reign which shall never end; but, after a thousand years, will be translated into the heavenlies “where there shall be no curse,” where “God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away.” (Revelation 21:4). ======================================================================== CHAPTER 20: 02.03. IS MY BIBLE MARRED BY REPUTED MIRACLES? ======================================================================== IS MY BIBLE MARRED BY REPUTED MIRACLES? John 3:1-36 opens with this statement— “There was a man of the Pharisees, named Nicodemus, a ruler of the Jews: “The same came to Jesus by night, and said unto him, Rabbi, we know that thou art a teacher come from God: for no man can do these miracles that thou doest, except God be with him.” This statement contains a concession. It admits that miracles had been performed by the Man from Nazareth. This concession is not made by an ignoramus, but by a scholar instead —a scholar of noble station who had had opportunities of observation and time in which to carefully consider. Was he mistaken? There are certain who say, “Yes; the Scriptures are marred by their reputed miracles.” There are others of equal competence who answer—“Nay; rather, the Scriptures are made of the miraculous.” It should be the object of this study to determine which of these contending companies is correct. To the skeptics of the “Strauss” sort “to believe in a miracle is an indication of Imbecility;” but to the minds of Leibnitz, Pascal, Copernicus, Kepler, Bacon, Newton, Kay, Faraday, the miracle was as natural to God as the gesture of a man’s hand is natural to the orator. However, the question of their having occurred is not settled by calling notable names, any more than the question of Evolution is settled by counting noses. Both subjects are open to argument. The intelligent man wishes to find for his feet firm standing ground, and gives himself to careful thought, seeking sound “reasons for the Faith that is in him.” That indeed is the Christian principle — “Prove all things”; “Hold fast only to that which is good” We propose for our consideration The Miracle Possibility, The Reputed Miracles, and, The Miracle of Miracles. THE MIRACLE POSSIBILITY First of all let us define the Miracle. What is it? The New Standard Dictionary defines—“A miracle as an event in the natural world, possible only by intervention and exertion of Divine power.” It is, then, the action of the supernatural in the natural realm. To believe in it, one must necessarily accept the existence of God. The Atheist cannot believe in a miracle; to him the supernatural does not exist. Such an intervention, therefore, as would change the course of nature becomes to him “a contradiction of the law of cause and effect.” But he thus ignores the circumstance that he himself, with his limited powers, never makes a motion without the violation of that same, supposedly, inviolable law. When he awakes in the morning and rises to dress himself, he has to overcome the law of “gravity” to get up. When he sits at the breakfast table and swallows his food, he has to break “the law of cohesion” in order to get it down. When he gets in his car to drive to his work he immediately enters upon a course of opposition to “the law of inertia.” If his theory of Evolution is correct (and it isn’t) he had to break the primal law of nature that each seed should “bring forth after its kind” in order to become a man at all. And, since he claims to have risen above that most persistent of all known natural laws, how does he prove that there are not other beings of far greater heights, who could interfere with mundane affairs as affectively as man himself is constantly doing? Lecky in his “History of Rationalism” says— “There is no contradiction involved in the belief that spiritual beings, of power and wisdom immeasurably transcending our own, exist; or that existing, they might, by the normal exercise of their powers perform feats as far surpassing the understanding of the most gifted of mankind as the electric telegraph and the prediction of an eclipse, surpass the faculties of a savage.” Certainly! And as John Stuart Mill reasoned: “A miracle is no contradiction to the law of cause and effect. It is a new effect supposed to be produced by the introduction of a new cause.” Admit God, and “all things are possible.” In the next place Let us note the miracle claim. “* * no man can do these miracles that thou doest.” Beyond all question, the Bible will stand or fall according to whether this claim be proven true or false. If you took the miraculous out of the Bible you would completely eviscerate it. In truth, the Bible claims to be wholly a miracle —a Book of supernatural origin, Supernatural life and supernatural influence. It should be no surprise; therefore, to find its pages often given to the record of supernatural events; and such is the case. The Old Testament abounds in them. Beginning with Adam’s creation in the Garden of Eden it takes a straight course to Malachi’s last word, recording one miracle after another and concluding with the promise of a major in the return of Elijah, the forerunner of the Lord—the Christ to come. Events such as the creation of Eve, the confusion of tongues at Babel, the marvels of Moses’ rod, the drouth in answer to Elijah’s prayer, the healing of Hezekiah, the preservation of Jonah in the fish’s belly—these are all recited with the clarity and calmness that commonly characterizes those who speak with authority and record what they “do know.” In the New Testament, the changing of water to wine, the healing of the nobleman’s son, Peter’s wife’s mother and others, the dispossession of the demoniacs, the bringing to life of the widow’s son, the daughter of Jairus, and His friend Lazarus—these and scores additional are written into the record as blithely, and with the same assurance of fact, as are recorded His words to the woman at the well, or the notes of His Sermon on the Mount. In Henryk Sienkiewisz’s “Quo Vadis” you may remember he is talking of Yinicius, Lygia’s lover and the nephew of Petronius. Lygia was a Christian and, as one of the young tribunes, Vinicius’ political aspirations stood somewhat in the way of his full surrender to the Christ of Lygia’s Faith. But, at the end of an illness which gave him much time and opportunity of thought, he found himself both convalescent and increasingly “astonished at the superhuman power of that religion which changed the souls of men to their foundations. He understood that in it there was something uncommon, something which had not been on earth before, and he felt that could it embrace the whole world, could it ingraft on the world its love and charity, an epoch would come recalling that in which not Jupiter, but Saturn had ruled. He did not dare either to doubt the supernatural origin of Christ, or His resurrection, or the other miracles. The eye-witnesses who spoke of them were too trustworthy and despised falsehood too much to let him suppose that they were telling things that had not happened. * * Vicinius, therefore, stood before a kind of marvellous puzzle.” On the one side loyalty to Rome beckoned; on the other the lordship of Christ called. The author had previously reported the effect upon Vinicius of Peter’s sermon. It was made up, for the most part, of simple rehearsal of what the apostle had seen, and concluded with a recitation of Thomas’ doubts, and also of how Christ, by the exposure of His wounded side to Thomas’ hand, had so far convinced him that Thomas fell at His feet and cried: “My Lord, and my God!” The author tells us “Vicinius listened” and, while it seemed incredible enough, he felt he would need to renounce his own reason in order to believe that Peter was lying. “There was something in his movements, in his tears, in his whole figure, and in the details of the events which he narrated, which made every suspicion impossible.” That is the effect that the whole Bible makes upon those who give to it a sympathetic study. Its miraculous incidents never astonish, even, such students. They seem not only as logical, but as natural as was the opening sentence of the Book itself—“In the beginning God.” A Miracle, Then, is Conceivable! The only ones whose minds are closed against its possible occurrence are the atheistic critics —The Humes, the Yoltaires, the Ingersolls! To follow them is to find oneself lost in a morass of skepticism. Concerning Hume, Lord Charlemont, his intimate associate, said: “An unfortunate disposition to doubt everything seemed interwoven with his nature; and never was there, I am convinced, a more thorough and sincere skeptic. He seemed not to be certain even of his own present existence, and he could not therefore be expected to entertain any settled opinion respecting his future state.” And that the opinion of his friend was independent of any prejudice against him is made clear when Hume himself writes concerning his own doubts, in these words: “They have so wrought upon me and heated my brain that I am ready to reject all belief and reasoning, and can look upon no opinion even as more probable or likely than another. Where am I, or what? I am confounded with all these questions, and begin to fancy myself in the most deplorable condition imaginable, environed with the deepest darkness, and utterly deprived of the use of every member and faculty.” Will the intelligent children of this generation accept instruction from, and adopt the opinions of, such darkened and darkening counsellors? If so, the future becomes an insoluble enigma and the present is a mere interrogation point. Suppose we admit that the miracle does not yield itself to easy explanation. Is that a ground for its rejection? Our great friend and fundamentalist co-laborer, William Jennings Bryan, used to answer that question—“Hardly; we constantly accept as so, what we cannot explain. Take this illustration from nature, if you please. In the Spring time I plant a black seed in two inches of brown earth. Shortly, from that brown earth, I get a green plant. Time moves along and that green plant produces a yellow blossom. That blossom develops into a melon a foot to eighteen inches long and six to nine inches in diameter. When the curl at its stem is dead, I tear it loose from the vine, and with my knife split it open. I find the epidermus green, the endoderm white, the content red, the seeds—scattered through—black. Who can explain the why and how of these many colors, and the regularity of their place and appearance?” If one stands dumb before a full-grown watermelon because it contains enigmas for which he is insufficient, will he essay to explain God? I grant you it may seem very unnatural to believe that by a word Christ could change water into wine, but it is not one whit more difficult nor even so marvelous as for Him, by the use of earth, sunshine and water, to change a blossom into a fifty-pound red-hearted watermelon. That poet, then, had occasion for her thought when she wrote: “Oh! ye Christians, learn the lesson; Are you struggling all the way! Cease your trying, change to trusting, Then you’ll triumph every day. ‘Whatsoever He bids you do it!’ Fill the water pots to brim, But remember, ‘tis His battle — Leave the miracle to Him.” THE REPUTED MIRACLES Beyond dispute, the Bible records many miracles. We have referred to a few from both the Old and the New Testaments, but, in presenting them, we have passed over a mighty number. The beginnings of Judaism, and those of Christianity, were especially fraught with miracle-working. Under Moses, what a mighty number! Under Elijah and Elisha, how many! Still more under Christ and His apostles! Neither the true prophet nor the Son of God indulged the habit of comparing Divine performances. Moses wrought many miracles, but in each and every case the wonder-work was a portion of, and essential to, the performance of the task in hand. Christ wrought more, and yet, as one of our most brilliant writers says—“He never used them for publicity purposes.” Each supernatural deed became with Him immediately “a closed incident.” He never employed it in self-advertisement; on the contrary, He often sought to silence its subjects. “See thou tell no man” was with Him a common injunction. Had they been ambitious exhibits of His personal power, the record of each would have been written in detail and employed on occasion. As against this human and self-centered custom He took an opposite course and compassed a hundred, yea for aught we know, thousands and yet in nine short words they are summed up — “And Jesus went about * * * healing all manner of sickness * * *”. (Matthew 4:23). Even His enemies in the council of the Pharisees were compelled to say—“* * * What do we? for this man doeth many miracles. If we let him thus alone, all men will believe on him.” (John 11:47). The same apostle further records: “But though he had done so many miracles before them, yet they believed not on him.” (John 12:37). A Two-fold Purpose Seemed to Animate the Master in miracle-working. First and foremost we believe—Compassion! Concerning the Gadarene He sent him home to tell how He had “had compassion upon him.” (Mark 5:19). At the foot of the mountain He found the epileptic child, and the parents besought Him saying: “* * but if thou canst do any thing, have compassion on us, and help us.” (Mark 9:22). Meeting the widow of Nain as she followed the bier of her son to the burial place, the Lord “had compassion on her.” (Luke 7:13). When the hungry crowd had stayed by three days and their last lunch was exhausted, Jesus said: “I have compassion on the multitude,” and He blessed the loaves and fishes with which to feed them. (Matthew 15:32). When the blind cried:— “* * Have mercy on us, O Lord, thou son of David,” (Matthew 20:30) “Jesus had compassion on them, and touched their eyes: and immediately their eyes received sight.” (Matthew 20:34). But why multiply texts more? The second reason for His miracle-working was an attestation of His Deity. Here we could quote an equal number of passages in proof, but we let John sum up for us the essential reason for His “many signs” wrought in the presence of His disciples, and not written in the Book, by saying of those recorded— “But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name.” (John 20:31). The great difference between the miracles of Christ and the reputed miracles of mere men is not only in the character of the work wrought, but in the reason for the act. Simon Magus was reputed to have made brass and stone dogs bark, or marble statues to talk; to have been able to transform himself sometimes into a serpent and at other times into a sheep or goat, and place his foot upon burning coals without blistering; but what is all that sort of foolishness worth except to make the performing individual appear “some great one”? Take the miracles that were wrought by the Egyptians in imitation of the wonders of Moses’ rod. What were they worth to mankind? When once Moses came to believe that God was with that rod, he opened with it the fountains of water that famished Israel might drink and live; he waved it over the sea and the liquid walls stood on either side for Israel’s safe passage. So of the miracles of Christ—they were meant to mark the path for the passage of God’s people ,and also to point to the fountain from which one could drink, never to thirst again. As Dr. Geo. C. Lorimer once said—“The miracles of Moses issued in a Jewish polity; those of the Lord in a Christian church,” which became the salt of the earth. The Bible miracles, therefore, instead of marring, make the Book. If the critics’ view of the Bible be a correct one, then we face a series of facts that find no explanation. First—Why doesn’t someone else write a ‘similar or a better canon and accomplish for it a kindred love and reverence? Second—Why doesn’t somebody else produce a book that lives as long, passes through as many editions, and grows daily in public demand? Third—Why doesn’t somebody else create a series of stories involving the wonderful, and make them to take a kindred hold upon the memory of readers? Fourth—Why doesn’t somebody else produce a book that quickens mentality, improves morals, exerts salutary influence, elevates society, and saves the individual from sin, as the Holy Scriptures have done? The answer is at hand—Because that somebody doesn’t live, and has not lived. The man who can become a competitor of God has not yet appeared. “Of making human books there is no end.” The teeming presses pour them forth by the thousands, yea millions even; but one Divine BOOK suffices for all centuries and all peoples and all circumstances. We conclude this treatise by a presentation of THE MIRACLE OF MIRACLES It is little use to be fussing about the fall of Jericho as unlikely, the Divine destruction of Sodom as nonsense, when within our own days we have seen the stories duplicated. San Pierre, with its 32,000, fell and was destroyed in a few seconds—and probably for the same reason that crumbled the walls of Jericho, THE SINFULNESS OF SIN. The heart of San Francisco was shaken down and burned up as surely as was Sodom and, in the judgment of man, because of its kindred condition. These are little miracles, almost within the explanation of the materialist. The destruction of Nineveh is not a stumbling-stone. Other cities of equal extent have been wiped out of existence. The swallowing of Jonah by the great fish and his preservation for three days in the whale’s belly is a comparatively small appeal to credulity. The miracle of miracles is Christ and Christianity! If there is no miracle, there was no Christ. He came not into the world by nature’s wonted ways. He was either Virgin-born—the product of a biological miracle—or He was not Christ. He was either Virgin-born or John was a deceiver when he said: “ * * Jesus Christ * * * is the true God.” (1 John 5:20). If He was not a miracle, His was not necessarily the Master mind; the report of His miracle-working not necessarily true; neither His deeds nor His words deserve the compliment—“We have never seen it on this wise!” The many who in Jerusalem on the Feast Day believed because “they saw the miracles which he did” were only deluded. (John 2:23). Christ Himself was only a faker, and faith in Him was but the acme of folly. If no miraculous Christ, then no spiritual body—the Church. Paul, the logician, puts that fact fully before us— “But if there be no resurrection of the dead, then is Christ not risen: “And if Christ be not risen, then is our preaching vain, and your faith is also vain. “Yea, and we are found false witnesses of God; because we have testified of God that he raised up Christ: whom he raised not up, if so be that the dead rise not. “For if the dead rise not, then is not Christ raised: “And if Christ be not raised, your faith is vain; ye are yet in your sins. “Then they also which are fallen asleep in Christ are perished. “If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men most miserable.” (1 Corinthians 15:13-19). The advocates of the Social Gospel are beginning to admit its failure; leaders among them are deploring its fruitlessness, and they are warmly admonishing their brethren to greater diligence in the endeavor of putting over the so-called Social Program. They do not at all comprehend the source or secret of their own weakness, having denied the Deity of Christ and having disputed the authority of the Book. In other words, having removed the supernatural from their philosophy —mistakenly called “theology”—they find themselves without standing-ground. When the foundations are removed, what can the righteous do? The supernatural gone, neither sanctity nor strength remain. The supernatural gone, worship is without occasion and good works are as futile as unaided human endeavor. The supernatural gone, the stars have lost their light, and even the sun has ceased to shine: at least that is what Romanes admitted, saying of his infidelity— “I am not ashamed to confess that with this virtual negation of God, the universe to me has lost its soul of loveliness; and although from henceforth the precept to ‘work while it is day’ will doubtless but gain an intensified force from the terribly intensified meaning of the words that ‘the night cometh when no man can work,’ yet when at times I think, as think at times I must, of the appalling contrast between the hallowed glory of that creed which once was mine, and the lonely mystery of existence as now I find it—at such times I shall ever feel it impossible to avoid the sharpest pang of which my nature is susceptible.” The confessions of disappointment now being made by the prophets of The Social Gospel are destined to deepen into despair. The false prophets of yesterday are the pessimists of today and the proclaimers of “another Gospel” which is “no gospel,” will be the radical despoilers of society itself tomorrow. Already, having loosed their bark from the Divine Rock of Holy Scriptures, they are adrift; and those who ride gaily with them, if they will, may hear even now the roar of the Niagara toward which they draw nigh. McCann wrote a book “God or Gorilla” and it mightily disturbed the ministers of modernism. But there is another question now—Is it God or Fixed Law? The supernatural expressed in a Miracle—Energy Divine and Eternal, or the Natural working itself out in the Helmholtz theory of dissipation or degradation? Further and Finally— If no Christ, then no soul-salvation. Salvation itself is a supernatural work made possible by a supernatural Christ, and made effective by a supernatural Spirit, through a supernatural experience. Begbie’s “Twice-Born Men” is a classic of illustrations. ‘The drunkard became sober; the lust-monger became a sacred lover; the thief, over night, was made a protector of other people’s property; the harlot-sister was meta-morphosed into a saint. In the New Testament we are told how Jesus of Nazareth touched the fevered form and the fever subsided; laid His fingers upon the eyes of the blind and instantly they saw; spoke a word to the demon-possessed and he came to his right mind; uttered a promise to the leper and he was cleansed; cried with a loud voice to the buried and they came forth fully alive! Men say that these things sound unreasonable, but if we see them still occurring, then the miracle may gather to itself converts from among even modernists; and Begbie saw that, and reported them. Some years ago “The Youth’s Companion” reported a conversation between one Mr. Hardy and Mr. Clark of the downtown Chicago Mission. Hardy said “Of course, no one believes in miracles nowadays.” Clark responded: “I do.” “You mean you think miracles occurred in the time of Christ? That’s a superstition.” “Maybe so,” said Clark, “but I know they are occurring in my time.” “Show me one,” said Hardy. “Several,” replied Mr. Clark. “Come with me.” In the downtown they entered a hall between two saloons, and took seats with a crowd of men and women so dilapidated in appearance that Hardy whispered to Clark— “What sort of a place is this you have brought me to? It looks like you had all the ‘downs and outs’ here.” “We have,” said Clark. A hymn was given out, a prayer was made, a big fellow with a voice like thunder rose and spoke; and for half an hour he poured out a perfect torrent of appeal to a roomful of lost men and women. He begged, urged, and plead; and finally when he said: “Will you come?” a score of those ragged wretches shambled to the front and the big fellow got down and prayed with them, his arms about them. The meeting was over, and Hardy and Clark went out. “Well,” said Clark, “you have seen a miracle, haven’t you?” “Oh, I don’t know,” said Hardy. “It was a good Temperance talk, but where is your miracle?” “The big man that addressed us! Nine months ago he was a professional gambler and a notable thief. Six times over he has been sent to state prisons. He spent fortunes in drink and vice, but one night in that same mission something happened to him. Instantly he abandoned all his old habits, forsook all of his godless friends, and from that moment till now he has been doing what you saw him do tonight. He is clean; he is wholesome; he is honest; he is a Christian of the highest type, and his earnestness of appeal is only a slight expression of his passion for souls.” Hardy was silent a moment, and then he said: “Clark, you are right; I have seen a miracle!” ======================================================================== CHAPTER 21: 02.04. IS MY BIBLE A BLOOD-STAINED BOOK? ======================================================================== IS MY BIBLE A BLOOD-STAINED BOOK? Paul, in Hebrews 9:22, says: “Almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission.” This very term “blood” has become an offense to certain intellectuals of this generation. It is quite the habit of modern theologians to decry the term, and to declare that “in a day when war is being outlawed, the gospel of blood is an insult to intelligence.” Paul, the most prominent exponent of Christianity in its beginning days, did not so think. On the contrary, to him any aspersion upon “the blood” was a Divine offense, destined to dire judgment. He wrote: “If we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins. But a certain fearful looking for of judgment, and fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries. He that despised Moses’ law died without mercy under two or three witnesses: Of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall he be thought worthy who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace?” (Hebrews 10:26-29) To bring any reproach, therefore, upon “the blood” is to fall under Divine condemnation, and as the apostle writes: “It is a fearful thing To fall into the hands of the living God.” (Hebrews 10:31). However, we shall proceed to study the matter of blood-shedding as it is found in the Scriptures, whether it relates to murder, war, or the sacrifice of lambs in atonement for sin. Three phrases may suffice for all: The Blood Trail: The Blood Truth: and The Blood Atonement. THE BLOOD TRAIL It is true that a scarlet thread runs through sacred scripture and not all of it expressed the divine pleasure, nor was shed by Divine appointment. There is the blood sinfully shed by man-murder; the blood shed with God’s consent-war; and the blood shed at God’s command-sacrifice. 1—The Blood Sinfully Shed by Man! The first frightful fruit of sin on man’s part, voiced itself in the shedding of Abel’s blood by his brother Cain. That was not God’s will, but Satan’s work instead. Upon that sin and upon all its kindred successors, the wrath of God has rested. “Now art thou cursed;’’ “the ground shall not henceforth yield unto thee;” “a fugitive and a vagabond shalt thou be in the earth.” (Genesis 4:11-12). We will have gone but a little way into the history of human kind until God finds it necessary to express his appreciation of human life and at the same time voice dire judgment against anyone who dared to ruthlessly destroy it. “Whosoever sheddeth man’s blood by man shall his blood be shed.” (Genesis 9:6). There are those who imagine that God had his specially favored, concerning whom His law would be more leniently interpreted; who, therefore, conclude that when Moses interfered in a fair fight between one of his own kin and an Egyptian and smote the Egyptian, he excited little or no Divine wrath. But all such as reach that conclusion indulge prejudiced minds rather than consult the course of history. Moses, object of God’s marvelous grace as he was, paid the penalty of his deed. His life was sought by Pharaoh and he had to flee the land, and for forty years dwelt, practically a prisoner, on “the back side of the desert” You will find it uniform that God’s judgment follows those who ruthlessly, or with malice of forethought, destroy their fellows. God never has and never can condone murder! There is no more maudlin sentiment abroad today than that which interprets the sixth commandment—“‘Thou shall not kill,” as opposing capital punishment. In fact, it does the exact opposite—it demands capital punishment. In the chapter following the one that contains God’s decalogue, we have it written with the pen of inspiration: “He that smiteth a man so that he die, shall surely be put to death,” and while there was a place of refuge for the one who unwittingly killed, if a man “came presumptuously upon his neighbor to slay him with guile, even the holiness of the altar itself was not to save him from the executioner’s hand. (Exodus 21:14), My beloved Minnesota is bleeding today because its cheap politicians have put aside God’s law and through soft and sinister legislation converted the state into a mecca for murderers. 2—The Blood Shed with God’s Consent. Here I have found my most serious mental and moral problems. I confess, frankly, that for a long period of time the pages of sacred Scripture that record the capture of the cities of ancient Syria, later known as Palestine, giving the slaughter of the natives dwelling there, proved to me the hardest portion of Holy Writ to accept with equanimity, or explain with satisfaction. We remember the covenant with Abraham: “Unto thy seed have I given this land, from the river of Egypt unto the great river, the river Euphrates. The Kenites, and the Kenizites, and the Kadomites, and the Hittites, and the Perizzites, and the Rephaims, and the Amorites, and the Canaanites, and the. Girgasites, and the Jebusites.” (Genesis 15:18-21). We follow on to discover that the cities of these people fell before the hordes of Israel: and in the process, men, women and children were slaughtered without mercy in mighty numbers. But a fresh reading, and a more careful one, of the whole history shows that Israelites, who engaged in this wholesale slaughter, were seldom acting on direct Divine advice! They followed instead the usual lines of warfare—they killed the enemy in order to conquer his country. That does not necessarily involve the Divine pleasure, or even certify the Divine consent as to methods. We have little doubt that God was in the migration of the Pilgrim Fathers, and that He, in His infinite wisdom, brought their bark to Plymouth Rock; nor is there much less question that God’s providence was in the white man’s capture and settlement of America. Here was one of His greatest and richest of continents, yea two of them, North America and South America, inhabited by wild, nomadic tribes, who, in their indolence and lust, lived without labor upon nature’s almost inexhaustible resources. They hunted, they fished, they fought, they died; life had little meaning to them, and God had no place among them. Righteousness was practically an unknown word, and their land, while teeming with animal life, was a moral waste. It is not surprising, even, that an infinitely wise God should both prefer and plan its different and better occupation. But that is not to say that He consented to all the deceptions and cruel methods of the white man; nor do we believe that the Old Testament binds Bible lovers to an endorsement of all the immoral deeds in taking the cities of that great oriental section and reeking slaughter upon its thousands and tens of thousands of debased, ignorant and helpless people. The objective of another occupation of the land, He did approve. But not all the ways of men in working their own wills. To be sure there was a point of danger that had to be guarded against or else Israelitish occupation would have proven little better than that of the Canaanites, Hittities and Amorites— namely, amalgamation. To have preserved the women and children alike would have resulted in a hybrid-race and a possible degeneracy of religion; and, instead of a land that would honor God, it would have lapsed into a state of equally gross idolatry. Without saying they were always justified in means and methods, it may be admitted that an all-wise Administrator of earthly affairs could not ignore final consequences and retain either a reputation for intelligence or His estimation of the good. We come then to a further consideration, and to the direct object of this confessedly crimson text: 3—The Blood shed at God’s command. We speak now of the system of sacrifices, inaugurated in the Old Testament, where animal blood was shed at God’s command, to adumbrate the sacrifice of “the Lamb of God” in the New Testament. Leviticus 16:1-34 is the Divine record of the Great Day of Atonement. On that day Aaron, the High Priest, must put on the holy linen coat to typify the holy character of Christ—the High Priest to come. He was to wash afresh in water to symbolize that in Him—Christ, there should be found no spot or stain. He was to bring a young bullock for a sin offering and a ram for a burnt offering, the bullock for himself to make an atonement for him and his house, acknowledging thereby the fact that he, unlike his Lord (who should finally fill the High Priest’s place) was not without sin. This bullock and this ram, and the two kids of the goats, from the congregation and for them, he was to slay and the blood was to be sprinkled by Divine appointment. This was the beginning of a system which, carried through Israelitish history, involved not only hundreds but thousands and tens of thousands of animals that lost their lives in the foundation laying of the Christian faith. It is against this slaughter that the critics have revolted; this destruction of God’s beautiful and innocent creatures against which the modernists rave, calling it “the gospel of the shambles.” But how superficial such conclusions! In the first place man has always lived upon the lower creation of vegetable and animal life, and the same individuals who stand aghast at this slaughter, kill the chickens that have gathered at their feet for their daily feed, and have trusted them as friends and defenders, the lambs that have gamboled with the children on the green, and the faithful ox that labors to produce for them vegetable food, they slay and eat with never an inkling of wrong. But when it comes to our religion, how keen is their revolt and how sensitive become their sympathies. The reason for these facts is found in the scripture statement: “The natural man receiveth not the things of the spirit.’’ But someone says: “Think of the waste of animal life!” Such critics only voice their ignorance. The bodies of the sacrificed beasts and birds were not thrown away. When the blood with which the altar was to be sprinkled, had been used, typifying the Great Atonement to be made on Calvary’s Cross, the carcasses went to the priest and people for consumption. God prohibited the eating of the blood since “the life is in the blood,” but never the consumption of the flesh of the beasts, since they were originally created for man’s sustenance. This revolt, then, is not against the shedding of blood, but rather against God! Let us consider further THE BLOOD TRUTH God’s sacred law is against the shedding of Human Blood. We have already shown how it was with Cain and even with Moses. We might follow through the Old Testament and multiply the names of murderers, only to find that God followed each with certain adequate judgment. His law is sacred and should he so regarded, and all the laws of man that are righteous and true and good are substantially based on the decalogue. “Thou shalt not kill” is written into the statutes of practically every state on earth. But man at his pleasure, in foul courts and at so-called bars of justice, but limply executes that law, and the majority of murderers now escape trial even, much less life-incarceration or capital punishment. That is why the world multiplies its highwaymen, increases its bank-robbers; why newspapers have their pages stained daily with bloody reports. The law of “a life for a life” is left in the limbo of court-failures, or in the morgues of injustice. The disregard of Divine law is the destruction of Human statutes—the suicide of civilization. God’s justice often manifests itself in war. These are days when the same sentimentalists who would let the murderer go free (or at most enclose him in a pen and feed and clothe him there until, being paroled, or having escaped, he attempts taking another life) assume to themselves the high sounding name of Pacifists, and plead for the destruction of armies and navies, sadly forgetting that there are some things far worse than civil or even international conflicts. Russia, who is training the largest army the world ever knew in one nation, is professing pacifism towards her sister states, but practicing diabolical butchery against every man who dares resist her system of civilian slavery or utters the slightest criticism of her autocrats. God is not in that—a thousand times no! He was, we believe, in the war between the United States and Spain, when our government sought freedom for the people of the islands to the southeast of us. He was with the armies that marched into China to end the bloody Boxer regime. In fact it would be quite impossible to study any great war in history without reaching the firm conviction that God finally interfered for right and righteousness. There are principles of righteousness, so in-wrought in the shedding of blood, that they prove themselves fruitful in the lives of men. We have seen that the crimes in America today are committed by youths on parole. Imprisonment taught them nothing except new notions on how to more successfully engage in a holdup, bank robbery or murder, for money. But the executioner of the law is differently affected! The sheriff who cuts the rope on the old gallows, or the jailer who straps the victim in the electric chair, how rarely have these men ever gone from their jobs to wilful murder of their fellows. They have seen the final fruits of sin and crime and learned; their practice has been abstinence from such sins and such crimes. You will see that the righteousness of God’s law and the unfailing custom of the Divine law to follow iniquity with retribution, is both intelligent and wholesome. It impresses respect for law, and even its executioner is profited thereby. But God’s symbols are found in sacrifices. The bullocks, the sheep, the goats, the doves, that whole dripping company of old Testament slaughter, pointed with unerring finger to the sacrifice on Calvary. Our conviction is that if the same critics who condemn it, would give themselves to a study of the Epistle to the Hebrews, they would turn from its censure to its approval. The High Priest there was only a prophecy of our High Priest, who, for us, “has entered in within the vail.” The blood shed there was only a type of the blood shed in our behalf. The atonement in Leviticus was intended to teach the atonement made on Calvary’s cross. Let us consider, then, THE BLOOD ATONEMENT This blood atonement involved only principles of justice. It regards the breaking of a righteous law as worthy of penalty. It involves the fact that sin was an offense to a righteous God, and His judgment was a result of His holiness. “Under an Eastern sky, Amid a rabble cry, A man went forth to die For me. Thorn-crowned His blessed head, Blood-stained, His weary tread. Cross-laden He was led, For me. Pierced were His hands and feet, Three hours o’er Him heat Fierce rays of noontide heat For me. Thus wert Thou made all mine Lord, make me wholly Thine, Grant grace and strength divine To me. In thought, and word, and deed, Thy will to do; Oh, lead My soul, e’en though it bleed, To Thee.” Still further, The doctrine of Atonement Defends God’s Mercy. When atonement is made He can be at once “just, and the Justifier of the wicked.” My friend Dr. Massee delights to illustrate this by telling the story how, when a youth, he was disobedient and deserved the stripes that his father threatened, should he be found guilty again. But just as the lash was lifted to fall upon his little back, his big brother flung himself over him, literally covering him with his greater body. This elder brother took every stroke willingly that the little brother might be saved the same. The word “Atonement” means “covering.” That is what our brother, Christ, did on the cross. He covered us with His own body. Then again, Atonement Cleanses Character. We may not be able to explain the process by which the crimson from the veins of Christ takes the color out of our sins. The Word is “Come now, and let us reason together, saith the Lord, Though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool.” A few days ago in the South with a number of friends we visited the beautiful grounds of Mrs. Gray, the millionaire, just out of Winston-Salem, N. C. One of them asked the manager of the estate for a red poppy that was in full bloom. He readily clipped it and handed it over. My friend took it home, connected up a red electric light bulb, and turning on the light, held it over the scarlet poppy. Instantly every bit of color left it and it became as white as snow. Such indeed is the effect on character when the blood of Christ is applied to the crimson stain of sin, but with this difference, the poppy was made white temporarily; the sin-stained soul is made white eternally. “If the blood of bulls and of goats, and the ashes of an heifer sprinkling the unclean, sanctifieth to the purifying of the flesh; how much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?” (Hebrews 9:13-14). The atonement tends to change the wicked into the Holy. Dr. A. T. Pierson, in his volume, “God’s Living Oracles,” recites this interesting incident as of the war between Russia and Circassia in the middle of the last century: “The prophet chief Schamyl, almost adored by his followers, found that some one was exposing to the enemy his designs and plans; and he made a decree, which he promulgated to his followers, that if the traitor were found out, one hundred lashes on the bare back should be administered for the offense. A few days later, it was discovered, to his astonishment that the guilty party was his own mother. He went into fasting and retirement for two days, and coming out, pallid and ghastly, ordered his mother to be brought from the tent and her back bared for the scourge. He stood by while one, two, three, four, five of those fearful lashes gashed her flesh; then he bade the executioner arrest his blows; bared his own back, and took the other ninety-five lashes on his own person, till the flesh hung in shreds. The effect, it is said, was electric—his followers were melted, and even his mother was utterly subdued, as she could never have been by mere force.” There is nothing known to the experiences of men, that, for the breaking down of a stubborn heart, equals the exhibition of vicarious love. There is in “the goodness of God,” who in the person of His Son died that we might not die, that which leads us to repentance, shakes us out of ourselves and subdues us to His ways and will. The Bible is not a blood-stained Book, but rather the Book that shows how the blood of Jesus Christ, God’s Son cleanses us from all sin!” “Not all the blood of beasts, On Jewish altars slain, Could give my guilty conscience peace, Or wash away its stain. But Christ the heavenly Lamb Took all my guilt away; A sacrifice of nobler name And richer blood than they. My soul looks back to all The burden thou didst bear When hanging on the accursed tree For all my guilt was there. Believing I rejoice To see the curse remove And bless the Lamb with cheerful voice And sing redeeming Love.” ======================================================================== CHAPTER 22: 02.05. HAS ARCHAEOLOGY DISCREDITED MY BIBLE? ======================================================================== HAS ARCHAEOLOGY DISCREDITED MY BIBLE? In John’s gospel, John 17:17, we have this sentence from one of the prayers of the Saviour. He says to the Father “Sanctify them through Thy truth; Thy Word is truth.” It seems most probable that by “Thy Word” He meant the Holy Scriptures. Such an interpretation would harmonize with the Psalmist statement: “Thy Word is true from the beginning.” (Psalms 119:160). It must be admitted that in all the multiplied references to the Bible found in the utterances of Jesus, He treated it as “The Word of God.” It has been said often, but cannot be said too often, that the Bible is not a text hook on science and was never so intended. In the language of the late William Jennings Bryan, “it was not written to show how the heavens go; but how to go to Heaven.” However, the moment we claim Divine inspiration for the book we are obligated to defend its accuracy on every subject to which it addresses itself. If God is its author, He is incapable of mistakes or misstatements. That fact does not involve perfect accuracy for all versions of scripture, but would call for infallibility for the originals in both Old and New Testaments, and comparative accuracy, approaching perfection, for those established versions upon which scholars, in large numbers, have labored together to produce translations as nearly perfect as is possible to human endeavor. Archeology is comparatively a new science; and since it is a science that deals with ancient history, that very fact brings the whole Bible within the circle of its inspection, and subjects the same to its scrutiny. When this science originated, Bible opponents expected from it decided help in their endeavors to discredit the canon of scripture. Now that this science is rapidly reaching the acme of its possible accomplishments, we can take account of the consequences; and, we find, as believers confidently expected, that, in it, Christianity has found a friend and the whole Bible a defense. We shall associate what we have to say on this subject with three suggestions: The Preservation of the Canon, The Probing of its Claims, The Proving of its Contents. THE PRESERVATION OF THE CANON Two or three observations upon this subject will be quite in order. First, the life of the Bible has been assiduously sought. It is most remarkable that a book ever appeared in the world that has won to itself so many friends as have the sacred scriptures. For nearly two thousand years this book has continued to be in ever increasing demand, and today you could take a dozen of the best sellers known to the world’s book trade, and the Bible will exceed all their sales for the year. It is pretty nearly the only book where a single copy fails to meet the individual’s need. Often a man owns a dozen and some a hundred copies. Seldom a Christian home so poor as to contain but a single one. Such is its popularity. But the converse is equally true. No book was ever hated as the Bible has been hated, and hunted with the purpose of destruction, as the Bible has been hunted. Through its entire history it has been the object of intense and malignant persecution. Again and again endeavors have been made, sometimes by mighty potentates, at others by powerful governments, to annihilate the scriptures. Laws have been enacted looking to the burning of the last copy that could be discovered; and, believing individuals have again and again been arrested, tried, convicted, and at times put to death for the possession of even a portion of this sacred book. It Is all the more remarkable, therefore,’ that it has survived, and remains absolutely intact. We are not compelled to put up with a mutilated Bible. We have the whole book. “O Word, of God incarnate, O Wisdom from on high, O Truth unchanged, unchanging, O Light of our dark sky, We praise thee for the radiance That from the hallowed page, A lantern to our footsteps, Shines on from age to age. The Church from her dear Master Received the gift divine, And still that light she lifteth O’er all the earth to shine. It is the golden casket Where gems of truth are stored; It is the heav’n-drawn picture Of Christ the living Word. It floateth like a banner Before God’s host unfurled; It shineth like a beacon Above the darkling world; It is the chart and compass That o’er life’s surging sea, ‘Mid mists and rock and darkness, Still guides, O Christ, to Thee. O make Thy Church, dear Saviour, A lamp of purest gold, To bear before the nations Thy true light as of old! 0 teach Thy wand’ring pilgrims By this their path to trace, Till, clouds and darkness ended, They see Thee face to face!” Its hiding places were providentially provided. We know how difficult it is for even an intelligent and satanically aided man to escape the law, when the minions thereof are on his track, engaged in a diligent search for him. If they desire to do so. sooner or later the detectives lay hands upon the criminal. A book has no ability to hide, none even to move from place to place, and no wits with which to out-manouvre its enemies. It is all the more remarkable that The Bible could escape detection. Especially does this seem true when we recall how diligent was the search, and how determined were the destroyers. However, the very term “Archeology” contains a partial explanation of how this marvelous protection took place. To begin with, the Oriental, partly due to the fixed forms of an ancient civilization, and partly due to the character of his climate, is a slow moving individual. When battles destroyed a city or a fire burned one or the winds blew clouds of dust or sand and covered it out of sight, he calmly faced the wreck and ruin and went his way to other parts, and to lighter tasks than uncovering or rebuilding. The result was that among the buried treasures of these demolished or sand-covered cities, would be, not only ancient libraries on clay tablets or papyrus, but also an occasional hidden and overlooked copy of the sacred scriptures. Once buried in such silent, and for centuries-to-be, undisturbed graves, God’s word was safe. That’s how it fell out, just two years before I was born, that Tischendorf uncovered the Sinaitic manuscript of the New Testament in a convent near Mt. Sinai. For something like sixteen hundred years it had lain in its secret hiding place, safe against Satan and all the fury of the Middle Ages, awaiting the day when it could safely come forth to the praise of God and the good of man. How marvelous has been this Divine preservation! As Arthur Pierson once said: “While kingdoms have been dismembered, thrones have crumbled, and nations dropped out of history, the Word of God, firmer than the eternal hills, has survived them all!” “The Bible stands like a rock undaunted ‘Mid the raging storms of time; Its pages burn with the truth eternal, And they glow with a light sublime. “The Bible stands like a mountain tow’ring Far above the works of men; Its truth by none ever was refuted, And destroy it they never can. “The Bible stands and it will forever, When the world has passed away; By inspiration it has been given, All its precepts I will obey. “The Bible stands every test we give it, For its Author is divine; By grace alone I expect to live it, And to prove it and make it mine.” The time of these discoveries provide further evidence of Divine Providence. The most important of them have been made since the rise of higher criticism. Just at the time when Satan adopted new tactics in his attempt to discredit the Scriptures, God brought forth His reserve defenses of the Holy Book. I shall not, at this point, indulge in the citing of particular instances, proving this assertion, for the double reason that no one can successfully dispute it; and at a later point, in this chapter, the witnesses will be called to the stand and their testimony taken. In the meantime, we can but marvel at the matchless way in which God has preserved His word. Our amazement will increase also as we follow the diabolical endeavors to discredit it, and the Divine wisdom and power exhibited in its defense. “Upon the Gospel’s sacred page The gathered beams of ages shine; And, as it hastens, every age But makes its brightness more divine. “On mightier wing, in loftier flight, From year to year does knowledge soar; And, as it soars, the Gospel light Becomes effulgent more and more.” THE PROBING OF ITS CLAIMS We have already called attention to the furious opposition Sacred Scripture has faced throughout its history, and for that matter, is still facing. In Russia today the possession of a Bible is not only a crime, hut in many instances is made a capital offense. Satan has not yet ceased his hatred of the Holy Word, and his emissaries have not all been like the average ruler of Russia—a brutal ruffian who has murdered his way into place and power. On the contrary, the adversary has proved his astuteness by selecting scholars and scientists as his detectives and executives, and right thoroughly have they done their work. The higher critics naturally set upon the unlikely statements of Sacred Scripture. They have walked round about Zion; they have marked well her bulwarks, but at the same time they have looked for open breaches, for possible underground tunnels, for any conceivable point of access, and they have become convinced that they have discovered not a few. For instance, according to the scriptures, man has been on the earth not to exceed 7000 years. The higher critics adopted a philosophy of Darwin, and felt sure they could prove human occupancy of the earth for anywhere from 40,000 years to nearly a million. The Pentateuch purports to be the writings of Moses. Their evidence indicated that in Moses’ day writing was unknown. Still further, there was no proof, outside the sacred scriptures, that such a man as Moses ever lived. They said, “go to, we will demonstrate even that Moses never existed.” Passing along they reached the report of the flood in the 7th chapter of his first book, and they said, “Here is a weak point! No flood could ever cover all the mountains of the world and not destroy it entirely. Another breach in the walls of the so-called sacred canon and we will enter to conquer.” Still further, they came to the history of the four kings who captured and carried away Lot, only to be defeated later by Abraham and the servants of his house, with Lot’s recovery. Here they paused and set down the remark, “Improbable! No other literature mentions such kings. They were traditions of imagination only, foisted upon a book that folly claimed to be Divine.” Coming to the history of Joseph they made another pause and said: “According to Genesis 47:1-31, an Egyptian king, acting on the advice of a Jew, not only gave the best of the land to Joseph’s brothers—Egypt’s enemies, but stripped the king’s subjects and blood—kin of all their wealth, and enslaved the person of the last one of them to the throne.” “That is unnatural,” they said. “Another weakness in the walls of a pretentious volume!” Still further along they found in the same Old Testament, the Book of Daniel, and a king named Belshazzar on the throne. History indicated that the king of that hour was not Belshazzar but Nabonidus instead. Once more they wrote, “A historic mistake!” and so on. They catalogued their errors; they found the breaches; they shouted to their sympathetic companions; they charged, expecting not only to enter in, but to rout every believer and bring to this book the dishonor and disgrace it deserved. But, this was not the end! These same scholars subjected the whole of the New Testament history to critical examination. They demanded proof that all of the authors named ever had an existence. In case it was shown that such individuals lived, then it must be fully demonstrated that they wrote the books bearing their name. That done, the greater task remained to prove that those books were original with them or received from a higher power, instead of being either rehashes from old traditional sources, historic tablets or fables. Still further, it must be demonstrated that these volumes were the work of a single hand, and not a compilation from different authors, assembled, edited and finally brought into circulation by third parties. At each of these points they wrought Assiduously, leaving no stone unturned. Years of time, unlimited money, and earnestness of purpose characterized their contest. Not one opinion of scripture that was favorable, not one passage of scripture that was sensible, not a dot of these writings but must be scrutinized. Isn’t it a strange procedure that man could be brought to hate a book that has been only of greatest blessing to every individual who has ever believed it, to every circle that has ever received it, and to every state and nation that has ever been influenced by it. Yet this is what we behold. The only parallels to this spirit that history has recorded seem to have emanated from the same source. When Moses was born, his life was sought. The enemy seemed to anticipate his influence, and even the emanations from his pen, and hated him. David, who built a nation and whose writings occupy so conspicuous a place in the Old Testament scriptures, was kept from death at the hands of Satanic agencies, by the narrowest margin, again and again. The prophets of the Old Testament were, most of them, put to death. Their martyrdom was the price they paid for the privilege of authorship. When Christ was born, all Hell moved in opposition, and God-Incarnate in the Babe of Bethlehem, had to be carried down into Egypt to escape the Herodian slaughter. Finally, the minions of the pit tracked Him to Calvary’s Cross, and nailed Him there, feeling that at last they had secured a victory. But God’s power brought out of Joseph’s new tomb a man more glorious, more divine, and one to be more feared by Hell itself. Little wonder that the life of the Bible should have been sought; that every conceivable point of attack should have been employed; that its destruction should have been desired. But the same God who preserved Moses in the bulrushes, and brought him into the king’s house; who guided the javelin from the hands of the mad-Saul so that it missed the head of the boy David, thereby preserving him for the office of king; who made dead prophets more eloquent than the living, the same God who gave to Jesus Christ the triumph over his enemies, even against death and the grave, has also given victory to His Holy Word, and the science of Archeology, the very instrument with which they sought its life, has become the agency for THE PROVING OF ITS CONTENTS The archeologist’s spade has become the succorer of the Sacred Canon. Let’s see! They sought to discredit Genesis on the age of man. Some years ago, Sir Charles Lyell, figuring the age of the world by the rate at which mud deposits itself in the delta of the Nile, made a discovery of pottery so deep that he estimated it took at least 30,000 years for the deposits. That looked bad for Genesis. But, the interested scientists took that pottery into hand and studied it carefully, to decide unanimously, that it was modern Roman, and so several thousand years this side of the Old Testament claim of human occupancy of the earth. Point One! As we saw, their next contention was about the Pentateuch. Writing was unknown in the age of Moses, they said, and the Pentateuch could not have been his work; but somebody, hundreds of years after his purported time, had penned these things, or at least, combined many authors into Pentateuchal form. Then, once more, the spade went to work and the Code of Hammurabi was uncovered, and when finally it was deciphered, it was found that writing preceded Moses by at least 500 years, possibly by a thousand years, and was in fact a highly developed art at that time. Second blow for destructive critics! But those same critics had denied that Moses himself ever lived; that the name was ever worn by such a historic character as the Old Testament presented. Once more the stones cried out, and I myself, saw in the British Museum, the name of Moses, brought from the archives of the earth. Point three, made against the professing scholars! Still further, these critics told the world that the story of the flood was a mere myth, and when they were reminded by even more competent scholars that every nation of the earth had its tradition of the flood, they still responded, “Traditions prove nothing! What we demand is evidence.” It is only a few years since that demand was met. Pennsylvania has been justly proud of Dr. Woolley. As an archeologist, he has few equals and no superiors. His work of uncovering Ur of the Chaldees is known to all the scholars of the world. While he was about it, he reached one day, perfectly clean clay, uniform, and his workmen announced they had come to the bottom of everything—to the river silt. But Woolley said, “Dig on.” They went down through this clean clay for more than eight feet, when suddenly they struck a layer of rubbish full of stone implements and pottery. To their amazement Woolley, when they took it up, said, “There is no doubt this was laid down by the flood of the Sumerian history”— the flood of Noah’s story. Point four! Most unfortunate for the critics! But, we continue: We have in Genesis 47:1-31, the story of how Joseph, a Jew, brought the Egyptian king to a point where Joseph’s relatives were permitted to live securely in Egypt, in “the land of Goshen for a possession,” that is, a full ownership, and at the same time it is recorded that the King, consenting to Joseph’s advice, enslaved every living Egyptian, taking from him, first his money, then the fruits of his land, then the land itself, and finally the bodies of the people as the last demand of the throne. Now that involved two or three apparently incredible things. First, that an Egyptian King, who hated a Jew and his occupation of sheep-keeping, should become so generous as to give him, in fee simple, the best of the land. Second, that he should be so completely dominated by Joseph as to take the last liberty from his own nation. Now it is learned that the Hyksos ruler, on the throne in Joseph’s day, was not an Egyptian at all, and had no particular love for Egyptians. He was like the Jewish rulers of Russia, an interloper, and had no concern for the land, and instead of having antipathy to sheep keeping, belonged, himself, to a shepherd race. All that, brought out by Archeology, confirms instantly how Genesis 47:1-31 was both conceivable and certain. Point five against the critics! But we pass from this fifth point to the sixth one, namely, the story of Genesis 14:1-12—how “In the days of Amraphel, King of Shinar, Arioch, King of Ellassar, Chedorlaomer, King of Elam, and Tidal, King of nations, made war with Bera, King of Sodom, and with Birsha, King of Gomorrah, Shinah, King of Admah, and Shemever, King of Zeboiim, and the King of Bela, which is Zoar. In the conflict they took all the goods of Sodom and Gomorrah and went their way, and they took Lot, Abraham’s brother’s son, who dwelt at Sodom, and his goods and departed.” When Abraham heard that Lot was taken captive he went after them, with trained servants, born in his own house, three hundred and eighteen; overtook and defeated them, recovered Lot and carried him back. The names of these four kings were not found when higher criticism first began its work. They fixed upon that as another breach, and said no such kings ever lived. Here again the stones cried out, charging these critics with ignorance, and producing the evidence. In the British Museum I had the pleasure, under the leadership of Ada Habershon, of seeing those names on Archeological tablets. Sixth point against the critics. Still further, in the Book of Daniel, Belshazzar is described as having a Bacchanalian feast with a thousand of his lords and ladies, when the Medo-Persian army came in and executed the Divine decree that had already been written upon the walls of the palace, and “That night was Belshazzar slain.” These erstwhile scientists said, “No!” Belshazzar was not king; Nabonidus was the ruler instead,” and they pointed to secular history to prove it. But, those same ancient archives spoke, testifying the fact that Nabonidus, at that time was absent from his kingdom on a warlike excursion against an enemy, and Belshazzar, his son, sat upon the throne as the vice-regent. Seven is God’s numeral—we think it sufficient! There are many other points where the stones have cried out against the professing scholars, and in every instance have worsted them. But, in the language of the courts, we rest our case, knowing full well that the opposition has no come-back. God’s book stands steadfast! Not one author is removed; not one incident is disproved; not one historic statement is unsettled; not one page has been dislodged; not one dot from an “I”, or a cross from a “T”, has yet been taken away by the ceaseless work of men, animated by enmity and hate and backed by the almost infinite resources of Satan himself. The Book stands! Archeology has fully confirmed its most doubtful instances, and this late science has brought to the scriptures the Twentieth Century triumph. Marsten, in his volume, “New Bible Evidence,” tells us, how a case of these Bible critics was carried into a Canadian law court in 1931. It came about after this manner: The same methods they had declared used in Bible making, were applied to modern books, and the charge of plagiarism was brought against them. The judge described the critics’ claim as “solemn nonsense.” They appealed it to the Supreme Court of Ontario, and Justice Biddell said of their claims, “almost an insult to common sense.” It was then taken before the Judiciary Committee of the Privy Council in England, the highest legal tribunal of the British Empire, in 1932. Lord Atkin, the presiding judge, described the higher criticism as “fantastic hypotheses.” The judgment of these courts is more and more the judgment of the world’s intelligence. The names of these enemies of God’s truth, that a few years ago were in the mouths of many, are being more and more forgotten, and their claims are already so far discredited that only the misguided youths, who emanate from the atheistic universities and the skeptical theological seminaries, are so unscholarly and shallow as to accept any of their claims. “How firm a foundation, ye Saints of the Lord, Is laid for your faith in His excellent Word, What more can He say than to you He hath said, To you, who for refuge to Jesus have fled? “Fear not; I am with thee; O be not dismayed For I am thy God, I will still give thee aid, I’ll strengthen thee, help thee, and cause thee to stand, Upheld by my gracious, omnipotent hand. “When through the deep waters I call thee to go The rivers of sorrow shall not overflow, For I will be with thee, thy trials to bless, And sanctify to thee thy deepest distress. “When through fiery trials thy pathway shall lie, My grace, all-sufficient, shall be thy supply, The flame shall not hurt thee — I only design, Thy dross to consume, and thy gold to refine.” ======================================================================== CHAPTER 23: 02.06. IS MY BIBLE AN UNSCIENTIFIC BOOK? ======================================================================== IS MY BIBLE AN UNSCIENTIFIC BOOK? “Thy word is true from the beginning.” (Psalms 119:160). To raise the question “Are The Scriptures Scientific?” brings a smile to the face of the skeptic, but it gives to the true student occasion of study. The believer accepts without controversy the Psalmist’s statement concerning God’s Book—“Thy word is true from the beginning.” The unbeliever instantly rejects it, but the unprejudiced student only demands evidence for the assertion. To this, intelligent Christians take no exception. If the Bible will not bear investigation, if scrutiny disclose shortcomings, if research disproves its assertions, if true science discredits its clear claims, it should fall. We could forfeit it without a tear, join in digging its grave without regret, and return to the duties of life smitten by no serious bereavement. But the men best informed upon this subject have little alarm lest that should be the fate of the most revered Book. They contend rather that Scripture and Science are harmonious and that any imaginary conflict between them is only the nightmare of uninformed minds. Holding that God is the author of the Bible and that He is also the Creator of the natural universe, they stand ready to furnish proofs of perfect agreement between God’s Word and God’s work. Many years ago, and before I had entered upon a series of debates against the proponents of Evolution, a co-laborer in our Northwestern Theological School—a Senior in years and a man of intellect quite as massive as his gigantic body, gave me this advice: “If you ever have occasion to debate, insist upon the definition of the terms involved. Definition results in definiteness and lays some limitations upon the parties involved.” We propose now a similar procedure and pass to THE DEFINITION OF TERMS The subjects of our present concern are Scriptures and Science. The Standard Dictionary defines Science. It is “knowledge gained and verified by exact observation and correct thinking; especially as methodically formulated and arranged in a rational system.” That definition takes you at once out of the realm of speculation; it disposes of such terms as “theory”, “assumption”, “hypothesis’’, making them possible servants of science, but never its synonyms. A hundred years ago we had our sciences so-called, but today the most of them sleep in the Morgue of Speculation. The explanation is easy: “The verification of knowledge by exact observation and correct thinking” is the highest accomplishment of which the human mind is capable. Not every man who cries “Eureka” has found it. This is not to inveigh against the sincerity of investigators, nor to suggest a cessation from their researches, nor even to reject all their conclusions; but only to call attention to the difficulties that beset their way and warn against the mistake of identifying science with “speculation” or “theory” or “hypothesis”, as has often and so falsely been done with the guess of Evolution. “Knowledge gained and verified by exact observation and correct thinking” will never be overthrown by mortal men, nor even by God Himself. An inspired apostle defines Scripture. “All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness.” (2 Timothy 3:16). Paul speaks of “all Scripture” as that which is “God-breathed,” and the method of its arrival was that “holy men of God spake as they were moved (or borne along) by the Holy Ghost.” (2 Peter 1:21). Conscious of belonging himself to that inspired company, Paul affirms: “Which things also we speak, not in the words which man’s wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth.” (1 Corinthians 2:13). We confess very frankly that this passage seems to us to agree with hundreds of others in confirming the verbal inspiration of the Bible. College students know that many professors now strongly inveigh against that doctrine: and even though they belong to the professed Christian company, they propagate another theory altogether, admitting that God may “have “stimulated” the thought, hut objecting to His having provided “words” with which to clothe it. The Verbal Inspiration theory is now commonly set aside and the doctrine of “illumination”‘ is advocated instead, as the most that can be claimed for the authors of the sixty-six books that constitute this great Library. The same men, however, who reject the Bible as the very Word of God, would go into court tomorrow and insist upon the settlement of an estate in which they were named as heirs, on a verbal basis, and would call the attention of attorneys and judge to “what was written” and, unless they had some unrighteous end to be conserved, they would permit no departure from the very words in which the testator had expressed himself. It is little wonder, therefore, that the New Testament writers, who may be conceded to have known what the Scriptures were, refer to the Old Testament more than eighty times as that “which is written ‘; and never once did they abandon the literal acceptance of the same. The modern method of admitting that the Bible may “contain” the Scriptures but is not itself “wholly God’s Word,” is merely a form of unbelief. If God has revealed His will to men in this Book it is hardly reasonable that He would do so with less care than any intelligent, faithful father would show in framing the document that bequeathed his possessions to his children. If in the Civil Courts the slightest word of the testator is the weightiest law, who would dare to treat with contempt, thought or phrase found in the Divine will? Let it be understood there is a decided difference between the plain statement of Sacred Scripture and some absurd interpretation. The scientist is under no obligation whatever to harmonize “knowledge gained and verified” with fanciful interpretations of Holy Writ: nor. is the intelligent student of Scripture under the slightest obligation to bring the Bible into line with the pseudo-sciences of the day. Science is God’s voice in nature and the Scriptures are God’s voice in Grace. It does not fall to the lot of any mortal to harmonize these voices; the harmony is in Him. This common authorship compels agreement. With man that would not be a logical necessity. Man can, and often does, write and speak contradictory things. It is said that an auditor once went to Mr. Beecher and said: “Dr. Beecher, what you said today was contrary to what you said last Sunday.” To which Beecher is reported to have replied: “Come and hear me next Sunday and may contradict the statements of both days.” But such contraversion is not consonant with the character of God. “* * * He abideth faithful: he cannot deny himself.” (2 Timothy 2:13). On more than one occasion I have heard liberal theologians discuss the subject of “Harmony Between Science and Scripture” and apparently to their personal satisfaction accomplish the same by quietly dismissing the claims of the Sacred Book with a waive of the hand or a jerk of the head, saying, for instance, of Moses and other early writers—“They faithfully recorded the views of their day, but Science has long since discredited such primitive impressions.” Is that harmony? Is it not rather annihilation? It may let you out of your difficulty, but you escape at the expense of inspiration, and to the unspeakable loss of the people. There used to be an eccentric preacher in Kentucky, well known to the author. He did no great amount of study, and yet he commonly preached with unction. One day he found himself before an audience with no unction on hand; even thoughts refused to come. He floundered through a few ill-formed sentences, and then, squarely facing his audience he said: “Brethren and sisters; you think I have got into the brush and can’t get out, don’t you? Well, I’ll show you; we’ll just look to the Lord and be dismissed!” But let it be understood that when one dismisses the claims of the Sacred Book and walks out of his difficulties, he has lost the Divine message and left the hungry multitudes unsatisfied. However, these three primal remarks but introduce— THE THINGS OF DEBATE Frankly we enter upon that without the least fear. God’s Holy Book has lived through a war of several thousand years, and, instead of wearying with the battle, it is more virile and combative today than ever before. “Defeat” is not in God’s dictionary. To the conflict then! We concede that Genesis is the storm center of this controversy. That has come largely in consequence of Charles Darwin’s work on “The Origin of Species.” The ancient author of the Pentateuch and the modern philosopher of Evolution are in direct conflict. The so-called Liberals of the day follow Darwin; conservative scholars consent with Moses. The reason for the course of the latter is found in the fact that to this good hour not one statement of that matchless chapter—Genesis 1—has been shown to be unscientific. In demonstration of this declaration, let us take the statements up in their order: First — “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.” (Genesis 1:1). Here two questions of Science are involved— the source of the physical universe, and the order of Origins. Beyond controversy Sir William Thomson, or Lord Kelvin, was, in the realm of science, without a superior in his day. Concerning the origin of the Universe he said: “Science positively affirms creative power.” Among modern astronomers, James Jeans knows no superior, and yet he does not hesitate to speak of “the Creator” and of “Creation”; and while he does not use the Biblical term “God,” he does say: “The great architect of the Universe now begins to appear as a pure mathematician.” The views of Professor Millikan are well known to the scientific world, and Jeans quotes him as having said of creation: “The Creator is still on the job.” Again the order of creation as set forth here is that now uniformly accepted by scientists, namely, so far as our section of the universe is concerned the heavenly bodies were created first and the earth afterwards. In other words, the old geocentric system which looked upon the earth as the center of the universe (which for thousands of years after Moses was held by supposed scientists) had to give place to the heliocentric system; but into that mistake Moses never fell. It is doubtful if there is a scientist living who would deny that at one time “the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep.” (Genesis 1:2). The statement of Genesis 1:3—“* * * Let there be light: and there was light”—before the rays of the sun had reached the earth (on the fourth day), was at one time disputed; but finally Laplace appeared declaring it to be a scientific certainty, that in the condensation of the originally formless chaos, there was such molecular and chemical action as must have emitted light! No truth-seeker arose to dispute him, and Boardman in his “Creative Week” remarked: “Why will the Academy vote Moses a blunderer for declaring that light existed before the sun appeared, and yet vote Laplace a scientist for affirming precisely the same thing?” Take Genesis 1:5—“And God called the light Day ,and the darkness he called Night” Till now the language of science has not departed from this statement. “And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters. “And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so. “And God called the firmament Heaven.” (Genesis 6:1-8). Huxley is reputed to have slipped here by charging Moses with believing that heaven was a solid substance resting like a canopy over the earth. But Huxley’s mistake was the result of his ignorance of Hebrew since the word translated into the Latin “firmamentum” is the Hebrew word “rakiah”, correctly translated “a broad expanse.” How significant! “A broad expanse”! The present-day scientist will tell you that that “expanse” is so broad that they know not whether it be finite or infinite; so broad that though Jeans insists that the only thing with which we are familiar that can compare in number with the stars are the sands of the sea; and yet, innumerable as those stars are, and enormous in size, almost past human computation, this broad expanse, instead of being insufferably crowded, Jeans also declares to be emptier than anything we can imagine; and then illustrates by saying: “Leave only three wasps alive in the whole of Europe and the air of Europe will still be more crowded with wasps than space is with stars.” And as for the waters which were in the heavens and the waters that are on the earth, modern science has again justified Moses by telling us that there is a veritable sea forever suspended in the first heavens by the law of evaporation! If any man doubt it let him express his skepticism to dwellers along the Ohio River or the Mississippi valley who lately had the scientific demonstration of seeing oceans of it fall from the firmament above to the firmament below. But still further: “And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear; and it was so. “And God called the dry land Earth; and the gathering together of the waters called he Seas; and God saw that it was good.” (Genesis 1:9-10). That statement used to be laughed at as a further sign of Moses’ ignorance, supposing that he had seen but one sea and imagined it the only one on earth! But now exploration has turned the laugh on Moses’ critics, for it has proven, as Dana in his “Manual of Geology” tells us, that while the continents are separated, the seas occupy one bed. Here is wisdom that is wonderful! Proceeding now to the Acts of Creation we find a remarkable agreement between Genesis and Geology. They both begin with grass as the oldest form of life and come up through herbs, trees, fish, fowl, living creatures, cattle, and creeping things, and beasts of the earth to man as the last and most wonderful of God’s creations. There is not a mistake from the standpoint of the geologist in this arranged system. The very rocks bear testimony to the Divinity of this revelation. I have found it extremely interesting to compare Genesis and Geology at other points. There are mentioned in the 1st chapter of Genesis three creative periods relating themselves to life upon the earth, called the Third Day, the Fifth Day and the Sixth Day of Divine work. I consult my Dictionary and find it also recognizes three creative periods—Paleozoic, Mesozoic and Zenozoic. Is this a coincidence? When I turn back to the specimens found in these three periods I discover that they are all quite clearly included in the Genesis account. But I must pause a moment to remark on the almost unthinkable wisdom found in the Fourth Day procedure where, not the earth, but the heavens are the subject of consideration. “And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night; “And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth.” (Genesis 1:16-17). On this let me make two or three observations that should at least impress the most confirmed skeptic. First of all the word “made” is not “bara”— which implies a creative act, but “asah”—a Hebrew word that suggests appointment to function. There is, therefore, no inharmony between Genesis 1:1 where God created the heavens and Genesis 1:16 where He appointed the sun and the moon “to rule over the day and over the night.” More remarkable still is the statement—“the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night.” How did Moses find out that the Sun was bigger than the Moon? He had no instruments with which to effect their measure, and all the appearances were to the contrary. I have seen the rising Moon when six to eight feet seemed to be its diameter, and the setting Moon under similar conditions; but three or four feet at the most would commonly compass the rising Sun, or the Sun at set. Again: If Moses had witnessed an eclipse— and perhaps he had—when the Moon came right in front of the Sun it not only dimmed it but covered it completely, indicating its excess in size. The Greeks, therefore, following natural reason, believed that the dimness of the Moon was due to its distance from the earth, and that it was the larger of the two heavenly lights; and just as naturally reasoned that the proximity of the Sun to the earth accounted for the warmth from that great center. But now that modern science has mastered the subject, we find—in the language of Jeans— that the Sun is not only 400 times as distant from the earth as the Moon, but it is also 5 million times as big as the Moon. Its diameter is about 400 times the Moon’s diameter, or 109 times the earth’s diameter; or 864,000 miles; and that no fewer than 1,300,000 earths could be packed inside its circumference. Before these facts, clearly outlined in Genesis, let the critics come and humbly confess—not the mistakes of Moses but of Bob Ingersoll and all skeptical confreres. I will not at this time undertake to prove the very easily compassed proposition that man is a creation of God—the climax of His work on earth and not an evolution from an amoeba; that I have done so often in other addresses and hooks as to obviate the necessity of repetition here. But, I conclude as I began by saying that the first chapter of Genesis has weathered the storm and comes out of the conflict with flying colors, its every proposition certified by the best scientists of the 20th century. But there are many other Scriptures involved in this Controversy. It is not within the province of this address to take up the asserted instances of conflict between science and Scripture, since that has been accomplished in a former chapter; but we here propose a marvelous demonstration of agreement instead. In a recent class in Homiletics one of our Theological Seminary students presented an argument for the Inspiration of the Bible in which he said what can be abundantly proven, namely that the Divinity of the Book was strongly argued by the fact that the Bible was historically correct; no mistakes in its historic statements having yet been proven; that the Bible was geographically correct — no dislocation of places having been discovered in its pages; that the Bible was geologically correct— the first chapter of Genesis a demonstration; that the Bible was botanically correct—-the flowers mentioned in it can be found in Bible lands to this day and create a complete herbarium satisfactory to any modern scientist; that the Bible was astronomically correct—not only anticipating for our section of the universe the heliocentric system, but rightly naming and perfectly placing the stars it mentions, and even going so far as to call attention to the now conceded “empty place in the North.” “He stretcheth out the north over the empty place.” (Job 26:7). He also presented an argument that the Bible is physiologically correct, and only modern discoveries have convinced us that man is “wonderfully made!” “I will praise thee: for I am fearfully and wonderfully made***” (Psalms 139:14). “When I read what the scientists have to say concerning the physical man I feel as I do when I follow Jeans in his vain endeavor to give me some hint of stars and space; I am staggered mentally! But if what they tell me is true, then the Psalmist’s statement concerning the creation of his body is certainly justified. If there be a thousand miles of blood vessels in my body, if there be 1,500,000 sweat glands on its surface, if my lungs are composed of 700, 000 cells, if my heart has already beat 3, 00, 000.000 times since I was born, and has lifted what would equal the weight of 600,000 tons of blood, if my nervous system controlled by a brain that has 3,000,000,000,000 nerve cells of which 9,200,000,000 are in the cortex or covering of The brain-alone, and if my veins there are 30,000,000 white corpuscles and 130, 000,000,000,000 red ones—then it is some job for an amoeba to evolute himself into that complexity, I grant! It sounds to me more like the work of God. But we proceed: Having just spoken of those thousand miles of blood vessels, it is not out of order to remember the statement of Moses that life is in the blood. (Genesis 9:4). Harvey, in modern times, discovered this same truth, and now it is uniformly accepted. Natural life is not in the flesh, not the nerves, not in the brains, not in the bones, not in them all combined; it is in the blood. In Ecclesiastes 1:1-18 we have rather clearly set forth two scientific facts which have been paraded in recent centuries as wonderful discoveries. The first belongs to the realm of the so-called Weather Bureau and tells us whence our storms or cold come, and also the source of heat winds; (Ecclesiastes 1:6) and the second compasses the whole question of evaporation. “All the rivers run into the sea; yet the sea is not full.” The reason is assigned here—“Unto the place from whence the rivers come, thither they return again.” (Ecclesiastes 1:7). But perhaps nothing is more remarkable than the scientific statements to be found in the Book of Job. We have already referred to his reference to “the empty place” in the north. Our time forbids that I take up all the scientific suggestions of Job 38:1-41 : Dr. Harry Rimmer in his volume “The Harmony of Science and Scripture” has well accomplished that job, and one stands amazed at their multitude! But I do want to affirm that Job taught the rotundity and the revolutions on its axis of the earth, (see Job 38:13). Still more remarkable is this ancient’s statement concerning the law of gravity. Other ancients had other methods of supporting the earth on mighty pillars, on the tusks of enormous elephants, on the back of Atlas; but into this folly the inspired writer never fell, for Job wrote: “And hangeth the earth upon nothing.” (Isaiah 26:7) the very deliverance of your latest science. Even more astonishing still is the statement concerning wind and water. We still employ very unscientific speech when we declare a thing to be “as light as air,” knowing that air has a pressure of 15 pounds to the square inch; and we still talk as if the seas might be dried up, when science says there is no change, and the drops of water—so far as extent is concerned—being only simply a question as to whether it is in liquid or gaseous form. But Job, anticipating the scientists by several thousand years, wrote: “To make the weight for the winds; and he weigheth the waters by measure.” (Job 28:25). Such instances of Scripture statement preceding scientific discoveries could be multiplied out of number; but I refrain in order to remark: It is high time pseudo-scientists surrendered their skepticism. Refusal to be convinced when such facts face them reminds one of Aesop’s fable. You will remember that the wolf, coming upon the lamb, said to him: “You are feeding upon my grass and I’m going to eat you for it.” But the lamb replied: “Sir, I am but a babe and have never tasted grass as yet. My mother’s milk suffices for my food.” To which the wolf responded: “But you drank from my spring, and on that account I will eat you.” And again the lamb said: “No, Sir; I have not done so. My mother’s milk is drink as well as food and I have never tasted water.” Whereupon the wolf replied: “Well, anyway I’m not going to be cheated out of my meal”—and he started in to kill and consume. Such a conduct ill becomes the true scientist. He should be a searcher for truth and when “knowledge gained and verified” is presented to him he should have an open mind and be subject to conviction. We pass now to THE UNDEBATABLE THEMES There are Scripture subjects upon which Science is Silent. There are points of human experience of which the microscope reveals nothing, the telescope tells us nothing; they transcend scientific investigation. Tyndale admitted that the problem of the universe would never be solved. And yet that problem is not so difficult from the scientific standpoint as are the problems of sin, substitution and salvation. There have been many theories as to how sin came into the world; but if the Bible statements be rejected, the so-called scientific philosophy proves unsatisfactory, As Joseph Parker, the great City Temple, London, pastor once remarked, “the faintest scratch reveals the wolf in us.” Paul, whose experience and observations on human life have seldom been exceeded, said: “Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are: adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, envyings, murders, drunkenness, revelings, and such like; of the which, I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.” Jesus, admittedly the soundest Judge of human life the world ever saw, said: “Out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, blasphemies. These are the things which defile a man.” For two thousand years, yea, for seven thousand, supposed scientists and professed philosophers have worked at the problem of sin and are as much at sea regarding the origin of sin, and as remote from the solution of the problem as they were when first they began. The only light we have that has proven of value is that from the sacred Word and that found in Jesus of Nazareth, the Son of God. If this statement needs verification we can present a few millions of men and women whose experience attests its truthfulness; and in the last analysis, that is a scientific confirmation of Scripture. The multiplied experiences of men demonstrate the divinity of the Bible. Wherever this book has gone light has walked in its wake, morals have improved and life itself has not only been made worthwhile, hut both inspired and protected by its teachings. A skeptic, in crossing Africa, found a native chieftain sitting calmly under a tree reading from a book. When asked what he was doing, he said, “Beading my Bible.” “Why man,” remarked the skeptic, “don’t you know that that Book is out of date?” “Maybe so in your country, but it is a good thing for you that it is not so in this, for had it been, we would have, some time since, made meal of you.” It was James Russell Lowell, was it not, who said: “When the microscopic search of skepticism, which has hunted the heavens and searched the seas to disprove the existence of a Creator, has turned! Is attention to human society and has found a place on this planet ten miles square where a decent man can live in comfort and security, supporting and educating his children unspoiled and unpolluted; a place where age is reverenced, infancy respected, manhood regarded, woman honored, and human life held in due esteem—when skeptics can find such a place ten miles square on this globe where the Gospel of Christ has not gone and cleared the way and laid the foundation and made decency and security possible, it will then be in order for these skeptical literati to move thither, and there ventilate their views.” There is a realm of the spirit that is super- scientific. God does not come within the range of the modern telescope; revelation is not subject to the measurement of the modern yardstick, and spiritual experience is not to be investigated by the modern lense. When the man who has been drunken for twenty years, and who, as a result, is a ragged, social outcast, staggers into a downtown mission and hears the Gospel and comes out never to drink again, supposed scientists will never be able to explain it; but that does not effect what you and I have often seen. When a woman who has walked in the ways of wickedness is visited by a Christian sister and brought face to face with Scripture teaching until, under profound conviction, she cries, “God be merciful to me a sinner” and after some minutes of weeping rises with a face from which a new light shines, and declares that she has personally met the Redeemer and knows that her sins are pardoned, and gladly takes the path that “shines more and more unto the perfect day” true science will never disregard what men and women have seen. They know that this Book contains the Gospel that has proven and can prove, “the power of God unto salvation” ; and seeing that, they believe the Book divine. One night in Paris, France, I was preaching and Dr. Reuben Saillens was my interpreter. I came to the close of a discourse upon this same subject, and I turned to Dr. Saillens and said: “Now, Dr. if you can put into such French language as not to despoil its rhythm, I would like to close with a poem of which I am very fond,” but concerning which I had seen again and again, “author unknown,” and I started in. At the end of my first line he was in a hearty laugh, and I could not imagine why my great friend should treat a poem of such portent, so lightly. He divined my embarrassment and said: “Excuse me Dr.; but I assure you I can put that poem into French, since I wrote it myself some fifty years ago.” In his early life Saillens was a blacksmith and from that experience he brought this poem: ‘I paused one day beside the blacksmith’s door And listened to the anvil ring the evening’s chime And looking in I saw upon the floor, Old hammers, worn with beating years of time. “ ‘How many anvils have you had,’ said I, ‘To wear and batter out these hammers so?’ ‘Just one,’ he answered, with a twinkling eye, ‘The anvil wears the hammer out, you know.’ “And so, I thought, the Anvil of God’s Word For ages skeptic blows have beat upon; Yet, though the noise of infidel was heard The anvil is unworn, the hammers gone!” So more and more skeptic-hammers will beat upon it, but the Book will abide, “Forever, Oh Lord, Thy Word is settled in heaven.” ======================================================================== CHAPTER 24: 02.07. IS MY BIBLE A DIVINELY INSPIRED BOOK? ======================================================================== IS MY BIBLE A DIVINELY INSPIRED BOOK? “All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness; That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.” (2 Timothy 3:16). “For many years there has rested upon a shelf in my library Dr. L. Gaussen’s book “Theopneustia.” It is a plea for the plenary inspiration of the Holy Scriptures, “deduced,” as the author says, “from the internal evidences and testimonies of nature, history, and science.” It was favorably reviewed by Charles H. Spurgeon in England, James M. Gray in America ,and by others too numerous to mention in both countries. The title is taken from the text in Greek—the term “Theopneustos” meaning “God-breathed.” It would be a bit difficult to find a stronger defense of plenary, yea, even of verbal inspiration, than exists in the employment of this meaningful word. In Genesis we have the record of man’s creation in these words: “The Lord God formed man of the dust of the earth into his nostrils the breath of life and man became a living soul.” The Bible became a Living Book after the same manner. Its vitality is the product of the Divine breath. To accept that statement would be the end of controversy on the subject of inspiration; but many refuse so to do; and, for their sakes, we introduce what we trust will prove convincing evidence. Turning, then, to the plain teaching of the text, we call attention to the Premises of Inspiration, the Proofs of Inspiration, and the Profits of Inspiration. THE PREMISES OF INSPIRATION The Scriptures make such a claim for themselves. We have proven this statement in the previous chapters by somewhat copious quotations from Moses, David, Jeremiah. Ezekiel, Daniel, John, and others. Their further multiplication is not necessary at this point. No less an authority than Dr. Howard Kelly, of Johns Hopkins University, speaking before the Princeton Theological Seminary, February twenty-fifth, 1927: said: “I went through the book, through the Old Testament and through the New, and I found hundreds, yea, thousands of times that it claims to be the Word of God.” But the critics come and say, “Why; even the men who were reputed to have made this claim probably never lived; or, if so, they did not write the books.” Driver and Kirkpatrick, in their volume, “The Higher Criticism,” fourth edition, page twenty, said: “The historical books are now seen to be not, as was once supposed, the works (for instance) of Moses, or Joshua, or Samuel, but are compiled out of the writings of distinct and independent authors, characterized by different styles and representing different points of view, which were combined together and otherwise adjusted, till they finally assumed their present form.” And, of course, if these men, whose names are quoted, did not write the Bible, then the claims of Divine Inspiration for its contents may the disputed. But who consents with these critics? What process of reasoning could reach such an absurd conclusion? A book is its author’s adequate certificate, and in proportion to its greatness the author’s name is immortalized. How, then, does it happen that we have such matchless volumes as the historical, poetical and prophetic books of the Bible, and yet know so little of how they came into being, and what minds God employed as the womb, through which they arrived? In a volume published in 1909, now out of print, we employed this illustration— “The story of how, after the repulse of the great Persian invader, Greece enacted a law that no one, under penalty of death, should espouse art, except free men. On one day all Greece was at Athens to behold an exhibit in the Agora. Pericles presided, with Aspasia at his side; while Phidias, Socrates, Sophocles, and others acted as judges. A group far more beautiful than the rest challenged universal attention, and excited the envy of all artists. But to the herald’s repeated question, “Who is the sculptor of this group?” there came no answer, and the conviction settled upon them that it must be the product of a slave. Amid the commotion, a beautiful maiden, with torn dress and disheveled hair, was dragged into the Agora, and the officers cried as they came, “This woman knows the sculptor.” To all their questions Cleone was silent. She thought if she should speak she would seal her brother’s doom. When Pericles could get nothing from her, he said, “The law is imperative; take the maiden to the dungeon.” Then a youth, with emaciated face and flowing hair, rushed from his hiding place and cried, “Oh, Pericles, forgive and save the maiden. She is my sister. The group is the work of my hands, and I am but a slave.” The crowd cried out, “To the dungeon with him!” Pericles answered, “No; behold that group! Apollo decides by it that there is something higher in Greece than an unjust law. The highest purpose of law should be the development of the beautiful. If Athens lives in the memory and affections of men, it is her devotion to art that will immortalize her. Not to the dungeon, but to my side bring the youth.” And that day the youth was crowned by Aspasia’s hand and his name immortalized. He had wrought so great a work that with the utmost care he could not escape detection. The work itself compelled the knowledge of him and created a place in history for him. But if the conclusion of the scholars, from whom I have quoted, is correct, we face this strangest fact of history, namely, that men, the authors of such institutions, such laws, and such a religion as the world has never known besides, the men who accomplished a work that only gods might ever be expected to complete, did it, and disappeared, leaving no name behind, not a footprint by which we can trace them to their homes; and this escape was accomplished without an endeavor. Such fictitious characters as Moses, Joshua, Samuel and David, they immortalized and while about it, effected, forever, a personal oblivion. What thinking man can believe it?” Christ repeatedly confirmed this claim for inspiration. He defended the Scriptures as authority. He quoted them as final. “Have ye not read this Scripture; The stone which the builders rejected is become the head of the corner.” Mark 12:10. “He came to Nazareth, where he had been brought up: and, as his custom was, he went into the synagogue on the sabbath day, and stood up for to read. And there was delivered unto him the book of the prophet Esaias. And when he had opened the book”—and finished His reading from Isaiah 61:1-11—”he closed the book, and he gave it again to the minister, and sat down.” “And he began to say unto them, This day is this scripture fulfilled in your ears.” Luke 4:16-21. Did not Jesus also say of the Bible of His day, “The Scripture cannot be broken”? John 10:35. To the two, on the journey to Emmaus, did he not declare, “O fools, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken: and beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the Scriptures the things concerning himself”? Luke 24:25-27. In fact, consecrated and scholarly men have more than once called the attention of thinkers and students to the circumstance that not one book or incident of Scripture has been made the object of criticism or ridicule, but Christ had, at some time, defended, approved and even profitably applied that very portion. To Him the Bible was not a book of “fables” or “old wives’ tales.” It was not a philosopher’s meanderings, or the speculations of Psuedo-scientists. It was “the sure word of prophecy— God-breathed! Experience has often and abundantly attested this claim. There is a right way and a wrong way of approaching worth while study. Dr. Howard Kelly brought out this fact in the Princeton address, to which a former reference was made, in making a plea for a scientific study of the Bible: “I do not read newspaper discussions about the Bible. Some doctors form their medical opinions from newspaper and magazine articles. I prefer, rather, first-hand investigation. So I asked, ‘What does the Bible say of itself?’ * * * I have seen it confirmed by research times without number, and I believe concerning the Bible that it is all that it claims for itself.” There are all too many people who get their evidence second-hand. They try to know Christ by reading of Him or hearing about Him. But there is a better way—His way—”come unto Me.” And there are people who try to know the Bible after the same manner; but here the same procedure applies. Good old Joseph Parker said, when people came to him with questions about the Bible, “I never begin by giving the Bible a reputation: I simply say, ‘Read it. Read it all. Read it with as little interruption as possible; then tell me what you think of it’.” It may be candidly questioned whether, in the twenty centuries since Christ visited our world and died on Calvary’s cross, there has been one single man, out of the millions on millions, who ever went unprejudiced to the Bible and pursued his way through its pages from book to book until he had gone from Genesis to Revelation, and who was willing to give thought to its teachings, without coming to the same conclusion with those other millions of his fellow-students; namely, this Book is surely “God-breathed”. It has about it a Divine aroma! It has in it a strange convincing power. It has over the men who study it a heavenly influence. The world has its convincing speakers—its orators of high order—but even profane history has never attempted to name them in the same catalog with Moses, Isaiah, David, John, Peter, and Paul. The unprejudiced find in these sacred authors wisdom of such height, truths of such importance, convictions of such depth, that they can but exclaim—This Book, like its author. “cometh down from above.” THE PROOFS OF INSPIRATION One might imagine that what we have been saying would suffice, but the unregenerate man is a confirmed skeptic. He must have line upon line, precept upon precept.” With him argument must be added to argument and demonstration to demonstration if his doubts are to die. And so we proceed with what might be called further proofs. Here is a most important one: Unity in multiplicity strongly argues the inspiration of Scripture. As we have seen, there are sixty-six books and about forty authors. These books were written at “different times, under different circumstances, in different countries, and yet this multiplicity of persons, of places and of conditions, did not destroy its unity. One could easily imagine that the same man wrote each of the sixty-six books of the Bible. So continuous is this love story, so historically related is one book to another, so normally do we move in the sacred history it records, so definitely does each book look to one final objective—the glory of God and the good of man—that a single master mind could be suspected of thinking it all. Once more we take a leaf from my former volume entitled “The Finality of the Higher Criticism,” now out of print: “The Bible seems to be the only literary structure the world has yet produced after the plan of the Cathedral at Milan, requiring generations of workers and many centuries in laying its foundations, perfecting its walls, and completing its cupolas. Men have long been surprised that the name of the original architect of Milan’s Cathedral should have been lost, but have not disputed that Amedeo was the author of many of its most beautiful designs, nor yet that Tibaldi conceived the ornamentation of doors and windows, while Napoleon saw to its finishing touches. But in the Bible we have a literary cathedral beside which every other output of mind and pen pales as the stars fade before the rising sun.” How account for it? Reason must agree with revelation; it is “God-breathed,” or else bring against herself the charge of being unbalanced. Again historical and scientific accuracy attest Inspiration! As to the historicity of events, up to this good hour no plain statement of Old Testament or New has ever been proven false, or even questionable. Its prophetic utterances stand solitary and alone in their matchless fulfillment, revealing a revelation from an Omnipotent one. The evidence from prophecy fulfilled is just such that its careful study results in a coffin for skepticism. “One thousand prophetic statements mark the pages of the Old and New Testaments; and it is estimated by careful scholars that over seven hundred of these have been fulfilled to the very letter; and history is still running in the mold of prophecy. These prophecies relate to cities, Babylon, (Isaiah 13:19-22), Ninevah, (Zephaniah 2:13), Tyre, (Ezekiel 1:14), etc.; to Israel and Judah (Deuteronomy 28:64-67); to the nations, ancient and modern, (Daniel 2:31-46); to the First and Second Coming of Christ, Genesis 3:15, Isaiah 9:7, Micah 5:2, Matthew 1:1-25, Acts 1:11, 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18); to the rise, progress and apostasies of the Church. to wars, rumors of wars, false prophets, false christs, famine and earthquake (Matthew 24:1-51); to the coming anti-Christ (Revelation 13:1-18); to the coming Armageddon Revelation 9:1-21 and Revelation 20:7-9). The remaining prophecies are, at this moment, so clearly in evidence as to cast their shadows before them. All of this is a supernatural proof of a supernatural Book. There is one class of men who give their lives to evidence, and that is not as is supposed, the professional scientists. If they are worthy of their names, they spend the majority of their days and hours in investigation and theory. But jurists train their ears to evidence and their minds to righteous judgment. How remarkable, then, that the greatest names ever known to that profession have found the arguments for inspiration sound and convincing. I speak of such outstanding individuals as Grotus, Bacon, Sir Matthew Hale, Oliver Cromwell, Blackstone, Selden, Sir William Jones, Lord Littleton, Lord Erskine, Edmund Burke, William Pitt, Wilberforce, W. E. Gladstone, John Bright, Lord Cairns, George Washington, Chief Justice Marshall, Chancellor Kent, Judge Story, Chief Justice Parsons, Greenleaf, Clay, Daniel Webster, Sewell, and an overwhelming majority of the members of the Supreme Court of the United States, and no less than eight out of ten of those who have been President of the United States, not to speak of an innumerable company worthy to be mentioned in this glorious galaxy of statesmen and judges. Still further, the ethical and spiritual effects demonstrate inspiration. “The proof of the pudding is in the eating.” We have already shown how a study of the Bible has never failed to convince the unprejudiced of its authority, but there is a still higher fruit of such study, namely, its elevating effect upon life itself. The Bible is in no sense the book of the scholarly only. Paul, in his Epistle to the Corinthians, 1 Corinthians 1:27, says, “But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise.” But wherever it has gone, learning and wisdom have walked in its wake. The Bible is in no sense a scientific treatise, and yet the greatest scientists that the ages have produced have acknowledged their indebtedness to it—such, for instance, as Sir Isaac Newton, Sir John Herschell, Kepler, Pascal, Faraday, Simpson, Beale, David Brewster, Professor Dana, Romanes, G. Frederick Wright, Hugh Miller, Louis Pasteur, Kelvin, Sir William Dawson, and a list that would require pages for publication. We have not forgotten that only a little while ago six hundred seventeen members of the British Scientific Society produced a paper, now in the Bodlein Library at Oxford, which pays the most glowing tribute to the Scriptures and defends them as Divine. The Bible, while written by men, many of whom were in humble life and some of whom were slaves, is not a book for the proletariate merely; and yet, wherever it has gone, it has elevated the social mudsill by lifting at the bottom of society and has carried up the whole superstructure. What other explanation of such effects than that to be found in the text of the day. “All Scripture is God-breathed”? The breath of God is a blessing upon the high and the low, the rich and the poor, the ignorant and the learned, and the Bible is the fostering friend of them all. In fact, we begin to approach now the very purpose of the Scriptures themselves, and we can do no better than to discuss that object under THE PROFITS OF INSPIRATION Here Paul has made a clean-cut statement: “It is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: that the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.” Let us analyze! It is the incomparable reservoir of truth. “It is profitable for doctrine!” What is doctrine? Look to your standard dictionary and find: “Instruction, teaching, especially in religious knowledge.” Christ said to men, “Ye shall know the truth and the truth shall make you free,” and the Christian Scriptures stand as the exponent of truth. It is sometimes said that Christ never answered the question, “What is truth?” But we resent that claim. In fact He gave to it two answers, and yet they are one, paradoxical as that may sound. He said of Himself, “I am the truth,” and He said of God’s Word, “Thy Word is truth.” John 17:17. Strangely enough, in the very age that has crowned dogmatism in the uncertain realm of speculation called Science, we have a whole school of advanced thinkers, so-called, who inveigh against “dogma” in Religion. In other words, they are a concerted company criticizing certainties while indulging speculations in the name of “assured results,” and who, in the language of Paul, are “turned aside unto vain jangling; desiring to be teachers of the law; understanding neither what they say, nor whereof they affirm.” (1 Timothy 1:6-7). There is not a ‘wholly balanced defender of the Bible, as God’s Book, who has aught to say against truth. On the contrary, all such are its ardent admirers, its virile explorers ,and its willing defenders. Our claim is that in Christ we have “the truth” incarnate, and in the Bible, “the truth” in print; and those who accept Christ and believe the Bible reincarnate the same. Yes, it is “profitable for doctrine.” It is the exacting regulator of conduct and character! It is profitable for reproof and correction. The Bible is no engaging legend. It is no Aesopian fable; it is no Utopian dream; it is no rag-time novel. On the contrary, it is a book of standards— Levitical law combining in one, physiological, ethical, and legal standards. The Decalog, after more than three thousand years of history, has never been equalled. For moral uplift, the Bible, so far as books are concerned, is incomparable. It not only establishes high standards for ethical attainment, but it also uncovers sin that man may see its infamy!” By reciting transgressions and recording the judgments for them, by taking even the noblest of characters and painting them—as Cromwell required of Sir Peter Ely “with the warts and blemishes” by denouncing sin in all its horrid forms, and promising a “hell” as the product of its willing and continued practice it seeks to correct men. It is not given to “smooth words.” It does not indulge in popular eloquence. It is not written to give literary form to unblemished human heroes and heroines. On the contrary, it paints life as it is; puts character into the balance, pronounces judgment against sin, destroys the spirit of egotism, and calls man to strict account. In it, “pride goeth before destruction,” “wickedness” is set for judgment, “hatred” and “envy” are assigned to the adversary, and sin becomes “a reproach to any people.” It demands the “captivity of every thought to the obedience of Christ;” it enjoins against “fulfilling the lusts of the flesh;” it reminds us that “the natural man receiveth not the things of God;” and it puts us to shame and silences us by asking, “Where is the wise?” Truly is it asserted that it is “sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.” Among all the high characters of the Bible, it holds not one of them as perfect, save Jesus. Moses, Noah and David — what marvelous names! And yet each is marred at some point as the light of God’s Word reveals alike his weakness and his greatness. We have parents who never see a fault in their children, and who never speak a word of reproof while they remain under the rooftree. Too often, they send the spoiled forth as social pariahs. God’s ways are not as man’s. His thoughts are as high above ours as “the heavens are high above the earth.” His Book is set for “reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness.” Wisdom is justified of her ways. Finally, this Book is the unfailing source of the soul’s supplies. The greatest thing in the earth is a man; the greatest thing in man is his soul. It is the spiritual nature that lifts him as far above the beast as the work of God’s sixth day was superior to the work of the fifth. There are those who claim that man has a blood kinship with lower animal life. We do not believe it. The Bible does not teach it; science has failed to demonstrate it. Only eleven percent of monkey blood and human blood are the same. Eighty-nine percent is different. Why?—Because the truth is as Paul said, “All flesh is not the same flesh: but there is one kind of flesh of men, another flesh of beasts.” Science once disputed this! It is now compelled to approve the statement, for blood analysis has demonstrated the Apostle’s theory and lifted it to the scientific level. The earthly tabernacle of the soul is flesh of a superior sort; hut the supreme thing is “the spirit of man.” It has always been a strange thing to me that advocates of the evolutionary hypothesis did not employ the only plausible arguments that either reason or Revelation provides them. I have yet to hear the first of them use the flying fish to illustrate the claim” that fish became birds. Possibly, because he did not see how he could provide them with feet and land them on a limb, or with lungs to help them live on land. I have yet to hear the first of them quote the Scripture, “That was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and afterward that which is spiritual.” Possibly, because he did not know that the Scriptures made such an assertion. But I have heard them use argument after argument for “reversion to type,” and the textbooks exploit the same. But never did I hear them logically apply it to man; possibly, because they were keen enough to see that it would act as a boomerang. Why is it that sinful man, unlike the animal, is seldom or never satisfied with his estate? Why is it that wherever you find him, he has within him a feeling that there is a higher life that he ought to live, a more noble existence he ought to experience, and a more holy character that he ought to develop? This “reversion to type” we have always consented is true; but apply it in religion and what does it mean? Here, on the part of man, is the high estate in which his forefather and mother once existed, and from which they fell by the sin in the Garden of Eden, and back to which there is an inborn tendency, clamoring for expression; a yearning, a longing, an endeavor to climb back to the higher realms on life’s parental ladder. The Bible and the Bible alone offers him satisfaction, contentment, peace that passeth knowledge.” pardon of sins, salvation, paradise recovered! It is all in Christ, and the way is made plain in Scripture. As John Milton said, “There are no songs comparable to the songs of Zion; no orations equal to those of the prophets, and no politics like those which the Scriptures teach.” Or as Berridge writes: “The Bible is a precious storehouse and the Magna Charta of a Christian. There he reads of his heavenly Father’s love, and of His dying Savior’s legacies. There he sees a map of his travels through the wilderness, and a landscape, too, of Canaan. And when he climbs on Pisgah’s top, and views the blessed prospect, he is amazed at the rich and free salvation.” “Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him. But God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit.” (1 Corinthians 2:9-10). “All Scripture is God-breathed!” ======================================================================== CHAPTER 25: 02.08. HOW MAY I BEST MASTER MY ENGLISH BIBLE? ======================================================================== HOW MAY I BEST MASTER MY ENGLISH BIBLE? In the discussion of our theme “My Bible” we have dealt with “Whence and How it Came,” “Is My Bible Scarred by Discrepancies?” “Is My Bible Marred by Reputed Miracles?” “Is My Bible a Blood-stained Book?” “Has Archeology Discredited my Bible?” “Is My Bible a Scientific Book?” “Is My Bible a Divinely Inspired Book?” If every contention, found in these seven chapters, were not followed by a successful Bible study, the proofs of inspiration would be well nigh in vain. On that account we propose this eighth theme. One may be surprised to have me introduce into this chapter three texts: 2 Timothy 2:15, 1 Timothy 4:15, and Matthew 6:5-6—since these three texts suggest three separate themes—Scripture study, Spiritual Meditation, and Secret Prayer. Believing as we do, however, that the first of these is impossible apart from the other two; contending that history names no man or woman who ever became a notable student of Scripture without spiritual meditation and secret prayer, we feel that to advocate the first compels the Inclusion of the second and third. To our first texts then! “Study to show thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.” (2 Timothy 2:15). SCRIPTURE STUDY A knowledge of the Bible is basal. It is fundamental to the individual life and development. It is the sine qua non of the church’s progress; and it is the chief cornerstone in Christian civilization. I wonder if any one of us has ever fully imagined what it would mean to be without the Bible? Arthur T. Pierson reminds us of Henry Rogers’ unique way of impressing this thought. He records a dream entitled, “The Blank Bible.” He thought that, taking up his Greek Testament one morning to read a chapter, he found the old familiar Book a total blank, without a character in it or upon it. Thinking that someone had played a practical joke upon him, he took down successively a large quarto Bible containing both Testaments, then a Hebrew Bible, but these were also perfect blanks. While musing on this mystery his servant came to tell him of a queer robbery, that some thief had stolen her Bible and left in its place a book exactly like it, but full of blank paper. Going into the street he met a friend who excitedly told him that during the night every copy of the Bible had been taken from his house, and volumes of the same size, but containing only pure white paper, left in their stead. On further investigation it was discovered that it was so, universally; and even the Bible Society and large depositories of books could produce not one copy in which the same miracle had not taken place. In fine, as though in judgment on the race for the abuse of God’s Book, He had actually withdrawn it from among men, and not a sentence from the Word of God remained in all human literature. Moreover, Mr. Rogers thought, in his dream, that as soon as men lost the Bible, they began to attach a value to it never appreciated while it was possessed. Any price would now have been paid for a single complete copy. Some to whom it had always been a “blank” book were loud in their laments over its disappearance. One old sinner declared it “confounded hard to be deprived of religion in his old age,” and another, who seemed from his practice to have indorsed Mandeville’s opinion that “private vices are public benefits,” was greatly alarmed for the morals of mankind now that the great guide to duty was lost.” The dream is an instructive parable, and may well lead us to consider what human life and society owe to the Word of God. Permit a few words then upon the Way of Bible Study, The Will for Bible Study, and the Wonder of Bible Study. The Way of Bible Study. I have often commended the late Dr. James M. Gray’s suggestions on the way of Bible study. He gives five little rules for Bible study: 1. —“Read the Book.” The book of Genesis, say. Bead it. The biblical library involves the only set of books known to the mind of man where we propose to read a chapter, which, as a rule, means about a page, or a verse, which would average about a half inch at the most. No other volume in which we are interested do we read after that manner. Bead the Book! We have suggested Genesis only because that is the beginning and one cannot be intelligently interested in Exodus until he has finished Genesis; nor can he properly understand Leviticus until he has finished Exodus, nor comprehend Numbers until he is through with Leviticus, nor Deuteronomy until he completes Numbers ;and notwithstanding the fact that the Bible has some forty authors, as a history it is a unit; and it is well to read the Book in order. 2. —Read the Book Consecutively, at a single sitting if possible. Any book read after that manner yields more of its content to the reader’s mind than is possible when it is read a bit today, some more tomorrow, another portion a week hence, and a still later part months afterwards. When you read a book consecutively you move with the author; you get his perspective; you realize his objective. 3. —Read it repeatedly. Dr. Gray, many years ago, in his “Synthetic Study of the Scriptures,” advocated this method. Report says that when he adopted it he read the book of Genesis forty times over before he continued further. Such a re-reading would make an expert in Genesis, even of the average man. 4. —Read it independently. Dr. Gray was very emphatic in this matter, and justly so. He plead with his students and auditors not to run straight away for a commentary or lesson help, but to stay by the text until it was conquered and until the Spirit has had opportunity to reveal its inner meaning. His fifth suggestion was: Read it prayerfully. It is doubtful if the other four could ever make a successful student of Scripture apart from this fifth suggestion. According to our contention the Holy Spirit is the Author of the Book. The author knows the book-intent. That is how it fell out that Spalitan wrote to Martin Luther and asked him how he might become a successful student of the Bible. Luther’s answer was a disappointment at first, but proved later the great Reformer’s wisdom. He said, “Pray!” Upon further reflection one realizes the superiority of this counsel. Luther sent him to the Author of the Book—the Holy Spirit. He alone can make known the meaning of its content. Concerning Him the Saviour said: “When He, the Spirit of truth, is come, He will guide you into all truth.” “He shall take of mine, and show it unto you.” To work one’s way through the Bible under the guidance of the Holy Ghost is to make the Bible a part of one’s self. Any Bible study that fails of that effect is a failure. Dr. A. C. Dixon says that a man went into an old German library and put up his hand and took an ancient looking volume off of the shelf, and as he lifted it down he noticed that the light was shining through it, and holding it up to the window, he said, “Look what the bookworm has done; he has gone clean through this’ book!” The volume was a Bible, and Dixon remarks, “I want to be a bookworm like that. I want to enter it at Genesis and come out at Revelation.” Such a bookworm will not perish; but with wings will sweep the sky. The Will for Bible Study. Undoubtedly the way of Bible study effects the will. The reason many people do not like the Bible is that they have not fed upon it often enough to have acquired a taste for it. The first olive I tried I spewed out, but after a few minutes I found there was an agreeable sensation left, and I tried out another and yet another until I came to love them. There is a principle employed here. The world around people come to like the things upon which they feed; and the only reason that some people have so little appetite for the Word of God and so much for the apples of the world, is that they feed upon the latter and utterly neglect the former. O. P. Gifford tells of a Southern officer who was going over the fields of the Civil War one day and saw a lone soldier up a persimmon tree filling himself on the green fruit. “What are you doing there? Is that your diet?” he inquired. To which the man replied, “No, General; I am shrinking my stomach to fit my diet!” Even a soldier of the cross, if he feed long enough upon the green persimmons of worldliness, will so reduce his spiritual capacity that a study of the Word of God will only fling him into pain, and he will put it away imagining that it is dry and difficult, when the trouble is not with it, hut with him; for at the very time that one is eschewing it entirely, another is saying with the Psalmist: “Thy Word is sweeter than honey and the honeycomb,” or with the little negro boy in the South, who had been converted and learned to read the Bible, and said, “It’s sweeter ‘an ‘lasses!” The Wonder of Bible Study. This grows upon one who becomes a good student of God’s Word. More and more he stands amazed at its heights and depths and more and more he says: “I cannot explore the one; nor sound the other.” A few years ago thousands of acres in northern Minnesota were regarded as useless. The timber had been taken off of it; the rock-soil could not be ploughed, and the owners attempted to shift it to the names of straw men and escape any taxation. The government forced them to acknowledge their ownership, and shortly they discovered that underneath its surface there was a wealth of iron ore worth millions. Many a man has a richer mine in his house; but in poverty of spirit passes his life, when his wealth might exceed that of Croesus, a thousand fold, if he only went beneath the surface of the Word and brought it forth. The elder Spurgeon—Charles’ grandfather was visited one day by a neighbor. Spurgeon was reading his Bible, and after he had admitted his guest, he dropped into his big chair and picked up his Bible again, and seemed to have forgotten that his neighbor had come. The neighbor sat and looked upon the old face and saw the lips frequently move and pronounce the words “Wonderful, wonderful!” No wonder the poet wrote: “O wonderful, wonderful Word of the Lord! True wisdom its pages unfold. And though we may read them a thousand times o’er, They never, no never grow old! “Each line is a treasure; each promise a pearl, That all, if they will, may secure. And though time and earth pass away God’s Word shall forever endure.” SPIRITUAL MEDITATION 1 Timothy 4:15 Scripture study demands it: the Quiet Hour Expresses it: The Soul Needs it. In fact the soul is born of spiritual meditation. No man is converted to God or regenerated by His Spirit until meditation characterizes his conduct. He must stop, he must think ere can be quickened into life. David said: “I thought on my ways, I turned my feet unto Thy testimonies; I made haste and delayed not to keep Thy commandments.” There are those who object to evangelistic, or protracted meetings. Their objections are poorly based. The one thing in favor of a protracted meeting is that it compels the men who attend it to think—to turn their eyes inward, to study themselves. We have jested a good deal about “Ten Nights in a Barroom.” We know how it can bloat the body, blight the mind, and blemish the soul. But I promise you that ten consecutive evenings before the judgment bar of ‘God, as depicted by an earnest and intelligent preacher, will reveal the iniquities of the soul, the destructiveness of sin, and compel the cry of penitence: “What shall I do to be saved?” I saw an atheist in central Illinois attempt to sit through five consecutive nights in such a meeting, but when the fifth came he changed- front and gave a good confession in the name of the Lord Jesus. The soul is nurtured by meditation. Phillips Brooks has a remarkable sermon on the text: “Jesus said, Make the men sit down.” His interpretation of that text is as unique as was Brooks’ preaching. He described the multitude that had followed the Lord across the water, and were filling the empty fields with clamor and confusion—a multitude in which curiosity was rife; a multitude with whom condemnation and criticism made up a constant cross fire; a multitude of whom every man was on his feet, gesticulating furiously, uttering hard words, and firing angry glances, when there came the command from Jesus, “Have the men sit down.” Brooks says: “This meant a change from the active and restless to the receptive and quiet state, from the condition in which all life was flowing outward in eager self-assertion to the other condition in which the life was being influenced; that is, being flowed upon by the richer power which came forth from Christ.” Truly there is too much outgo with most of us; and too little inflow. One day in Liverpool I went down to the Mersey. She was shallow; her stream was on its way to the sea; and the great vessels along shore were stranded, many of them resting upon dry ground, and could not go, and I said, “How is” this?” They answered, “The tide is out now; but it will turn after a bit, and instead of this river continuing to the sea, the sea will have made its contribution to the river and fill it in and fill it up, and lift the last one of these vessels to .places of power and possible motion.” That is what meditation ought to mean. By it men come into receptive attitude; by it men open their souls, and so the God of all fullness flows in and fills with Himself. The man who can say: “Let the words of my mouth and the meditation of mu heart be acceptable unto Thee” is very likely to call Him “My strength and my Redeemer.” By meditation the soul is inspired! No man can ever go forth to a large undertaking and find himself equal to it who has not first meditated upon it. The Christian world stands amazed today at the progress of Buddism. Its aggressive missionary spirit is the effective challenge of Christianity at every point. It is taking other lands with a rapidity which astounds the world, putting its missionaries even into America and England, though they must be renamed—in order to deceive if possible even the elect— Theosophy and Bahaiism, etc. Yet, Buddists are not the strenuous folk that Christians are. What then is the secret of their power? Possibly in “meditation” Brooks says: “You let your boat drop quietly down the Ganges today, and along its banks the silent figures sit like carved brown statues, hour after hour, day after day, with eyes open and fixed on vacancy, clearing themselves of all thought, emotion, and desire, that being emptied of self, they may see God. The most popular religion of the world today is that which flows out from the sacred seat, under the sacred tree at Gaya, where Buddha sat for six years, silent, receptive, until the great illumination came.” This is what Jesus desired of his Church: “Tarry ye, until ye be endued with power from on high.” The men who waited in the upper room were the ones whose minds were illuminated, whose hearts were fired, and whose missions were successful. “Wait, I say, upon the Lord.” SECRET PRAYER Matthew 6:5-6 In it one sees himself! Jesus believed in the quiet hour. In the great Sermon on the Mount there is more than the beatitudes; there is much of instruction concerning the development of the spiritual life, and infinitely more important, there is the injunction, “Pray”. “Enter into thy closet and when thou hast shut the door, pray to thy Father which seeth in secret, and thy father which seeth in secret shall reward thee openly.” The picture of yourself cannot he developed in the light; the dark-room is essential to the bringing out of its every feature; yea, to the realization of the last line of the face. No man ever sees himself as he ought to see himself; no man ever has a perfect picture of himself before his eyes until he goes into the dark-room to get it; into the room, the door of which is “shut” to the great wide world; into the room every window of which is closed; into the room where every curtain is drawn. Jesus knew it, and hence advised, “Enter that room.” It is in the place of secret prayer that the soul is uncovered and man sees his spiritual infirmities, and realizes the white plague that may have attacked the immortal part; or looks upon the cancer that may be eating out the spiritual life, and decides that he will perish apart from the great Physician. In Secret Prayer you see the face of God. Only those who know the quiet hour can become acquainted with the Father. Edward Everett Hale preached a theology so liberal that we seldom quote from him; yet, Edward Everett Hale spoke a great truth when he said: “Form the habit of giving up a fixed hour every day to see what God has to say to you. I have known a man who told me he had such a place of rendezvous in the attic of his store. He went upstairs every morning. He dropped his business; he came to his oratory. He let the downstair cares drop off. He forgot the price of sugar and flour and candles, and the rest. He left the morning mail unanswered so that he could ask God what he wanted him to do and be that day. He asked and waited five minutes to see what answer came before he went downstairs. Sometimes he had an answer. Sometimes he thought he had an answer. Sometimes | he thought he did not.” But Edward Everett Hale said: “I think he went down with God’s reply to his question whether he knew it or not; for those five minutes he was better able to carry out the larger laws of life than he ever would have been had he not been face to face with God.” This brings me to the last suggestion: Secret Prayer is the Source of Strength. Perhaps the most remarkable preacher in America yesterday was J. H. Jowett. Jowett once said: “Gentlemen, we are not always doing the most business when we seem to be most busy. We may think we are truly busy when we are really only restless, and a little studied retirement would greatly enrich our returns. We are great only as we are God-possessed; and scrupulous appointments in the upper room with the Master will prepare us for the toil and hardships of the most strenuous campaign.” There is a hymn entitled: “My Lord and I” with which the most of you are acquainted; and there is another that must have been suggested by it, which begins after the same manner, but reaches other and quite as important conclusions: “In the secret of His presence, I am kept from strife of tongues His pavilion is around me, And within are ceaseless songs; Stormy winds, His words fulfilling, Beat without, but cannot harm, For the Master’s voice is stilling Storm and tempest to a calm. “In the secret of His presence, All the darkness disappears, For a sun that knows no setting, Throws a rainbow on my tears; So the day grows ever brighter, Broad’ning to the perfect noon, So the way grows ever brighter, Heaven is coming near and soon. “In the secret of His presence, Never more can foes alarm; In the shadow of the Highest, I can meet them with a song; For the strong pavilion hides me, Turns their fiery darts aside, And I know whate’er betides me, I shall live because He died. “In the secret of His presence, In the sweet, unbroken rest, Pleasures, joys, in glorious fulness, Making earth like Eden blest; So my peace grows deep and deeper, Wid’ning as it nears the sea, For my Saviour is my keeper, Keeping mine and keeping me.” ======================================================================== CHAPTER 26: 03.00.1. PASTORAL PROBLEMS ======================================================================== W. B. RILEY PASTORAL PROBLEMS FLEMING H. REVELL COMPANY COPYRIGHT © MCMLIX, MCMXXXVI BY FLEMING H. REVELL COMPANY Westwood, New Jersey London E.C.4—29 Ludgate Hill Glasgow C.2—229 Bothwell Street Library of Congress Catalog Card Number: 59-5503 Printed in the United States of America ======================================================================== CHAPTER 27: 03.00.2. DEDICATION ======================================================================== DEDICATED TO MY WIFE MARIE ACOMB RILEY whose ability in administration and competence in teaching have been such important factors in the development of Northwestern ======================================================================== CHAPTER 28: 03.00.3. PASTORAL PROBLEMS (AUTHOR/INTRODUCTION) ======================================================================== PASTORAL PROBLEMS Out of his fifty years of experience as a pastor and teacher of homiletics, Dr. Riley prepared this handbook on every question pertaining to the work of the Christian ministry: appointment, preaching, administering the ordinances, performing a wedding service, conducting a funeral, untangling church quarrels, visiting, church music, finance, church organizations, the pastor and missions, and transacting church business. The book is Biblical and practical. Its chief authority is the Bible and every chapter has Scriptural quotations enforcing its thesis. It is practical because of the rich experience of the author and his skill in making that experience available to his readers. These forthright directions and suggestions have been tested out by Dr. Riley in the classroom and in the field. They have proved helpful to preachers just beginning their ministerial experience and to those still seeking solutions to so many of the common problems. $1.50 ABOUT THE AUTHOR W. B. RILEY, world-renowned Bible teacher and evangelist, served as a pastor and educator in Minneapolis for several decades. He helped to found the Bible and Missionary Training School, Northwestern Seminary and a liberal arts college in that city. INTRODUCTION Of the making of books there is no end—and most of them die quickly, once they have been made and published. Only the best, the healthiest, survive. Few stand the test of time, as this one has; published some twenty years ago, Pastoral Problems met an immediate and continuing popularity, and became a classic in its field. Popular demand has kept it in print. Dr. Riley was divinely called and peculiarly equipped to write this book: he had a wide and enriching experience not only in theory, but in practice. What he taught at Northwestern Evangelical Seminary he put into pastoral practice as minister of the famed First Baptist Church of Minneapolis. In the pulpit he was one of the nation’s great champions of historic evangelical Christianity; on the campus he was an inspired and inspiring evangelist and an invaluable instructor in the methodology of the ministry. He seems to have missed nothing, in this book, in his consideration of pastoral problems: from the appointment of the pastor through his work in preaching, teaching, administering the ordinances and offices of the Church, and the management of money, music, missions and evangelism, he offers the benefit of a counsel and experience the obtaining of which would cost the average minister twenty years of his life. We are proud to present Pastoral Problems in its new dress —a revised and popular-priced edition. THE PUBLISHERS ======================================================================== CHAPTER 29: 03.01. I. THE PROBLEM OF APPOINTMENT ======================================================================== I THE PROBLEM OF APPOINTMENT PAUL, writing to his junior, Timothy, said: “This is a true saying, If a man desire the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work.” (1 Timothy 3:1) The speech of the apostle, like all inspired declarations, will bear careful scrutiny.—“If a man desire the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work” is not to be translated—“If a man is ambitious to be a preacher, he gives evidence of his fitness for that office.” The reference is not an approval of the individual; it is a commendation of the office instead,—for bishop— overseer or pastor of the flock is “a good work.” It will be made clear in the course of this series of lectures that this office is not to be approached from the point of personal ambition, with a desire for personal honors or emoluments. If these things come to one in the office they are to appear as fruits of faithfulness, not as coveted objectives. It is not the purpose of this volume to persuade men to make a choice of the ministry as a life profession; it is our object instead to impart counsel, born of long experience, to the young and immature, who feel it absolutely incumbent upon them to enter the ministerial office. The successive gateways to this God-ordained occupation, as suggested by Scripture and increased by custom, we set in order. THE DIVINE APPOINTMENT In the process of this discussion we shall have occasion again and again to advise against entering the ministry as an occupation, save as one is compelled to do so. This compulsion should take the form of conviction.—The two outstanding ministers of New Testament history are Peter and Paul. Fortunately the record of their respective calls is somewhat complete. In the instance of Peter when, through the influence of his brother, Andrew, he was introduced to Jesus, Jesus said: “Thou art Simon the son of Jona: thou shalt he called Cephas, which is by interpretation. A stone.” (John 1:42) In other words, Christ, who knew all things, saw in Simon—a hearkener, the emotional possibilities of a mighty minister, and decided to put His Spirit upon him and so stabilize him as to render him worthy of his new name “Peter—a stone.” The marvels of his ministry, therefore, surprise no one; they were to be expected after such a judgment as Jesus formed and pronounced. In the instance of Saul’s call to the ministry, the record is far more complete. (See Acts 9:1-31); but in the case of both, the divine commission and a personal conviction combined. That is why Paul, writing to the Corinthians, was compelled to say: “Woe is unto me, if I preach not the gospel!” (1 Corinthians 9:16) Of every true minister it should be said, as was said of Christ’s ministry, “And no man taketh this honour unto himself, but he that is called of God, as was Aaron.” (Hebrews 5:4) These are days when men discuss essentials to success in the ministry. Let it never be forgotten, disputed, or even debated, that the first of all essentials is the still small Voice saying to the inner ear, “This is the way; walk ye in it!” Competence is a prominent evidence of this call.— Paul, writing to Timothy on the subject, reached his climax of essentials in the phrase, “Apt to teach.” (1 Timothy 3:2) Little wonder that in his second epistle to Timothy he repeated this requirement as a sine-quo-non, “Apt to teach” (2 Timothy 2:24); and that upon Titus he should impress the same idea by insisting that one who is thus called should hold “fast the faithful word as he hath been taught, that he may be able by sound doctrine both to exhort and to convince the gain-sayers.” (Titus 1:9) The late Dr. J. M. Stiffler, an authority on the Gospel ministry, thinks that Titus, as he went from church to church in Crete, was accustomed to ask, with a view to discovering divine appointees to this office, “Who is apt to teach?” and he remarks, ‘Titus went not to prepare a ministry. He went to find one that had already evinced its preparation by its known and acknowledged works.” This essential qualification should be associated with others of importance.—In the ministry, character is a Siamese twin of competence. A bishop must be “blameless, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, not given to wine, no striker, not greedy of filthy lucre; but patient, not a brawler, not covetous; one that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all gravity; (For if a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God?) Not a novice, lest being lifted up with pride he fall into the condemnation of the devil. Moreover he must have a good report of them which are without; lest he fall into reproach and the snare of the devil.” (1 Timothy 3:2-6) It is hardly necessary to elaborate on this statement of the apostle; it is manifestly complete as to the qualifications. In fact, the Word of God lays upon the conduct and character of a minister high demands, and he who is unwilling to strive, at least, for such qualifications should, out of common honesty, leave the office alone. It is not conceivable that God is calling a character-less man, no matter what his other competence. These are days when a certain class of men among us are laying emphasis upon scholastic honors unknown to Scripture demands. Education of high character will forever be a mighty contribution to competence; but it can never supersede character-demands or substitute for fidelity to the Word. As Edward T. Hiscox, speaking to this subject, said: “Certain it is, that no given amount of preparatory study is an indispensable condition of ministerial fitness.” Paul, the University graduate, may prove a more prolific writer than Peter, the unlettered fisherman; but the former was no whit more God’s minister on that account. They were alike “gifts” to the church of the ascended Lord; they were alike Spirit-inspired and Spirit-led. As a pastor and writer, Paul surpassed; as an evangelist, Peter saw the greater success; and let it be remembered to the credit of the scholarly Paul that he never spake to the discredit of his less learned brother, Peter. He had no objection to Peter’s ordination, and made no suggestion that Peter’s name be taken out of “the Regulars” and recorded on die list of “Reserves.” THE CHURCH RECOGNITION The church is to observe upon fit characteristics.— Fifty years ago, when I was in my tender youth, the village church of Dallasburg, Ky. (now Wheadey) was truly apostolic in this matter. Its officials and older members kept their eyes upon the young men of the congregation, carefully observed their conduct, gave intimate attention to their talents and, like Samuel of old, sought among the youths, “the Lord’s anointed.” They believed that the ascended Lord was still engaged in giving to the church “some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers”; (Ephesians 4:11), and they were eager to discover His will. They gave cordial reception to such youths that they might have “fellow-helpers to the truth.” (3 John 1:8) The result was such men as Dr. James Frost, Drs. Matthew and James Riley, W. B. and W. L. Riley, Dr. Tanby and others, too numerous to mention, came from that country church. Now we have developed a condition where the Diotrephes type has been multiplied to such an extent, that youths who bring many evidences of a divine commission are not welcome in the fellowship of those “who love to have the preeminence.” (3 John 1:9) But, as in the day of John, so now! It is not the business of office-lovers and office-seekers to decide who may enter the ministry; but it is the function of the church of God to make observation upon youth and to encourage every young Demetrius whose good character and love of the truth indicate the divine pleasure in him and the divine appointment for him. In the New Testament teaching, this whole question of fitness for the ministry rested with the ascended Lord, “Head over ail things to the church,” and with His Body, the organized company of believers. It was not with examining committees; it was not with District Associations; it was not with State Secretaries; it was not with National Convention officials, nor with Bishops. It was with the church. To find one Baptised historian, whoever commanded even attention, much less respect, from his denomination, by taking a different view of the matter, requires a wider reading than my fifty consecutive years have rendered possible. Originally the local church determined official distinction.—To Timothy, Paul wrote: “Neglect not the gift that is in thee, which was given thee by prophecy, with the laying on the hands of the presbytery.” (1 Timothy 4:14) In the instance of Timothy’s ordination to the ministry, it seems perfectly clear that two churches united, —the brethren at “Lystra and Iconium”; but, as in my own earliest experience, in all probability he was speaking in two churches at the same time, and they had mutually agreed upon his evident call to this work, as he was well-reported of by the brethren at both places. It is also a matter of inspired record that Paul, an apostle, visiting them at this time, joined in the ordination service by the putting on of hands. (2 Timothy 1:6) The ordination of Paul and Barnabas by the church at Antioch is recorded in Acts 13:1-3. It would seem therefore from plain New Testament teaching that the Church, formed after the New Testament model, holds, as an inherent right, the divinely-approved privilege of ordaining any man to the ministry it believes to be divinely called, and to choose for its pastor, the man of its prayer-guided choice. Common courtesy suggests a council of sister churches.—This has some apostolic precedent, and Reason’s hearty approval. Paul was ordained by the church at Antioch; but it must have been fully understood that he would minister to the multitude of new churches that were springing up throughout Judaea, and even known to the apostle, at least, that his ministry would reach far beyond these bounds. A similar situation exists with the average candidate for ordination. On that account the long established custom of inviting sister churches to send their pastor and delegates to sit in council with the church of which the candidate is a member is approved by the principles of Revelation and the demands of Reason. This much is certain, namely that Paul and Barnabas “ordained elders in every churchy,” as on their missionary journey they visited these newly baptized Bodies of believers. (Acts 14:23) The various denominations of the present day proceed after manners suited to their forms, of church government. Churches that are ruled by officialdom require officialdom’s recognition; but churches that are autonomous, which seems to be more nearly the New Testament model, proceed on the basis of direct action in this matter. The candidate for the ministry stands before the church and their invited counselors, and states his Christian experience, his call to the ministry and his views of Christian doctrines. All questions that any member of the church or council desires to ask are answered by the candidate. Then, it is common to move a secret session, retiring the candidate in the meantime; and the council, after discussion, votes either in favor of or against procedure with the ceremony of ordination. However, where the Congregational form of church government obtains, the right remains with the local church to accept or reject the counselors’ advice, ordain or refuse to ordain by its own vote. The rejection, however, of the advice of such counselors is extremely rare, and when it occurs, it is commonly a mistaken procedure. The minister involved, if ordained after that manner, enters a world-field seriously handicapped; in fact, popularly discredited. Believing as we do in the autonomy of the local church in this matter, we hold, and ardently advise, that every candidate for ordination should willingly subject himself in procedure to the council’s decision. It is our judgment that (with the rarest exception) the council’s decision (unless it has been politically created and manipulated) will at once prove not only the way of wisdom, but the will of the Spirit. THE HUMAN REGULATIONS It would be a pleasure to end this lecture at this point. It would seem that when one has made a careful study of Scripture and has sought to follow its teaching, that should suffice. But the church of God is menaced at this point also. Men are now creating human gradations.—For centuries there has been a gradual creeping paralysis of the church by ministerial offices and honors that have been graded after the world’s weights and measures. These human gradations began in the early centuries of church history, piled up through the middle ages, and have continued even to the present time, so that in the church today there is every conceivable rank. As is well known, certain so-called denominations have retained quite a little of this medieval politico-religious arrangement; but, until recently, a number of the more evangelical bodies were free from invidious distinctions of ministerial rank. However, the world-pull is like the law of gravity. It is both persistent and powerful; and now denomination after denomination which was aforetime free from such infection is beginning to yield to the pressure of conformity to the ecclesiastical world, and falling before this spreading epidemic. To be ordained in many a denomination, one must now bring his diplomas from the schools of its demands. This movement seeks to capture the conduct of ordaining bodies in even the most democratic and evangelical denominations. This grading of ministers, this setting up of human standards, is a grievous and sad departure from the divinely prescribed method of minister-making. The Word of our Lord, concerning this matter, is: “This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me. But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.” (Matthew 15:8-9) These standards are not only human; they divide and disrupt the body of Christ.—If there was ever a place in the whole Christian system where men, who are brethren in Christ, should stand on a common level, it would seem to be that of the Gospel ministry. If by the act of creation the doctrine of common “brotherhood of men” may be declared; and if, as is the teaching of the inspired apostle, men in Christ are “beloved brethren” (1 Corinthians 15:58), it would logically follow that men who are divinely called and commissioned to a common ministry should stand, in the sight of that God who is not even a “respecter of persons,” upon a common level. Originally it was so. Peter never assumed to be a pope, or suspected such posthumous office. Paul never set himself up as a cardinal or an archbishop, or in any wise imagined his office apart from that of Barnabas or John Mark, or the fishermen—Andrew and Peter, James and John. Timothy and Titus, young men, entered this ministry to be accorded, by their older and more prominent brethren, every fellowship of which these great and inspired souls were capable. Paul, in his first epistle to the Corinthians, in speaking of the gifts of the Spirit, emphasizes the fact that the Body of Christ is one, and he certainly never dreamed that the ministry to that Body would assume a different attitude. But we are fast falling upon times where “the heads” are saying to “the feet”: “We have no need of you” (1 Corinthians 12:21); forgetting the New Testament principle that “those members of the body, which seem to be the more feeble, are necessary; And those members of the body which we think to be less honourable, upon these we bestow more abundant honour,” since the custom of God is that “having given more abundant honour to that part which lacked; That there should be no schism in the body; but that the members should have the same care one for another” (1 Corinthians 12:22-25) That all of this applies directly to the ministry is made perfectly clear in 1 Corinthians 12:27 where it is said: “Now ye are the body of Christ, and members in particular. And God hath set some in the church, first apostles, secondarily prophets, thirdly teachers” etc.; but, to His main divisions, we propose a series of sub-divisions. Ecclesiology, then, is threatening the New Testament ministry.—Ecclesiology is the human side in the organization and development of the Church; it is defined as “the science of organic Christianity.” Man has always been indisposed to accept God’s models and methods as sufficient. He vainly imagines that he may improve upon them and brazenly sets himself to the task. Up to this good hour, we know of no instance in which this attempt has been eminently successful. The debris from man’s failures has converted the centuries of the past into an elongated cemetery where lie the tangled wrecks of his egotistical endeavor. The best thing that could happen to the Cause of Christianity would be a uniform consent on the part of its professors, to assign once for all to the ash-heap of forgetfulness man’s proposed improvements and return en masse to the revealed plans and programs of the Most High! OUTLINE OF CHAPTER ONE THE PROBLEM OF APPOINTMENT (Text—1 Timothy 3:1) Introductory word—The ministry not a mere profession. I. THE DIVINE APPOINTMENT a.This compulsion should take the form of conviction. b.Competence is a prominent evidence of this call. c.This essential qualification should be associated with others of importance; especially character. 1 Timothy 3:2-6 II. THE CHURCH RECOGNITION a.The church is to observe upon fit characteristics. b.Originally the local church determined official distinction. c.Common courtesy suggests a council of sister churches. In congregational forms the final right to ordain remains with the local church. III. THE HUMAN REGULATIONS a.Men are now creating human gradations. b.These standards are not only human; they divide and disrupt the body of Christ. c.Ecclesiology, then, is threatening the New Testament ministry. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 30: 03.02. II. THE PROBLEM OF PREACHING ======================================================================== II THE PROBLEM OF PREACHING PAUL, writing with the pen of inspiration to the Ephesians, tells us the source and also the secret of the Christian ministry. Referring to the ascended Lord, who “led captivity captive, and gave gifts unto men” he says, “And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers.” (Ephesians 4:11) For the present moment, at least, I want to fix attention upon the phrase “And he gave some, evangelists; and some, pastors,” with particular emphasis upon the pastorate. Too often we read even the Bible itself, God’s Holy Book, carelessly, and by such careless reading misinterpret and misunderstand. This text, while it involves the divine call, in that Christ gives these officials, states rather the benediction bestowed upon those to whom He has made the gift. It does not read, “And he gave some to be apostles, and some to be prophets, and some to be evangelists, and some to be pastors and teachers”; but it does read, “He gave gifts unto men,” and, “He gave unto some (men) apostles, and unto some (men) prophets, and unto some (men) evangelists, and unto some (men) pastors and teachers.” The emphasis in the text is upon the favors shown to men; but the plain inference of the text is divine appointment to each and every one of these offices. In other words, the risen and ascended Christ creates and fills the same. Thinking along that line then, we conclude that the problem of preaching is not solved by man, but rather by the Son of God, without whose appointment these officials do not exist. Speaking, as we do, to students who confidently expect to fill some one of these offices, you will permit us to talk about the Essential Preparation, the Recurring Equipment, and the Pulpit Ministry. I. THE ESSENTIAL PREPARATION The first essential is the divine selection.—If one is to be a minister of the Word, he is made such by a holy commission. Christ alone determines his appointment. The story of that yokel who decided he ought to preach and whose farmer father inquired as to why he so felt is apropos here. The youth replied, “Because the Bible says ‘Go preach my Gospel to every creature,’ ” to which the old man answered, “Yes, the good Book do say, ‘Preach the Gospel to every critter,’ but nowhere does it say that every critter is to preach the Gospel.” The ministry is not a mere profession to be accepted on the advice of a parent or friend, or to be entered upon with the thought of honorable office, possible social and intellectual advantages, or conceivable emoluments. Charles Spurgeon may have seemed extreme but we believe that he was absolutely correct, when he said, “Young man, if you can be satisfied to do anything else, don’t preach the Gospel,” by which the great London minister meant to suggest that he alone who felt compelled by the consciousness of a divine call had either responsibility for the office or likelihood of success in the same. A second essential in preparation for the pastorate is a Scripturally based Faith. It is our judgment that just now this suggestion needs particular emphasis. We are fully convinced that no conceivable scholarship can dispense with this necessity, or in any measure create a substitute therefor. Unless the man who is to preach can say with the apostle, to every assembly he proposes to address, “Brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I also received; how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; and that he was buried and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures,” he has no place whatever in the pulpit, and no right to maintain occupation of the same, (1 Corinthians 15:1-4) Luetta Cummins compasses this thought quite well in a poem entitled “A Sermon to Preachers”: “I am greatly disappointed with some preachers of today, With their logic and their ethics; their aristocratic way; With their science and their theories and their new Theology Full of everything but Jesus, and His love for you and me. “There is plenty in the Bible for the preachers of today, If they will but search its pages and for help divine would pray; For God’s Word is everlasting and it never will grow old— ’Tis indeed a priceless treasure—far more precious e’en than gold. “What we want is consecration in a good true man of God, With a Bible education, and a love for God’s dear Word; Who can lead us and direct us to the truth, the life, the way, Which brings peace to soul and body through the burdens of the day. “If the preachers in our churches would preach Jesus crucified, How through love for us He suffered, and through love for us, He died, Then our pews would not be empty, as so many are today, But be filled to overflowing, in a Pentecostal way. “What we need is just plain Gospel, in the good old-fashioned way, In place of Emerson or Shakespeare, or some topic of the day, What care we for all their sayings, or their teachings true and tried? We want just the dear old story of the Saviour crucified. “That alone can make men better, that alone can make men free— Just the precious, dear old story, of God’s love for you and That is what the people’s wanting, there is where the crowd will be; Where they hear the same old story which they heard at mother’s knee.” A third essential in preparation is Consecration to Study. Here again the apostle Paul becomes our teacher, “Study to show thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.” (2 Timothy 2:15) To be sure some of the versions have “Give diligence,” but that translation is only a greater emphasis upon the necessity. At this present moment I am not speaking of scholarly culture. We will come to that a moment later; but I am talking of mastering the text. Dr. A. J: Gordon of Boston, perhaps the finest and most finished of our Baptist pastors, is reported by his son to have longed for a renaissance of farmer preachers with which his boyhood had been familiar. The reason he gave for wishing that this now defunct ministry could be reinstated was this, “They knew their Bible from cover to cover. With such men,” he said, “we could renew the religious life of New England.” The passing of time has made Gordon’s remark even the more meaningful. Strangely enough, just when educators, capturing public opinion, persuaded the same that only a cultured minister could accomplish aught, in and around Boston, for instance, the intellectual standing slipped, and today there are few sections of America that have so large a proportion of the illiterate as New England itself. Scholarship is meaningless to the overwhelming majority of its citizens; but the plain Word of God, committed to heart, and preached to the foreigner who has flocked to that section, represents practically the only hope of its evangelization. Some years ago certain Theological Seminaries deliberately decided to create ministers for the cultured classes, and for those alone. The result has not been gratifying. Scores of country churches were closed in consequence, and in the city pulpits in which these finished orators hold forth they have proven practically unintelligible to the average man. In consequence of that fact, plain every-day people have largely ceased from church attendance, while the cultured company, who we confidently expected would pack the elegant sanctuaries, yielded themselves to desires of the flesh instead, and Sunday golf, Sunday picnics, Sunday motor excursions, have left the orator of the day to a vanishing and uninspiring audience. We discuss the question, “How can we fill the church house?” Let it be distinctly understood that there are only about two ways: One is a secular show that for putridity equals or exceeds that put on by the picture house itself; the other is the preaching of the Gospel of Grace in the power of the Spirit. The first panders to the passions of the flesh and profits nobody; the second enjoys the divine favor, and results in human redemption. Whatever else the minister does or doesn’t do, he should master his Bible and “preach the Word!” II. THE RECURRING EQUIPMENT I promised a few moments ago to return to the question of scholarship. In spite of what we have just said, we believe in the scholarly minister, and heartily approve constant mental application. Some years ago Dr. R. F. Horton of London, England, delivered the Yale lectures on Preaching. In the course of the same he said, “Every preacher should be, so far as circumstances permit, a scholar.” To be sure, he added, “There is an idolatry of learning, an esoteric spirit of the specialist, a superstitious reverence for the ‘original tongues,’ which will ruin any preacher. I do not advocate the sentiment which was expressed by the father of Coleridge when he used to speak with bated breath of Hebrew as ‘the immediate language of the Holy Ghost.’ To my mind the old countrywoman was considerably nearer the mark when, on hearing a minister quote Greek in the pulpit, she exclaimed indignantly, ‘Bless you; you don’t suppose the Apostle Paul knew Greek!’ It is a far saner state of mind which supposes that Paul was ignorant of Greek, than that which imagines that a mysterious and divine value attaches to the tongue in which, as it happened, the great communications of God were first made.” The ideal man, however, is the minister whose scholarly attainments no auditor can question, and yet whose directness and simplicity of speech is such that the most unlearned can readily understand it. In fact, some of the world’s greatest scholars have been characterized by utter simplicity of speech. My own revered teacher, Dr. John A. Broadus, was an illustration in point. He was easily one of the first Greek scholars living and an adept in other dead languages; and yet his sermons were delivered in the simplest English. Savonarola, the immortal, was a student and a scholar, but doubtless the thing that made him a preacher of power is the circumstance stated by Herrick in his volume Some Heretics of Yesterday: “For seven years, from 1475 to 1482, when he was thirty years of age, he continued in the convent of Bologna until, as the story goes, he knew the Bible, every word by heart.” That indeed is the equipment above all others. It is important that the pastor intelligently select sermon subjects. When I say intelligently, I do not mean to approve dull themes, or applaud sensational ones. If advertising of pulpit subjects is to take place, they ought to be such as harmonize with Scripture teaching and at the same time, so phrased as to attract public attention. Robert J. Burdette once preached from the text “So shall he startle many nations” Isaiah 52:15. In that connection he said. “We have to startle men to make them hear. You have to startle them to stop them,” and “compel them to think.” There are not a few people who condemn sensational preaching but patronize sensational places, revel in sensational sports, and as Burdette said, “They want their religion to be a mixture of laudanum, chloroform, lollypop and fudge.” But there is no such religion, except it be one of the pseudo-Christian cults which passes for a genuine faith. Perhaps the most sensational thing that ever took place was the giving of the law of God, as the mountain smoked and the lurid lightnings filled the people with fear, and the thunderous words, “Thou shalt not,” “Thou shalt not,” “Thou shalt not” broke upon their ears. There is a decided difference between such a sensation as Paul created in every city visited, and the cheap sensation that some ministerial montebanks bring about. In the instance of the Apostle, the people, attracted by his new methods and his revolutionary message, went away profited. In the instance of the montebank, they are called in the name of bread, and are delivered a stone. The Bible is wonderful in that it touches every feature and phase of human life. There is scarcely any subject with which mortal men have to do that is not discussed within its pages. It is quite practicable, therefore, to bring from its teaching, week in and week out, year after year through the longest pastorate, things “new” as well as “old”; nor is there any reason why the great essentials of spiritual progress should not be so stated as to interest and attract the public. Think of old Isaiah, that marvelous, most eloquent of Old Testament preachers, and I can imagine the crowds running to see what is up, while he stands on a box at the street corner and lifting his voice until it can be heard afar, cries, “Ho, every one that thirsteth; come ye to the waters; Come ye!” I know of no modern minister, Billy Sunday included, whose methods were more sensational than were those of Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel. But the sensationalism of their message was both justified and exceeded by the importance of their message! The third point of recurring equipment is contact with the Christ. Prayer should be what the trolley pole is to the current in the wire, the medium through which power is conveyed to the wheels of human life. Dr. Horton, to whom I made reference a few minutes ago, in the same Yale series, said: “The duty of the Christian minister is to bring his people in each service to that mountain top where Jesus retires to pray. No man can do that who has not been there himself and learned all the footprints up the mountain. In vain shall we expect to pray in the name of Jesus on Sunday unless we have been praying in His name all the week. No dress sits easily when it is new and Sunday clothes, which seem by prescription to be permissible in the pews, are useless in the pulpit. You must stand up to preach and pray in your weekday clothes; and therefore the weekday coat must be prayer in the name of Jesus.” When Andrew had spent “a day with Jesus,” it was not difficult for him to persuade Simon Peter. Christ contact is the source of strength. III. THE PULPIT MINISTRY In preaching the Word certain characteristics should be found in the pastor and also in the evangelist. His ideas should be clearly expressed.—Mudiness of thought, mistiness of expression, are ministerial clouds in which the truth is lost. Among the characteristics of the Bible is clarity. To turn from Mary Baker Eddy’s “Key to the Scriptures” to the Scriptures themselves is like walking out of a California coast-fog into cloudless mountain air. Since the purpose of preaching is to make the Book more clear, words should be chosen for their simplicity and readiness of understanding. The late O. P. Gifford was marvelous in this matter. His sentences scintillated; they flashed upon your mental vision as the rays of the sun, caught by reflecting glass may be turned upon your face almost with blinding light. I asked him one day, “Man, how do you manage it?” To which he answered, “I spend hours in simplifying speech. When I ride on a train or street car and people let me alone, I employ my spare minutes in whittling my sentences.” Study simplicity of speech. Yet again, Employ no artificial tones! If in what I am saying it has seemed that I am ignoring the feminine section of the school body, let me say that just here I have that particularly in mind. There are men who are unfortunately born with female voices and vice versa. There are women who are blessed with feminine voices; who strongly determine to cultivate masculine ones. The result is the same in both instances, the auditor is repulsed, not attracted. And then, there is the further point of necessary consideration, namely, the assumed artificial, and by some called “holy tones” I was brought up under these. One of the preachers who profoundly influenced my youth was never supposed to be going well until he got to the “holy tones,” and at his best he sucked in his breath with such a voluminous sound, that at a distance of a hundred yards you would have had a hard time to distinguish between the preacher’s voice and the bray of an ass. There are others who adopt the sing song, or “canonical whang” as one has called it, and to some people that tone is a signal of sanctification. But the truth remains that God had a purpose in the gift of the human voice, and that its proper employment involves a sensible use of the gift itself. Speak naturally provided your nature is not indolent; in that case stir yourself. Speak naturally provided your nature is not grandiloquent; in that case quiet yourself. Talk! Preaching is simply telling the good news of God’s saving grace. Finally, control emotions; don’t destroy them. Some speakers let their emotions run away with them. They have scarce begun before they begin to weep. The story is told that two small boys sat in the gallery and listened to a minister who was quite emotional. As he went on from word to word he wept his way through. Finally one of the boys said to the other, “Jack; what is that old codger crying about?” To which his buddy replied, “I guess if you had to stand up there and preach for an hour and a half, and didn’t have anything more to say than he has, you’d cry too.” The minister without emotion is not a true servant of God; he does not stir the people. But his emotion should be controlled! To lose one’s control of self is to lose also the interest, if not the respect, of auditors. On the other hand, the unemotional man cannot be a minister. Forever Jesus of Nazareth will remain the minister’s model. Most of His addresses are calm and logical; but it can never be forgotten that certain subjects stirred Him so deeply that sobs escaped His lips. When He stood on the hill overlooking Jerusalem and realized its coming fate, the waves of emotion swept beyond control, and He wept! One can readily imagine that each of these sentences was voiced in a sob: “Oh, Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them that are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not. Behold, your house is left unto you desolate.” Again, when He stood beside the grave of Lazarus His soul was swept with a sob. To preach a funeral sermon, or to attempt to administer to the bereaved apart from emotion is simply to add additional hurt to hearts already breaking. In counseling young ministers I know that I could do no better than point to Jesus and say once more: “Behold the Man! imitate Him!” OUTLINE OF CHAPTER TWO THE PROBLEM OF PREACHING Introductory word—on Ephesians 4:11. I. THE ESSENTIAL PREPARATION a.The first essential is the divine selection. b.The second essential is a Scripturally based Faith. c.The third essential is consecration to study. II. THE RECURRING EQUIPMENT a.Scholarship is eminently desirable. b.The selection of sermon subjects should be Spirit-guided. c.Constant contact with Christ is most fundamental. III. THE PULPIT MINISTRY a.One’s idea should be clearly expressed. b.Employ no artificial tones. c.Control, but do not discard emotion. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 31: 03.03. III. CONSERVING MATERIAL FOR SERMONIZING ======================================================================== III CONSERVING MATERIAL FOR SERMONIZING SERMONIZING is not the whole business of the minister as we have shown in a previous discussion. We cannot go the length of Professor Phelps, insisting that all else be let alone, and one give himself wholly to the preparation and delivery of discourses; but we can agree that this is the main business of the minister. That being true, the gathering and the filing of material for sermonizing is of first moment. My long experience in this matter would lead me to suggest the following:— FIND THE MATERIAL There are several fields that may be drawn upon in this matter. Your own experience is a fruitful field.—You range in ages from twenty to forty, possibly an average of above twenty-five. That is a considerable proportion of life, fully a third of the same for the most fortunate and favored of you. In that time you have had experience and made observation and mental notes of many incidents. That constitutes your accumulated fortune. It is exactly as the laying aside of money for the day of need. The Saving’s bank account comes handy when there is a crisis, an unusual call. You will be surprised, as you go on in your ministry, to find how often you will draw on these past years, and how richly they will supply you with incident and illustration, born of experience and observation. Taken all in all, for the first few years of your ministry, your own past will provide the most and best of your thoughts and illustrations. But as the man who constantly spends his accumulations must be adding to them or else come to poverty, so there will be additions that you must make or mental penury will overtake you. Your observations should constantly add.—Move through life with your eyes open. Here you have your Master’s example. His speech was like a lecture with a magic lantern,—scene after scene thrown upon the canvas. His illustrations He drew from observation. The cup, the platter, the lamp, the candle-stick, the mill stone; the sewing of a new piece of cloth into an old garment; the putting of new wine into old bottles. He pictured the hen gathering her chickens, the playing children in the streets; He painted the lilies of the field; He illustrated by the birds picking up the seed; building their nests in the branches of the trees; by the doves, the sparrow, the dogs, and the swine; by the fig tree, the bramble bush, the south wind, the red sky, the yellow grain, the sheep and the shepherd. He told the stories of the Pharisee and the Publican; the Priest and Levite and Samaritan; Dives and Lazarus; the unmerciful servant; the laborers in the vineyard; the Prodigal Son; the wicked husbandman; the marriage of the King’s son; the ten virgins; the talents; the two debtors; the barren fig tree; the great supper; the lost sheep; the lost piece of money; the unjust steward; the unjust judge; the unprofitable servants. Christ was the Master in illustrations drawn from observation. Your reading, however, is an inexhaustible source.— Here there is no limitation. Of making books there is no end; yea, of even good ones. The limitation of great books far exceeds the possible personal perusal. Own the book that you read, and read it with a pencil in hand. Mark every thought that may at some time be needed; every illustration that appeals to you as having pith and point. You say, “We are too poor to do that.” “No!” Better go without butter on your bread than without books. It is not the large number of books skimmed over that will prove profitable. It is the number read carefully and marked for future reference. The young man who skimps in body that he may supply the mind will shortly discover that the improved intellect can richly clothe and abundantly feed the body, and still have an ever increasing surplus. Every newspaper that you read is liable to yield you a treasure. Every magazine into which you peer will also provide its reward. With all your reading entertain the double purpose of keeping abreast of the times, and preparing yourself against time to come. CATALOGUE THE MATERIAL You cannot retain it in memory!—The memory is but a pint cup, at best. It will hold a little bit, but not much; and if you trust it only you will find that you will faint and perish; you will be on the desert plains without supplies. These remarks apply no matter how good a memory one may have. Some men have remarkably retentive memories and there are exceptional instances where the memory of others, under certain excitement, clearly recalls observations long since made or pages long since read; but as a source of supplies for sermonizing, the memory is wholly insufficient. Don’t discard it, but give it aid! Conveniently locate your material.—Mark the word “conveniently.” There are men who clip from newspapers and put into envelopes and write on the back of the envelope its contents. That is not a “convenient” arrangement! It requires endless patience and valuable time to fish out contributions from such enclosures. Other men have an endless series of boxes catalogued, in which they place clippings and references. Most of this stays there to gather dust, because it is too difficult to find it, maul over, and sort out. You must have it “conveniently” located, that it will come at your call, and come quickly. The very best arrangement is the Index-Rerum.— This suggestion was arranged originally by a man named Todd, but there is no patent on it. Every man can provide his own,—simple in the last degree,—taking each letter of the alphabet and following it with the vowels in turn. Like—aa, ae, ai, ao, au; opposite page—aa, ea, ia, oa, ua; ba, be, bi, bo, bu, etc.—opposite page—ab, eb, ib, ob, ub, etc. And you can write up under this arrangement every conceivable subject; simply placing it under the word that involves the initial letter and the prominent vowel; and since words are impossible without vowels, there are no exceptions to the rule. For instance, Bible would come under Bi.; Christ under Ci.; Church under Cu.; etc. UTILIZE THE MATERIAL This material then lies ready to respond to your call. Your outline should be original.—My uniform custom is to make my own outline, before I have done any other study whatever. One should take his text and study it in the light of the context, and when he has thoroughly comprehended what the text intends to teach, then state that first in the Main Divisions. After the Main Divisions are clear, study it a second time for subdivisions. I have found the method of alliteration most suggestive in such divisions. You can do this as well as another can do it for you, and when you have done it yourself, rather than having borrowed the same from another, it will have taken a hold upon your mind that no borrowed idea could. Then draw from your experience, observation and Scriptural knowledge.—Jot down these incidents, illustrations and texts in such a way that when you come to write or dictate, the words used will suggest the incident, observation, or Scriptural quotation. Finally, resort to the Index-Rerum.—Sound reasoning ought to characterize the sermon. Thought should be your own, or at least it must have passed through the medium of your mind so as to become substantially your own. But cold reasoning, however logical, will not produce conviction, nor result in conversion. For this, illustrations are effective. They are like the point of an arrow, and without that point the arrow will not do its work. It is possible, of course, to preach sermons that are simply chains of illustrations, but it is not desirable. It is practically impossible to preach an effective sermon without illustrations. Your Index-Rerum should receive its daily contribution from your reading and make its weekly contribution to your preparation. I have used Todd’s Index-Rerum for fifty consecutive years. I have never prepared a sermon without appeal to the same, and in the fifty years it has never disappointed me. There are on the shelves of my library, in the form of clippings alone, seventy volumes that range in size from 100 to 300 pages. I could publish more illustrations today, if I desired to do it, than were contained in John Foster’s two volumes of 24,000. I have been asked a great many times during my ministry how I secured such a wealth of illustrations. The answer is,—“Read; Mark Clip; Paste; Record in the Index-Rerum.” OUTLINE OF CHAPTER THREE CONSERVING MATERIAL FOR SERMONIZING I. FIND THE MATERIAL a.One’s own experience is a fruitful field. b.One’s observation should constantly add. c.One’s reading is an inexhaustible source. II. CATALOGUE THE MATERIAL a.You cannot retain it in memory. b.Conveniently locate the same. c.The very best arrangement is the Index-Rerum. III. UTILIZE THE MATERIAL a.Your outline should be original. b.Draw from experience, observation and Scripture knowledge. c.For illustrations, resort to Index-Rerum. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 32: 03.04. IV. ADVERTISING THE SERVICES OF THE CHURCH ======================================================================== IV ADVERTISING THE SERVICES OF THE CHURCH FEW subjects receive greater attention today than the subject of advertising. We are accustomed, however, to employ the phrase almost entirely with reference to business interests. It is only of late that men have realized that advertising for Christ and the Church is of vastly more importance than the successful sale of the best of earthly wares. A careful study of the New Testament, however, will show that in the disciples’ day advertising Christ was regarded as the very mission of the Church. In fact, the last promise that Jesus made before ascending into the heavens looked definitely to the advertising of the Christ: “Ye shall receive power after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you; and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea, and in Samaria and unto the uttermost part of the earth.” Advertising the services, if it means anything at all, should mean advertising Christ Himself. There are, therefore, some things that I wish to set in order on this subject. HAVE SOMETHING TO ADVERTISE The preparation of a service should justify all that is said of it.—In other words, if you are going to blaze abroad a service and invite people to the same, you should put into the service itself every attraction named. Extravagance here will, as usual, produce final poverty. Failure to live up to what has been announced will send your audience away disappointed and dissatisfied, and your next invitation is not likely to be regarded. I was brought up on a farm and I learned that when you call hogs you must provide them corn, swill or some adequate meal. If you don’t, they will shortly cease to come. Men are equally bright, and you can’t fool them too often. The performance should redeem all promises.—If you have a choir of ten voices do not claim twenty; and if you have a house that seats two hundred, do not advertise four hundred. On a recent Sunday I heard a mistake, inadvertently made, that corresponded in a measure with what many preachers constantly and deliberately do. I had failed to write out what the Radio announcer should have said about the Sunday Night services of the First Baptist Church, and so I gave him, by word of mouth, this statement: “There will be eight hundred balcony seats reserved for students.” Imagine, therefore, my surprise, after having quit the room where I had been addressing my radio audience, to hear thundering after me as I left the building, “8000 balcony seats will be reserved for students in the First Baptist Church tonight.” If all the other sins of preachers were pardoned, the one of exaggeration may yet balk some of them at Heaven’s gate. I have counted the seats in most of the prominent churches of America and almost without exception, the pastors, in advertising, boast on an average just about one-third more seatings than the sanctuary ever had. In this the Scriptures are illustrated “all men are liars”; and the old adage is still worthy of attention— “Honesty is the best policy.” The profit of the people should equal their response. —If they come in great numbers there should be given them great return; and if at first they come in small numbers what they get will determine in a large measure their rate of increase. There are gaudy and worldly shows of one sort or another that can be pulled off in the house of God and for a time attract marvelously; but such audiences of Athenians will leave you the very day that another and still more worldly program is put on by the church across the way. I have been in this pastorate for thirty-nine years. I have seen audiences come and I have seen them go. I have seen churches grow suddenly popular and for a time attract crowds, but the two churches, in this city, that have maintained a steady influence with the people, and whose audiences have averaged higher, the year around through the entire time than any other two in the entire Northwest, have been the two where honest work was done for and in the pulpit, where the Gospel was presented in its simplicity, and where the spiritual interest of the people were both sought and conserved. We repeat, therefore, have something to advertise. ADVERTISING SHOULD Be SANE AND SNAPPY An advertisement should arrest attention.—Some years ago the Nash people offered a prize for that agent of the Company, who should suggest in a word or phrase the most arresting thought. A personal friend of mine secured that prize. His suggestion was “Another Nash.” You have seen that all over America—“Another Nash!” There is, at this moment, a good sign on the west end of our Jackson Hall. The arresting phrase is “Night School.” Here brevity is the soul of wit! A word, a short sentence that will strike the eye and hold attention to itself, until the thing advertised is comprehended, is the objective in advertising. An advertisement should carry information.—That is the real purpose of all advertising; to tell people what you are keen to have them know. The weakness of too much church advertising is at this point. The hour of service is stated; the subject is announced, but oftentimes no information is contained in the announcement. People cannot tell, or even imagine, from the subject the trend of the sermon. It is often worth while to follow with a series of questions that would be answered, or with simple statements as to the direction the discourse would take. There is some thoughtless church attendance, but the majority of people would like to go where they can get definite information on subjects of deep soul-concern. While advertising should be well done, it should not be overdone.—I saw sometime since a most sensational dodger destined to be freely distributed. It started: Introducing Mr. _____ “Mr. _____ is a man of unusual brain power and spiritual illumination. He combines in a rare degree the exactness of the scientist, the idealism of the philosopher, the vision of the seer and the truth of the Bible student. “The lectures are considered among the greatest productions of the age in which we live. A volume could be filled with commendatory letters from ministers, educators and people in all walks of life.” Others have said:— “Simply great—no other word to use.” “Most dramatic speaker in America.” “A cultured orator.” “A great spiritual teacher.” “One of America’s greatest thinkers.” “Logical, practical, dynamic.” “He speaks as one having authority.” “You can never forget him.” “A fearless crusader.” “Always draws big crowds.” “He is a Kansas Cyclone.” “Young people are charmed with him.” “His lectures are worth $5,000.00 to me.” “Humor, tragedy, drama, science, Bible, Christ, philosophy and psychology—all in one.” A Western editor, after reading this handbill, said: “It is modeled after the show bills originated by P. T. Barnum.” The local pastor who talked of himself after this manner or permitted himself to be so lauded would shortly be the laughing stock of the town. Finally, think with me on some SUCCESSFUL METHODS Meetings should be a medium of advertising.—To this end, multiply them. There is an impression with some people that the fewer meetings you have the more popular they are. Exactly the opposite is true. No store could run by selling on one day a week; no theater could live if it were open only every other night. The more meetings held, if they are the right sort, the more mediums of advertising all. The success of one becomes the popular channel for announcing another. If I were the pastor of a country church I would do what has been done in this metropolitan organization; I would multiply meetings. The power of the old-fashioned “spelling bee” to bring the people together has been neglected, not exhausted. The popularity of a Community Sing is just now at its height, and should therefore be utilized by country churches. The organizing of the young people in the community who can play musical instruments into an orchestra would both interest them and bring their talents to the service of the King, as would the putting on of meetings in school-houses and pastorless churches near at hand. The direction of the Boy Scout Movement might easily be employed to the profit of the Sunday School and Church; and of course, it goes without saying that prayer meetings, Bible study, and Mission gatherings are under God’s favor. A country church should be the center of the community’s social life. It used to be. Now the Public School is rapidly stealing the same away, and the result is anti-Christian practices in harmony with the anti-Christian philosophy of the school itself. Without openly antagonizing, the country preacher who sets himself intelligently to the task of keeping Christ before the community, and calling the community to Christ, will find his work the center of ever increasing interest. The local newspaper also is an excellent medium.— Here we confess to fault. We have never taken the pains to cultivate newspaper men or the time to set before them our plans and programs. They are as amenable to the minister’s friendship as any other professional class, and they are in a position to serve the interests of the cause of Christ above almost all others. Give them interesting material. Get it to them on time; and express your appreciation after they have published the same. You will find you are being served gratis to an extent that would cost others big money. If some moral or religious principle is involved and the newspaper opposes and criticizes you, do not grieve. Dead men never raise a row. A man who is in a fight at least has the assurance that he is alive, and other men arc taking note of him. Thirty-five years ago I went one day to Mr. W. L. Harris, President and owner of the New England Furniture Company, and poured out to him my complaint of unfair and unjust newspaper criticism. He looked at me complacently and said, “You do not know when you are well off. I had to pay out $500.00 in cash this morning to have the same amount said about my business as is being said about your administration in the church. It is worth more than that amount in publicity.” Finally, Your membership is your greatest agency of advertising. Lyman Beecher was enjoying a very successful pastorate in Boston and somebody asked him how it happened that his comparatively small congregation was arousing the city in such a signal way? He answered, “I preach to four hundred and fifty of them on Sunday; and four hundred and fifty of them re-preach my sermon for seven days in the week.” The pastor who can enthuse his people with his own spirit will, through them, reach and profit the public. One of the greatest agents that Christ ever discovered in His matchless ministry was when “‘there came a leper to him, beseeching him, and kneeling down to him, and saying unto him, If thou unit, thou canst make me clean. And Jesus, moved with compassion, put forth his hand, and touched him, and saith unto him, I will; be thou clean. And as soon as he had spoken, immediately the leprosy departed from him, and he was cleansed. And he straitly charged him, and forthwith sent him away; And saith unto him, See thou say nothing to any man; but go thy way, show thyself to the priest, and offer for thy cleansing those things which Moses commanded, for a testimony unto them. But he went out, and began to publish it much, and to blaze abroad the matter, insomuch that Jesus could no more openly enter into the city, but was without in desert places: and they came to him from every quarter.” (Mark 1:40-45) This man’s blessing was so big that silence for him was impossible! Saved men are the best mediums of advertising Christianity! OUTLINE OF CHAPTER FOUR ADVERTISING THE SERVICES OF THE CHURCH (Text—Acts 1:8) Introductory word on—“The Value of Advertising.” I. HAVE SOMETHING TO ADVERTISE a.The preparation for a service should justify the advertisement. b.The performance should redeem all promises. c.The profit of the people should equal their response. II. ADVERTISING SHOULD BE SANE AND SNAPPY a.An advertisement should arrest attention. b.An advertisement should carry information. c.Advertising should not be overdone. III. SUCCESSFUL METHODS a.Meeting should be a medium of advertising. b.The local newspaper is an excellent medium. c.Your membership is your greatest agency. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 33: 03.05. V. ADMINISTERING A CHURCH SERVICE ======================================================================== V ADMINISTERING A CHURCH SERVICE FOR some years it has seemed increasingly clear that I should give to the students of my own schools the Northwesterns, and such other schools as may choose to use the volume, the benefit of my long experience in dealing with the problems of the pastoral office. There are not a few of these, as each Pastor finds; and to solve them correctly spells success, while an unsuccessful endeavor spells failure. Students will readily comprehend our anxiety for the most eminent success possible to their talents. I speak, then, on ADMINISTERING A CHURCH SERVICE. There are certain essentials here that must be regarded: THE APPOINTMENTS Pre-arrange the physical comfort of the congregations.—Many country churches have not salaried sextons. The work will devolve either upon some kindly member who volunteers to clean, warm and care for the church room, or it may possibly fall upon the pastor himself to perform that function. Henry Ward Beecher was both sexton and pastor of his first charge. Whether this duty is assigned to another or must be discharged by you, see to it that the House is ready for the assembly. The fires should be started before the congregation has come in, not after. On one occasion in Kentucky, I rode twenty miles on a bitter morning, my horse breaking through the ice of a small river, wetting me to the skin, and I found no fire in the building on arrival at the service hour. Certainly fires should be built, the sweeping, if such is to occur, should be over and the dust settled and mopped, in advance of assembly. I have seen many a service badly disturbed by coal-carrying, wood-delivery, sweeping and mopping after the people were in their seats. It is a poor preparation for a profitable service. Plan for the smooth participation of the people in the service.—Too often the part of the congregation in the service is minimized and the essentials to their eager share in the service are neglected. For instance, in a house where chairs not pews, are used, I have seen the service open with the chairs in disorder. Every new arrival, by the time he got his chair placed and himself comfortably seated in the same, had disturbed a considerable section. Again, I have seen congregations gather, even in the Northwestern Bible and Missionary Training School room, where the number of chairs was limited, and the early arrivals promptly appropriate the back seats, and all late comers—stragglers—had to make their way to the front seats, much to their confusion, and, if visitors and strangers, to their deep embarrassment. Congregations can be trained by a little careful attention and suggestion to keep these things in mind and thereby contribute to a smooth and successful opening service. Above all, have pianist and hymn books in place.— Many meetings are injured, in their opening, by the late arrival of the pianist, or the fact that none had been provided, and one must be persuaded to conquer her shyness, and after much coaxing come forth with great deliberation! When she reaches the piano stool, she adjusts her skirts and then looks bewilderingly around for a hymn book. Some boy, in the back of the room, finally volunteers to bring her one, by which time the congregation is far more ready to laugh than to worship. I am positive that I am not exaggerating when I say that half the time in country and village churches at least, the hymn books are distributed after the first song has reached its center, or the introductory service its middle. All of these things should be taken care of in advance. The physical comforts completed, we come to THE PREPARATION on the part of the pastor himself. There are three suggestions that are absolute. Go from prayer to the pulpit.—There are churches where the deacons meet with the pastor for prayer previous to the morning service, and a few where they meet with him for prayer previous to each service. It is an eminently desirable custom and should be encouraged. But if possible have that meeting conclude at least five, or better, ten minutes before preaching time. The very best equipment for preaching is a private waiting before the Lord when there is no one else in the room save you and Him, and when your deepest secrets can be laid before Him and your crying desires can be poured into His ears. To preach without preceding the same by private prayer is to appear before the people without an assurance of the Spirit’s presence, and “apart from Him we can do nothing.” Appear in the pulpit promptly.—Many times have we been in a service where the preacher would not get to the front door for five minutes, or even ten minutes, after the announced time for opening, and we have seen him, even then, go the rounds of friendly greeting and chat as comfortably, as though this time did not belong to God and to the congregation that had been called together. Only the most urgent business, that could be dispensed with a word, should be placed before any preacher between his study and his pulpit. Many people will be lying in wait for you and will be saying, “Pastor, just a minute!” to which it will be sufficient to answer smilingly, “Pardon me; I am on my way to the pulpit; it is service time now” and after a courteous word, pass on. Dallying with the hour of opening is indefensible. Have a complete program in hand.—It is almost an unpardonable sin to enter the pulpit and sit down and commence hunting a suitable passage for the morning lesson, or turning the leaves of a hymn book in search of a hymn to be announced. That should not only be in hand, but perfectly in hand. You will pardon an illustration that I trust will be effective and not forgotten. Recently I was thinking on this lecture, and especially revolving in my mind the emphasis I should place on this point. I arrived in a St. Paul pulpit while contemplating this very discussion. I was going to preach on “The Last Night on Earth.” I had not taken the precaution to look up the Scriptures that constitute the parable of the Rich Fool. Having preached from that text doubtless a hundred times, it never occurred to me that I could not open my Bible to the same at will, but when I rose to read the lesson my memory slipped me and I turned to Matthew 12:1-50. Not finding it, I became a little confused and looked it over again carefully to find that the text was not in it. Fortunately I had been thinking on this very point, and so told the audience that my embarrassment was a valuable illustration as I was getting ready a talk to the students of the Northwestern in which I was laying it down as the law of the Medes and Persians “that changeth not,” that the preacher when he entered the pulpit must have every hymn marked and ready, and a mark in his Bible at the place for his Scripture lesson, lest his memory fail him and confusion result. The joke was enjoyed and the point I am making was decidedly emphasized. A preacher’s confusion, an audience’s amusement—these do not contribute to the success of a service. Have the complete program in hand and be able to pass from one point of the same to another without a hitch or even hesitation. THE PROCEDURE On entering the pulpit start the service.—Don’t drag yourself into the pulpit; go in with brisk step. Let the people believe that you are alive and alert. You may be tired on arrival, having come by a long journey or from other services that were exhausting. Be careful not to communicate that fact to the audience. Summon your remaining strength, lift up your chin; be alert! In hunting, I have seen the bird dogs so absolutely exhausted with their long hot runs that they seemed almost unable to keep up with the procession, dragging along behind the hunters with dripping skin and lolling tongues, when suddenly the air conveyed to their nostrils the scent of prey—a flock of prairie chickens just to the right of the road, and instantly the mouth closed, the head was up, the motion was vigorous and as they went into the action of “a point,” you would imagine that those dogs were fresh from the kennel, so alert were they! The pulpit is the preacher’s place of “point”! His game is there, and if it is to be taken for Christ his Master, he himself must be alive and active in that endeavor. Keep the service going constantly.—We have already emphasized having the program in hand, but that is not enough. Proceed with it from point to point, and that without hesitation. Such continuous interest requires and even demand, adequate preparation, but it must move forward. The wife of a railroad president told me that she was driving with some friends. The gentleman at the wheel, not being certain of his bearings, stopped at the corner and hailing a man there asked the way to a certain place. The man answered, “Let me see,” whereupon the man at the wheel said, “Well, if you don’t know; don’t tell me!” There are a great many people in the world who sympathize with that sentiment. Whenever directions are asked and people giving them hesitate, don’t take them, when given. There are some subjects on which to hesitate is to be lost. The man in the pulpit is there as a director of the congregation, and if he hesitates at any point the people lose confidence and consequent interest. Finally, end the sermon unexpectedly.—Too many men give the first point, second point, third point, fifth point, and then last point. After dwelling for some time on the last point, they say, “Now, in conclusion” so and so. Then after a few minutes more they add, “Finally, my brethren.” “And, now to end with this further word.” This is altogether too extended a process of termination. Even the swiftly moving trains will blow their whistles but three times before stopping; but I have heard preachers blow theirs half a dozen times, indicating a stop, and were yet going on. The small boy sat in the gallery and watched the preacher read a carefully written sermon. One page was laid aside after another until thirty or forty of them had been piled to the left. The youngster had watched the pile to the right decrease and had hoped and prayed for the final success of the one to the left. When, therefore, the last leaf was carefully laid to the left, the minister lifted his face and said, “And so, my brethren, on this wonderful theme I could go on and on.” It was too much for the impatient boy, and he shouted down, “No, you couldn’t; you are out of stuff and you know it.” The impression on the part of the audience that one is out of stuff, that he has exhausted himself rather than his subject, is not desirable. The finest place to quit is at the climax of interest. An illustration that grips and lifts the people, that holds them spell-bound, with a word of application and an unexpected termination, leaves an audience alert of mind, moved in heart, ready to act. Such should be the effect of every sermon. Then what? Some would say,—“Sing a song and pronounce the benediction”; but we dissent. The theme and purpose of a sermon will determine in large measure what should follow its delivery. If it is a sermon intended to raise mission money or funds for other purposes,—collection; if it is a sermon intended to bring Christian people to action along a definite line,—possibly a consecration service, taking the form of testimonies involving promises, or of coming to the front as a pledge of consecration to the ends sought. But, if an evangelistic sermon, then— PULL THE NET For we should be “fishers of men.” In a recent ministers’ meeting, where many young pastors were present, the answer to no question put by them was received so eagerly as the answer to the question, “How shall we conduct an after-meeting?” There are three essentials that we mention in this matter: Be certain you have created an atmosphere of decision.—A sermon that does not have as its objective, decision for Christ, can hardly be followed with a successful soul-winning after-meeting. A sermon that is not delivered under the power of the Spirit can hardly produce favorable circumstances. We heard a man once read a sermon on “The Parable of the Prodigal Son” and while it was evangelical in sentiment, his slavery to the written page and his utter lack of animation made improbable any response, or even interest. The reason many ministers cannot conduct a successful after-meeting is that they do not present a fervent, evangelistic appeal. In the invitation, express expectation.—I have been in many after-meetings where the minister would timidly say, “Now is there one in this House who has decided, or will decide, for Christ? If there is one, let him lift his hand, or stand.” The minister’s tone and also his manner of speech indicated no expectation, and his use of the word “one” revealed the fact that that was the utmost of his hopes. It is a phrase that should never be employed. Instead, a better form would be, “How many are there here who have settled this question once and forever, who truly love the Lord, who have accepted Him as Savior from sin, and who are not ashamed to openly confess Him, nor afraid; will you rise together?” We have found that the quotations of texts in this connection are tremendously effective. Such as “Behold, now is the accepted time; behold, now is the day of salvation” (2 Corinthians 6:2); “Whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed” (Romans 9:33); “Whosoever therefore shall confess me before men, him will I confess also before my Father which is in heaven” (Matthew 10:32); “Let the wicked forsake his way, and the unrighteous man his thoughts: and let him return unto the Lord, and he will have mercy upon him; and to our God, for he will abundantly pardon” (Isaiah 55:7); “Him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out” (John 6:37). These are more than encouraging passages; they are enlightening also, and bring to the hesitating mind the clearer conception of the importance of the step, and the assurance of acceptance. Variety should, however, characterize the after-meeting program.—When one preaches in the same pulpit every Sunday, it is not at all wise to give the same invitation, in the same form, over and over again. You can vary it. At times, a show of hands; at other times, rising; at still others, coming forward to the front seat; sometimes combining all three in the same after-meeting. We have found also that it is extremely helpful, before asking for any show of hands or response of any sort from the unsaved or the un-churched, to exact something of the church members present: “Will all the members of the local church stand”; and then follow with having Christians from other churches who may be visitors, rise with them; then, possibly asking all those who are residents in the vicinity, but who have not brought their letters to the church of the new home location, to rise; and lastly, those who have never made a public profession but who now desire to record themselves with God’s own, etc. In a protracted meeting it is quite advisable and effective to require the Christians to come forward and mass themselves at the front of the House at some time in the early part of the campaign, once or twice, in order to end the stiffness and formality that will hold an audience bound until the spell is broken. The answer to the question when one should begin to call for decisions, depends entirely upon church conditions. If the church has a warm, evangelical atmosphere all the time, you can begin early in the campaign; if on the other hand it is cold and formal and spiritually dead, Billy Sunday’s method of preaching to the Christians for a week or two to get them thawed out, interested and active, before making any appeal to the unsaved, was an evidence of Sunday’s wisdom. Two remarks let us make in conclusion: First, the preparation and appointment of personal workers, who move through the audience and quietly talk with interested men and women, boys and girls, is absolutely essential. Second, do not make too easy the expression of interest. A hand at half-mast may suffice to ease the conscience of a convicted sinner and still leave him unsurrendered and unsaved. Be exacting; if the lifting of the hand is used at all, insist that it go clear up. Better yet is rising, for it carries a more definite committal. Far better than either is the demand that those who truly love the Lord, walk the aisle to the front seat in proof of the same. Personal workers should always be ready to meet all such, attend them, teach and pray with them, until they are in the perfect light, and are ready for church membership. One may ask, “How often should we hold after-meetings?” Circumstances must determine in this matter. It has been our lifelong practice to conclude every sermon, that was not specifically directed to another objective, with an opportunity for decision for Christ and public profession of Faith. In an evangelical and living church, decisions should be as in the First Church of Jerusalem,—“day by day.” OUTLINE OF CHAPTER FIVE ADVERTISING A CHURCH SERVICE I. THE APPOINTMENTS a.Prearrange the physical comfort of the congregation. b.Plan for the smooth participation of the people. c.Have pianist and hymn books in place. II. THE PREPARATION a.Go from prayer to pulpit. b.Appear in the pulpit promptly. c.Have a complete program in hand. III. THE PROCEDURE a.On entering the pulpit start service. b.Keep the service going constantly. c.End the sermon unexpectedly. IV. PULL THE NET a.Be certain you have created an atmosphere of decision. b.In the invitation, express expectation. c.Variety should characterize the after-meeting program. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 34: 03.06. VI. ADMINISTERING THE CHURCH ORDINANCES ======================================================================== VI ADMINISTERING THE CHURCH ORDINANCES LET no pastor imagine that the administration of Ordinances is a matter of minor moment. The conspicuous place they occupy in Scripture, as well as in church history, suggests their prime importance. It is not my purpose, at this time, to discuss the Ordinances themselves in any exhaustive or even adequate manner. That perhaps belongs to Pastoral Theology, and often takes on the form of Polemics; but the administration of the Ordinances is a subject on which there should be essential agreement as between careful, earnest students of the Scriptures. THE ORDINANCES ARE TWO They are Baptism, and the Lord’s Supper.—There are some ecclesiastical bodies that add one or more ceremonies, insisting that they also are ordinances; but such contentions find little Biblical defense. The Ordinance of Baptism, while apparently instituted by John the Baptist under the guidance of the Holy Ghost, was approved by Christ when, at the Jordan, He demanded the same for Himself at the hands of His servant John. The Ordinance of The Lord’s Supper He Himself originated “on that night before He was betrayed” and so far, at least, as His divine approval and employment were concerned, Christ stopped with these two. He was no ceremonialist! The most amazing thing of past and present-day church history is the multiplied ceremonies that characterize certain denominations, and in this matter Rome is not the only offender. Her unbiblical creations and supposed ornamentation have been copied by those who have popish tendencies and high-church proclivities, so that, if Christ were to return to the world and enter certain churches, seeing their strange performances,—if Divinity could wonder, —He would have occasion to “marvel” as He compared them with the simple, straightforward principles and practices of the New Testament Church. The Scriptures determine the order of the Ordinance-Occurrence.—Baptism, of course, comes first. The Lord’s Supper comes afterward. This fact was typified in the Old Testament, for the priest who was approaching the Lord came first to the Laver, and later to the table of Shew Bread—great Old Testament types of Baptism and the Lord’s Supper. In the New Testament, the Church, in its origination as recorded in Acts 2:1-47, adhered to the same course. We find at Pentecost that they repented and were baptized in the name of Jesus Christ first, “Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: . . . And they continued stedfastly in the apostles’ doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers.” (Acts 2:41-42) Unquestionably “the breaking of the bread” is the second Ordinance. Those people, therefore, who refuse the first Ordinance and insist upon the second have no Scriptural basis whatever for their course; and those ministers who invite to the Lord’s Supper men and women and children, who have not been both regenerated by the Holy Spirit and baptized biblically, wholly exceed their authority; and it is such a ministry that has wrought irreparable wrong to the Church of God by introducing into it not only the unbaptized but the unregenerate as well. Since Baptism is a symbol of death, burial and resurrection to a new life, (Romans 6:4-5), it is not surprising to discover that those who refuse or fail to biblically administer it should shortly neglect and even eventually come to deny its spiritual import,—regeneration. This leads us to state that— THE ORDINANCES ARE TYPICAL Baptism typifies death, burial and resurrection. This is not a denominational interpretation. Paul, in his letter to the Romans, said in plain language, “We are buried with Him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk, in newness of life. For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection”: (Romans 6:4-5) It would be difficult to conceive a type of more transcendent testimony. Baptism is, in itself, a sermon indeed, and it is a sermon upon the greatest of the essentials; Death to sin; Burial of the old life out of sight, and the Resurrection to a new life in Christ Jesus. By biblical Baptism we preach the most essential experiences of Christianity. The Lord’s Supper signifies Christ’s sacrifice and our sustenance.—In the bread we are asked to behold His Body. That broken bread speaks of the blessed Body that was broken for us. In the cup we are asked to witness the reflection of His blood, the precious blood that was shed for us. Men may lightly esteem the breaking of His Body. In fact, Isaiah said that they did do so. “Surely we did esteem Him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted.” (Isaiah 53:4) But, our superficial judgment is reproved by the essential fact, “He was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed.” (Isaiah 53:5) In the cup, crimson in color, as the wine was, we are asked to see the blood that flowed in the veins of God’s Son, man’s Saviour; the blood, without the shedding of which, there was and is no remission. Can it be possible for any man or woman to go through life, conscious of having been saved at so great a cost to God’s Son, without a keener appreciation of life itself, and especially of all obligations to the Saviour? It also suggests the believer’s sustenance, and so it does; for, as we partake of these elements they become symbols of that which sustains the flesh. Bread and wine were the common forms of daily food in the land where this Ordinance was instituted. It was not difficult, therefore, for His auditors to understand and easily comprehend the Master when He said: “I am the living bread which came down from heaven: if any man eat of this bread, he shall live forever: and the bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.” And still further, ‘‘Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you.” (John 6:51; John 6:53) In other words, the life that is not sustained by a vital relation to Jesus Christ as Lord is like the branches that, cut away from the vines, are cast away, and in their dead and dry condition are gathered and burned. He is our life. “In Him we live and move and have our being.” Apart from Him we can do nothing; we are dead! I come finally to the major objective of this brief chapter of advice: THE ADMINISTRATION OF THE ORDINANCES Baptism can be biblically and beautifully administered.—There are those who justify sprinkling and pouring on the ground of order and convenience. They think those methods are more genteel and are capable of comfortable and attractive administration. This conviction is deepened whenever immersion is badly administered. I have seen, not scores, nor yet hundreds, but thousands of people baptized; and it is a somewhat pathetic confession to make that I have seen, in my long life but two ministers perform the service both biblically and beautifully. The first of these was the late Dr. Allen Tupper of Broadway Baptist Church, Louisville, Kentucky. Another, notably worthy of mention, is Dr. James Whitcomb Brougher, formerly of Tremont Temple, Boston. From observing Dr. Tupper’s method of Baptism I learned and adopted my own practice in the matter. In forty-five years of constant baptizings I have never yet experienced an unpleasant episode in the water, nor witnessed one single smile of derision excited in connection with the same. On the contrary, no part of the worship in the House of God has been more often or constantly blessed to the good of all present than baptism properly administered. Permit me to employ here two or three “don’ts” and then to follow with some positive and practical intimations: 1. Don’t slap people into the water, sloshing it by the vigorous and sudden dip. 2. Don’t so baptize as to strangle and excite a cough. 3. Don’t permit conditions that will make possible the clinging of the candidate to the administrator, or any foolish performance on the candidate’s part. These are some of the things that have brought the most sacred of divine symbols into certain disrepute. My own method is to meet back of the baptistry all the candidates for baptism. When they are lined up, ready to receive in turn the Ordinance, I have a minute for their instruction, and uniformly say the same three or four things: 1. Stand erect in the water with the hands clasped in front at the waist, and the eyes closed. (The symbol of death.) 2. When the formula is pronounced and the baptism is undertaken, don’t sit down in the water with the idea of helping; for it only hinders. Don’t bend your neck forward or throw your head backward, but keep your head on a straight line with your body, your whole frame rigid and ready to rest the same at the neck in the hollow of the administrator’s hand. 3. Don’t hold your breath; for if you do your capacity in breath-holding may end while you are under water, and you will struggle. Breathe naturally, and be assured of the fact that you cannot strangle, since just as you go under the water I lay my left hand over the mouth and nose, covering both and keeping the water out of the same. 4. Have a handkerchief tucked into the neck of your baptismal robe where the administrator can lay easy hold upon it, and with it wipe your wet face when you come from beneath the baptismal wave. 5. There will be a helper standing a foot or two in front of you when you are lifted from the wave. Give him your hand and he will help you from the Baptistry. 6. Obey these instructions, but stop with them. Don’t attempt to add a self-baptism. All endeavors on the part of the candidate to aid the administrator hinder and detract from the beauty and solemnity of the service. 7. For myself, let me remember that this Ordinance is to be slowly and quietly administered. I employ this formula, after quoting an appropriate passage of Scripture, “In obedience to the command of our Lord and Saviour, Jesus Christ, and upon your public profession of faith in Him, I now baptize you, my Brother, (John Smith) in the Name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, Amen!” After the formula is finished there should not be a single sound, and certainly not a ripple in the wave, nor a nervous gesture. Baptism, when thus administered, is beautiful; and every witness of the same is profoundly impressed with its symbolism and its spiritual significance. The Lord’s Supper is fairly prescribed.—An intelligent administrator by the careful reading of Matthew 26:17-30 will be impressed with the original setting of the same, as he will also be with its spiritual significance, and soul impress. One should do his best to repeat, as far as possible, the conditions of mind and the administration of the elements that characterized that initiatory rite. This can be done in a brief talk on the significance of the ordinance. If the people are led to feel that, in the breaking of the bread, they have the type of the broken body of their Lord, and in their partaking of the cup they are tasting of the fountain of life itself, namely the precious blood of the Son of God, reverence will characterize the whole ceremony. And, when that is accomplished, and the Bread and the Cup have first been prayed over in thanksgiving to God, and later in turn passed to the people, only a profound impression of the price with which we are purchased can prevail. While there is no absolute necessity on this matter, my own feeling of reverence with that original institution is such that I always prefer to have the Ordinance end as it ended originally, “And when they had sung an hymn, they went out . . .” (Matthew 26:30) OUTLINE OF CHAPTER SIX ADMINISTERING THE CHURCH ORDINANCES Introductory word—This matter important. I. THE ORDINANCES ARE TWO a.They are Baptism, and the Lord’s Supper. b.Scriptures determine the order of the Ordinances. II. THE ORDINANCES ARE TYPICAL a.The Lord’s Supper signifies Christ’s sacrifice and our sustenance. b.Baptism symbolizes death, burial and resurrection. III. THE ADMINISTRATION OF THE ORDINANCES a.Baptism can be biblically and beautifully administered. (7 points to be regarded) b.The Lord’s Supper,—the creation of a testimony. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 35: 03.07. VII. PERFORMING A WEDDING SERVICE ======================================================================== VII PERFORMING A WEDDING SERVICE ONE of the pleasant duties falling to the pastoral office is that of marrying people. The pleasure of this performance may be somewhat accentuated by the fee commonly attached; but certainly the true pastor will regard that attendant circumstance as slight, in comparison with his opportunity to render an important service to two people at probably the most eventful period in their existence. Birth is important, but for that the individual involved has no responsibility. Death also is important, but here the individual is impotent. Marriage, on the contrary, is a deliberate choice, and the consequences of it contribute to life’s failure or success, as few other incidents of human existence. The pastor should be keenly alive to that fact, and, in speaking the words that make two of his young people to be one in interest, in reputation, and above all, in affection, he should realize both the gravity of the act and the high privilege of such a service. In the average church, people married by the pastor are his ardent friends, earnest co-laborers, and if need be, his ready defenders. The exciting emotions of this life-determining step are exactly such as give superior place in the heart’s affections to all of those who participate in the same; and, of course, among them the pastor fills an important function. He it is who speaks the mystic words that bind, or at least should bind, for life. There are, however, certain circumstances attending this ceremony of primary importance. THE PLACE The place of wedding will somewhat determine the exact procedure.—In church or home the ceremony naturally becomes a bit more elaborate than if performed in one’s study, or in some private room. Church weddings are the most ceremonial, as they are commonly attended by a crowd, and the show element is accentuated. Second to that stands a home wedding, especially when the invited guests are considerable in number and the event is made a real occasion. The influence that all this must have upon the ceremony itself and the complementary appointments, we shall discuss a bit later in this chapter. There are three places common in such elections.—Those we have already mentioned, but we repeat for the sake of emphasis—the church, the home, and what is known as the private wedding—the ceremony performed quietly in the presence of two witnesses, or possibly a very few friends, in the pastor’s study or in a private place, such as a hotel room, selected by the contracting parties. It is not wholly unusual for young people to ask advice in these matters, and that advice will naturally be determined by the desire of the contracting parties, and the plans incidental to the performance. If they desire the presence of a large number of their associates, the church should hold first place in pastoral suggestion. Beyond all doubt, a church wedding gives emphasis to the marital ceremony. Its spiritual sacredness harmonizes with the significance of marriage itself. People who propose to begin life with little or no recognition of God are extremely likely to make shipwreck of the sacred relation. On the other hand, those who look upon this step as not only the most important, but the most sacred of human acts, consequently feel the need of divine guidance, and find in the atmosphere of the Church House the very place associated with their own deepest spiritual experiences—a congenial environment. Second to the Sanctuary, of course, stands the home, with its hallowed associations and memories. It is extremely common now for people to appear in the pastor’s office attended by no one, looking to him to call in even the needed legal witnesses; and, as they often suggest, “Get the matter over in a hurry.” This procedure does not suggest a deep conviction concerning the sacredness and seriousness of the step, and we doubt not that this quick and indefinite method links itself rather easily with the loose marital ties that often find complete release in a divorce court. The pastor, then, can, to the extent of his counsel and influence, impress the sacredness of marriage by favoring church and home weddings. The Ceremonials will be suited to the place itself.—In a church wedding, a somewhat extensive ceremony is both desired and desirable. It should be three or four times the length of that used in the privacy of a pastor’s study, or the parlor of the manse, and even longer than the service employed in the bride’s home. This is due to the fact that the congregation gathered to witness the ceremonies anticipate a service in keeping with the place where it is performed. They do not enter a church to stay two minutes, but commonly to spend an hour or more in a church service; and while only the high mass of a Catholic Church would think of retaining them so long for a marriage service, any thing much short of half an hour, including the musical numbers, instrumental and vocal, the processional, ceremony, and the recessional, would be regarded by the attendants as a kind of cheat. It has not been uncommon to have brides say at the close of the practice ceremony, “Can you not make it a little longer than that?” Such a suggestion is almost as common as that which comes from the groom who consults you about a study-ceremony, namely, “Can’t you cut it short?” So we emphasize again that the place of the wedding profoundly influences the ceremonial performance. THE PRACTICE The practice for, and before the final ceremony, is a matter of importance.—Provided, of course, that the wedding is to occur in church or home. The entire program should be familiar alike to the pastor, contracting parties, and their attendants. In this there are a number of matters of somewhat minute detail. The organ numbers should be known to the pastor and their probable length understood. These in every case, are supposed to be the will and suggestion of the bride. If one or more vocal numbers are to be used, the rehearsal will acquaint the pastor with that circumstance and leave him in comfort of mind through the time of these preliminaries. The Processional is always a matter of moment.—It is the dress parade of life for both the bride and her attendants. There is a natural, reasonable gait for this part of the service. Uninstructed and non-practiced young people might easily speed that gait to the point of mirth, but by far the greater danger is that they will slow it to the point of absurdity. Here the pastor is looked to for direction, and can by very quiet suggestion fix the same. It will sometimes require not a single rehearsal, but two, three, and even four repetitions before all is at once satisfactory and sacredly rendered. The home wedding involves less care and ostentation, but if a large company of friends attend, here also a careful rehearsal is extremely important, lest some unsuspected failure on the part of some one of the wedding party should disconcert and embarrass. The rehearsal is commonly a day previous to the wedding.—Of course, in that matter the pastor consults the convenience and will of the wedding parties. It is not uncommon for people to come long distances to be important attendants, and the time of their arrival and the convenience of the participating parties must be consulted; and the pastor should, even though it be at a sacrifice of his own interests and engagements, meet, in a large measure, the convenience of these involved. It hardly seems necessary to say that this should always be graciously done; with a smile on the pastor’s part, with a readiness to meet these suggestions, or even demands, so that it will leave no question in the bride’s mind as to the satisfaction of the whole arrangement. THE CEREMONY There is no set ceremony of absolute form.—Each pastor is supposed to have his form of ceremony ready for such an occasion. Books along this line are a multitude and can be easily purchased by a young pastor, and at least one such should be in his possession before he is ever called to perform a marriage ceremony. He should have studied the ceremonies there suggested and decided upon one or the other of them to be committed to memory; or, following the suggestions, prepare what is to him a satisfactory service. My successor at Carrolton, Kentucky, was caught napping in this matter. He had just accepted the call when a young couple across the river on the Indiana side, called him to come over and speak the mystic words that would make them one. On the way across the river, he wrote down some meditations and read them to his bride-wife. She answered, “Well, Charlie, that is pretty good; but before you have another wedding you should study up on the subject.” When the moment of the mystic words was on, the Reverend Charles said to the groom, “Do you take this woman to be your true and wedded wife? Do you promise to love . . . her . . . cherish her . . . while life shall last?” He promised. Then turning to the bride he said, “And do you promise to take this man as your true and wedded husband, and . . . and . . . and ... (in the meantime, trying to think of some different phraseology he finally blurted out, “and, to stick to him the rest of your days?” She blushed, but promised. It was a lesson to Charlie, and he went home a bit humiliated, to give himself to the preparation of a fit wedding ceremony. A word to the wise is sufficient. Get ready! However, the bride should be consulted on this subject! Quite often she will not even wait consultation, but will modestly tell you it is not satisfactory; and, as before suggested, is likely to add, “Can’t you lengthen it out a bit?” Ceremonialism has secured to itself a highbrow reputation in social circles, and its form of service has been heard by many a bride-elect; and often she inclines to the same, and since there is no moral or spiritual objection, it is best to accommodate her wishes. Consequently I use a flexible ceremony, the form of which I give here for whatever it is worth, suggesting the omissions that naturally occur when the wedding is a small and private one. FORM OF SERVICE (Supposedly in church or at well-attended home weddings) “Dearly Beloved: We are gathered together here in the presence of God and this company to join together this man and this woman in the holy bonds of matrimony.” (This introduction can be left off if the wedding is private.) “Marriage is an institution ordained of God when man’s estate was that of innocence and supreme happiness. We would naturally infer from our Saviour’s presence and the part He played at the marriage feast in Cana of Galilee, that He considered the act of matrimony well worth His own recognition; but when He selected the tie that binds husband and wife as a fit emblem of His relationship to His own ransomed church, He broadened and deepened its significance until there is no tie on earth so binding, and none so sacred, as that which binds man and woman in the holy bonds of matrimony. “Such a relationship, then, should not be entered into thoughtlessly, insincerely, or indiscreetly; but advisedly, thoughtfully, and in the fear of God. “If, therefore, it be your desire to be united in this holy bond, will you signify that fact by joining your right hands?” Then “Do you, my brother, take this woman, whose hand you now hold, to be your true and wedded wife; and do you solemnly promise before God and these witnesses to love, cherish, honor and protect her; to forsake all others for her sake; to cleave unto her, and her only, until death shall part you?” “Do you?” To be answered, “I do.” “My sister, do you take this man who now holds your hand, to be your true and wedded husband; and do you solemnly promise before God and these witnesses to love, cherish, honor, and protect him; to forsake all others for his sake; to cleve unto him, and him only, and him forever until death shall part you ? Do you?” To be answered, “I do.” If the bride’s father is present to participate, then say, “Who giveth this woman to this man to wife?” To which he answers, “I do” (and then steps back to be seated). Taking the ring, proceed: “And this ring, you give to her as a sign and seal of the endless affection with which you will cherish her, and the unbroken fidelity with which you will perform to her the vows of a husband? Do you?” To be answered, “I do.” Addressing the bride, “And this ring you receive from him and promise to wear it as a sign and seal of the unbroken and endless fidelity with which you will perform to him the vows of a wife, do you?” To be answered, “I do.” (In case further ceremonialism is desired, by the bride, I often add): “I, Frank (or whatever the name might be), take thee, Katherine; to be my wedded wife; to have and to hold from this day forward; for better, for worse, for richer, for poorer; in sickness and in health till death us do part, and, thereto I plight my troth.” Then turning to the woman: “You also repeat after me, ‘I, Katherine, take thee Frank, to be my wedded husband; to have and to hold from this day forward, for better, for worse, for richer, for poorer, in sickness and in health, till death us do part, and thereto I plight you my troth.” Then, presenting the ring to the groom, I say: “Place it on the third finger of the left hand and repeat after me: ‘With this ring I thee wed and with all my worldly goods I thee endow.’ ” Continuing: “In consideration of these solemn and sacred pledges, I am authorized by the law of the State in your marriage license, and, by the law of God in His Holy Word, to pronounce you husband and wife. As I do this, let me remind you that henceforth you are one; one in interest; one in reputation, and above all things else, one in affection. What God hath joined together, let no man part asunder.” Then comes the prayer. My own usual form is this: “Our Heavenly Father, we invoke thy blessing upon the union of these lives. We doubt not that Thou hast brought these two together, and we know that Thou hast taught them to love. Lead them now in the paths of Thine own choosing, and prosper them in all that they shall undertake. Remember also this circle of friends, and that much larger company who are interested in this hour and in this event, and grant to us all that when Christ shall wed His own Bride—the Church, we shall have place and part with Him in that festive time. We ask it all for His Name’s sake. Amen.” Then, if in a church, or home wedding, the bride’s veil is pushed back; the groom is supposed to kiss the bride, and, if in church, the recessional immediately begins. Young people should understand that while the processional is commonly a slow procedure, the recessional is not a race, but a brisk walk-gait as they retire from the church. If the wedding be in the home then the wedding party simply face about to receive the congratulations of family and friends. In the instance of these congratulations, the family are accorded first place, the intimate friends second, and acquaintances finally. OUTLINE OF CHAPTER SEVEN THE PERFORMING OF A WEDDING SERVICE Introductory words—Importance of the ceremony. I. THE PLACE a.The place will determine the procedure. b.There are three places in common use. c.Ceremonials should be suited to the place selected. II. THE PRACTICE a.The practice for the ceremony is of importance. b.The Processional is always a matter of moment. c.This rehearsal is commonly on the day previous. III. THE CEREMONY a.There is no set and absolute form. b.The bride should be consulted on the subject. c.Form of service I commonly adopt. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 36: 03.08. VIII. CONDUCTING A FUNERAL SERVICE ======================================================================== VIII CONDUCTING A FUNERAL SERVICE AMONG the many pastoral duties that of visiting the seriously sick, comforting the bereft when death shall come, and the conducting of the funeral service to follow is most important. No pastor should approach such service, therefore, without proper preparation in both thought and action. THE BEREFT FAMILY Sickness and death are imperious calls to the pastor. —They present to him the one challenge where he must not fail. There is no time in the family life when a loved pastor is so longed for as this time of sickness and death. His presence, the consciousness of his sympathy, and the need for his quiet comforting is craved at this time as at no other. If within possible call he should not fail the church family; and at almost any cost of time or expense in travel, he should reach particularly the intimate and official families when they pass through this most dreaded of all human experiences. Some years ago I was in Charlotte, North Carolina, a night’s ride beyond Atlanta, Georgia, when one of the greatest and best officials that any pastor ever had, dropped dead on a Sunday morning, when, with the Sunday School lesson prepared, he was crossing the threshold of his own home to go to church and meet his class. Immediately, upon receipt of that news, I left Charlotte, reached home for the funeral, and when it was finished, returned to Charlotte to complete the engagement. It is not amiss to remark that members of that family are to this day among my best beloved friends and most efficient co-laborers. Bereavement brings special pastoral opportunity.—To share with people their greatest sorrows is to come into a soul-communion with them, and to weave one’s life in with theirs in an almost inextricable way. The best friendships known to this world are those born of, and bred in, the fellowship of suffering. The man who will not fail you in the hour of your direst need is the one upon whose love and care you learn to lean. It is my conviction that the average preacher but dimly realizes what impression is made upon children who, when they are passing through bereavement, find in the pastor a fellow-sufferer and friend; and it is equally my conviction that adults, whose age and experience have somewhat accustomed them to the depredations of the last enemy, do not suffer as deeply, nor become in consequence as profoundly impressionable, as do boys and girls when they give up a mother or father or grandparent. Twice within a fortnight I have officiated at a grandmother’s funeral. No eyes were so red and no faces indicated the same anguish as that of the grandchildren in both instances. To prove oneself a counselor, comforter and lover under these circumstances is to hold young people to you forever. Preparation for a funeral demands thought and care.—The average family calling the pastor, either at the approach of death or immediately after its event, will be facing a new experience. They will not have passed that way before, and in their sorrow they are often at sea, and know not what to do, nor how to do it. It means much to them to sit down and quietly suggest, “Now if I can help you in selecting pall-bearers, in arranging music, determining the place for the funeral service, and getting off messages to distant friends and information to friends nearer at hand, I will be glad to render any service possible.” That will naturally lead to the discussion and the determination of those essential subjects. In these matters, while the pastor is to be sympathetic and suggestive, he must not even approach the dictatorial. Bereaved people have their preferences, and these should be instantly and sympathetically regarded. If they suggest the pall-bearers, don’t hint others; but if they do not know whom to have, then your help will be appreciated. If they have a certain person they want to have sing, by all means consent to their suggestions. If they do not have such preferences, and ask you for a suggestion, then it is quite in order to make it. If they have a preference for a place for the funeral, don’t argue the point. Once in a while someone passes away whose people think that the main auditorium of the First Baptist Church is the place where the funeral should be conducted; and while, to me, a small room, for a probably small audience, has in it far more comfort and cheer than a great unoccupied space, I do not debate that with people, even though it be winter time and the expense of heating the church is large. It is a time of such sensitiveness, owing to suffering, that one must aid, and not attempt to dictate. THE SERVICE ITSELF The Funeral Service is not an occasion of creating sorrowful emotions.—Among the changes that have come to ministerial service here, the last half century has marked progress. When I was a lad the preacher was supposed to make every funeral the medium of stirring to the depths sorrowful emotions. Once when a student in Louisville, I agreed to fill a pulpit in Southern Indiana on a fifth Sunday, which happened to be an open date with me, as I was pastor of the church at Carrolton, Kentucky on the first and third Sundays of the month and at Warsaw, Kentucky, on the second and fourth. I reached this Indiana appointment on Sunday morning. An itinerant minister who came to the community about once every two months arrived on the same day. Six weeks before, a member of this country church had died. There being no resident preacher, the body was buried, but the funeral was delayed until the itinerant should come. At the suggestion of the officers I gave place to him to preach the funeral sermon. Long before he finished I had decided that never would I conduct one after his manner. He revived the memory of the suffering; he recited the deathbed scene; he seemed, to me at least, to tear open, with ruthless hand, wounds that for six weeks had been slowly healing. As I listened to the weeping of the entire congregation and the wailing of the family involved, I felt almost a moral outrage at the whole ministerial proceeding. It was indeed akin in method to that adopted by a very queer man who was also pastor of a Kentucky church some twenty-five years ago. A friend of mine, at the close of a funeral sermon, involving an officer of a church he had formerly served, and for which service, he had been called seven hundred miles, complimented him on what he had said; to which this freaky preacher replied, “Yeah; I bored for water, and I got it, didn’t I?” The man reporting it to me said: “Instantly my respect for him was gone. I had imagined at the time that he was expressing something of his own compassion and attributed the emotion excited to that circumstance; but when I learned that it was an oratorical trick that motivated him, I felt a degree of disgust.” The Funeral Service is a call for the consolations of the Gospel.—Beyond all doubt, those great and multiplied passages of Scripture that relate themselves to the Resurrection, Immortality, and Heaven, were given us of the Holy Ghost as the divine panacea for bereavement. Let us then, apply them. The balm of Gilead is intended for breaking hearts. Psalms 23:1-6 sounds the note of courage even in the shadow of death: “Though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil” 1 Corinthians 15:1-58, particularly 1 Corinthians 15:35-58, clearly sets forth the assurance of the resurrection-body of the believer; and that assurance is needed in the presence of death. 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18 adds to the resurrection the glorious fact of transfiguration and ascension, and the assurance of eternal fellowship with loved ones, and with Christ. John 14:1-7 is a promise from the lips of the dear Lord Himself that our heavenly home is being made ready for us and that in the course of time He will gather us to the great and shining house of God. Revelation 21:1-27 is a practical exhaustion of human language in the divine endeavor to describe the final residence of the saints and the eternal felicities that will be their never-ending experience. How essential, then, that sorrowing ones should have these great passages laid to the hurting hearts as healing potions. The entire funeral service should move to the objective of consolation.—Such Scriptures as we have mentioned should be combined with music of consoling sort, with prayer for the divine help and the presence of Him who, in person, has already passed through this valley of the shadow, who even endured the pangs of death itself; and with a sermon that will point to an open Heaven and to the happiness and glory of the dear departed. One dare not, as we have already suggested, tamper with the preferences of the bereaved people; but when they in all sincerity ask for guidance, it is my judgment and advice that organ music rather than the human voice looks definitely in this direction. There is a quality in the human voice that makes an appeal doubling and deepening sorrow; while in the music of an organ the same words of comfort are clear in one’s memory, attended by tones that naturally soothe and at the same time instruct. It is possible, therefore, for a funeral service to accomplish the objective of comfort, consolation, the strengthening of faith, and the inducing of submission. It is doubtful if Satan ever permits the passing of a loved one without attempting to create in the heart of the bereaved some sentiment of rebellion against God, as having been indifferent to our agonizing cries, or even cruel in His refusal to answer favorably. It is profoundly important, then, to tide people past such a temptation, and bring them to see that even in the deep sorrows of life, God is still with us and His love and care are our chief consolation. THE BURIAL CEREMONY The funeral service should be brief.—A good order of procedure is the organ prelude, a Scripture lesson, involving such passages as we have referred to above, or, if one has in hand a pastor’s manual and cares to read from the Scripture passages therein applied, it is perfectly proper so to do, provided there are not too many of them. I should say two or three minutes, and never more than five minutes of Scripture reading should suffice. Following the Scripture a prayer that should express always our appreciation of the plan of salvation, the divine interest in the human soul, and the divine compassion toward the suffering. In this connection, it is well for the pastor, if it is possible, to know how many are in the bereft family, and whether sons or daughters, husband or wife, grandchildren, etc., not to mention each by name, for that is a dangerous experiment. If one is left out, as is likely, feelings may be hurt; but to pray for the bereft husband or wife, as the case may be, for the sons, if such exist, for the daughters, and the in-laws, and the grandchildren. In such cases where there are such immediate members of the family, it introduces an element of personal interest that is keenly appreciated. The prayer over, then music, preferably a hymn from the organ, such as “Nearer, my God to Thee,” “Lead Kindly Light” or “Safe in the Arms of Jesus,” or whatever the family may have suggested to the organist, or to you to be passed on to the organist. Sometimes singers are ambitious and want to put in three or four numbers. It will be perfectly proper to suggest that music following each prayer is the common custom, thereby reducing the number to two. In fact organ music is to be preferred to singing. After the music comes the talk which should never exceed fifteen minutes, unless the person is of great importance and more than one speaker is involved. The rule of a ten minute talk, with exception in proportion to the importance of the individual being buried, we regard as a good one. The talk should conclude with prayer, music following again, when the service is turned over to the undertaker to arrange for the viewing of the remains; or to announce private burial, as the family may have arranged with him. Procedure at the grave.—Once at the grave, keep in mind that the whole service is intended for comfort. Anything, therefore, that tends to add to sorrow or distress should be avoided. There should be no second sermon at the grave, save in those cases where a funeral has been held in one city or country place, and the burial is taking place in another remote from it, there being different groups on the two occasions. Then, if the family desires, it would be perfectly proper to make another talk at the graveside. The length of this certainly should not exceed ten minutes; and, if the weather be severely hot or dangerously cold, the service should be greatly shortened. If the same company attends the ceremony at the grave, who are present at the funeral service, then only a quotation of a short passage of Scripture is necessary, such for instance as the words of the Lord at the grave of Lazarus: “I am the resurrection and the life. He that believeth on me, though he were dead, yet shall he live again,” or “I go to prepare a place for you. And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again, and receive you unto myself; that where I am, there ye may be also”; or, “We sorrow not even as others which have no hope. For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so them also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with him. For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are dive and remain unto the coming of the Lord, shall not prevent them which are asleep. For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, with the trump of God; and the dead in Christ shall rise first: Then we which are dive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord. Wherefore comfort one another with these words”: Following a brief quotation from Scripture, without throwing any clod on the coffin, or making any suggestion of last view, lead in prayer. In the prayer, perform your burial service by saying: “Now, Lord, as we leave our friend (or loved one) to rest here in this quiet, beautiful spot, in body; remind us that “the spirits of the just made perfect” are with Thee, and so give to us an appreciation of the joy into which our loved one has already entered; the joy of Thy companionship; the joy of the heavenly home which Thou hast thyself prepared for him (or her); the joy of meeting the great company of loved ones who preceded him (or her) into that land of light and love; the joy of coming for the first time into the fuller acquaintance of angels and archangels, and of seeing the face of God in the person of his Son, Jesus Christ; and in this joy assuage our sorrows and comfort, as Thou alone canst, with a new sense of the unsearchable riches which He hath prepared for them that love Him” This obviates the necessity of the old formula: “Earth to earth, dust to dust.” The burial of fifty years ago was a cruel procedure. The grave was naked as a rule; nothing but a deep hole in the ground. The cemetery sexton took a spade full of dirt and ruthlessly threw it in on top of the wooden box with a clatter, and the preacher suited his words to the procedure, all of which wrung the hearts of the bereft. Now the flowers, and other prepared coverings, removes from sight every particle of dirt; the grave itself is often lined with green, extending the beautiful landscape round about you down into the resting place prepared; and the coffin, instead of being lowered into the grave, in the presence of the family, is left on a level, or even above the ground, flower-covered and attractive, until the mourners have gone. In small villages and country places the preacher, by intimate fellowship with the undertaker, can often aid in these ameliorating appointments, and such should be both his purpose and pleasure. As for singing at the grave, discourage it to the utmost, without being discourteous to the mourners. If they demand it, don’t debate it; but if they ask counsel, say that it is not the custom. If the family, after having asked you to conduct the funeral service, finds that a minister who was aforetime their pastor, or who is an intimate friend, is to be present, and want you to share the services with him, do it with the utmost graciousness, revealing gladness always to have such fellowship in service; and asking the family what part they would like this associate in the service to perform. If they insist upon leaving it up to you entirely, be very gracious in the division of time. Make it the ride of life not to accept fees for the burial of your own church members.—You are the shepherd of the flock; you should never profit by their sorrow. Such procedure might raise the question as to whether you were glad or sorry at such a service. Furthermore, even with people of considerable means, death, often preceded by a long illness and large doctor bills, nurses’ and hospital charges, the cost of coffin, carriages and incidentals to burials, brings a large expense; and it is not easy, as a rule, for the family to meet it all. The minister who is a pastor should prove himself the unselfish friend in this hour of sorrow, ready to respond to every call and without the least consideration of cash return. Money will often be sent to you and your temptation will be great to keep it because your needs are sore. In the end you will fare better if you practice self-denial, and return the same with a note of deep sympathy, assuring the family that it was only too little that you could do under the circumstances; and that you wish you might do more to brighten the dark hour for them, and to lift the load that rests so heavily upon them. In case of strangers, people who are nothing to you or your church, calling you for services, there is no objection to accepting the modest fees that may be offered you, but serve your own flock without money and without price. When the service at the grave is finished, if possible, have a personal word of comfort with the mourners as they are retiring to their carriage. Promise them, and keep your promise, to call in the near future. Sorrow’s hour is the pastor’s opportunity to bind to him with hooks of steel the hearts of the bereft. OUTLINE OF CHAPTER EIGHT THE CONDUCTING OF A FUNERAL SERVICE I. THE BEREFT FAMILY a.Sickness and death are imperious calls to the pastor. b.Bereavement brings special pastoral opportunity. c.Preparation for a funeral demands thought and care. II. THE SERVICE ITSELF a.The funeral service is not an occasion of creating sorrowful emotions. b.The funeral service is a call for the consolations of the Gospel. c.The entire service should move to the objective of that end. III. THE BURIAL CEREMONY a.The funeral service should be brief. b.Procedure at the grave. c.Fee should not be accepted from one’s active church members. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 37: 03.09. IX. TRANSACTING CHURCH BUSINESS ======================================================================== IX TRANSACTING CHURCH BUSINESS THERE are some people in almost every church who have an idea that the pastor is to have nothing to do with the business of the church; that this belongs entirely to the laymen and especially to the elected officers. We have been counseled by a very famous professor to “preach”; let others transact the business, etc.; but our observation and experience unite in declaring the utter importance of the business administration of the church and the necessary relation of the pastor thereto. The preacher who has no business ability is, by so much, unfit for the pastorate. Administration of the church affairs is not second in importance to any phase or feature of the ministry itself. To fail there is to fail everywhere. Such a thing as a long pastorate, on the part of a preacher who is not a sound administrator, is unknown. Of primary importance in this matter are—The Governing Board, The Preparation of Business, and The Proper Transaction of Business. THE GOVERNING BOARD The average church has too many Boards. If it is Congregational in polity it has a Board of Trustees and a Board of Deacons, and sometimes an additional Advisory Board or Council Committee. The consequence is unnecessary conflicts and confusion. All ecclesiastical interests are over-lapping, and when two Boards pass upon the same subject in separate meetings, and are not agreed in their decision, then you have a fine opportunity for a church fight. After some bitter experience along this line in my earlier pastorates, I decided to have one Board that should pass upon all matters of vital interest to the church, and bring its recommendations to the church itself. This Board is constituted of the deacons, trustees, such officers as Sunday School Superintendents, Clerk, Treasurer, and the heads of departments. In the First Baptist Church, Minneapolis, Minnesota, it numbers forty or more, and according to our Constitution “every matter of vital concern to the church” must be passed upon by that Board, and passed on to the church for final decision. That is why it is called “Advisory.” It has no power, but it has unlimited influence, and there is safety in numbers. Every small country church will have three or four deacons, perhaps three trustees, and, under state laws, so much power is placed in the hands of trustees that if the church is governed by them it often means a one-man rule. I have never yet seen a Board of three Trustees that did not have at least one weakling who would be governed by some man of means or social influence; and thousands of churches have been wrecked by one-man rule. This single Board should be carefully constituted.— While all officers should be members of it, their election to office should be painstaking and careful. As a rule the man who wants office, and is going to have it or make trouble, is unfit for it. The pastor should not be a politician, pulling to get certain of his friends into places of power; but he is commonly influential enough to secure the proper selections with very small endeavor on his part. The average member of the church wants to work with the pastor, and he is likely to ask his advice as election time nears. Don’t speak against the man you think unfit for office; but quietly speak favorably of the man you believe would fill the same efficiently. The selection of officers for a church is a choice upon which the issues of life and death hang. Good officers can make a church, and unfit ones can ruin it. The influence of such a Board is immeasurable.—If the best people in the church are elected to office, and one Board unites in bringing its recommendations to the organized body, it will be a rare occasion when a recommendation is turned down. In this pastorate in the First Baptist Church, of thirty-eight years in length now, I recall but a single instance in which the church failed to adopt a recommendation of the Board, and on that occasion the pastor was absent. A well-constituted Advisory Board is the pastor’s body-guard, and it is also the invincible leadership in successful church work. THE PREPARATION OF BUSINESS The average church suffers from the lack of a careful preparation of the business presented to it for consideration and action. The pastor should think through church problems. —As the servant of the church, that is one of his supreme tasks. Situated as he is, where he can survey the whole field and give careful consideration to both the points of weakness and of strength, he should be the first man to see the former and correct them, and also the latter and increase them. The conduct of the church is his business. He has his entire time to spend upon its interests, and on account of this he ought not to expect the laymen who are burdened with their own affairs and who, oftentimes, cannot spend an hour a week in serious consideration of church problems, to take initiative in originating ideas, or formulating plans. No problem of any importance ought to be presented until somebody has thought it through, and that somebody should be the pastor. The secret of success in the First Baptist Church, Dallas, Texas, is Truett; the secret of success in Fort Worth is Norris; the secret of success in the First Presbyterian Church, Seattle, is Mark Matthews; the secret of success at the Baptist Temple, Los Angeles, was James Whitcomb Brougher; the secret of success in the Grace Temple, Philadelphia, was Russell Conwell, and of Tremont Temple, Boston, was Dr. George Lorimer. These men thought through their problems, and found for them solution, and their leadership was the basis of unusual victories. The pastor should bring to the Board his recommendations.—I can conceive of no force so disintegrating as an official meeting that has nothing definite before it. In my early pastorates we had stated times for these official meetings, and we permitted anybody to bring up anything that right at the moment popped into his mind. The result was much and even injurious discussion, ending in nothing except divided opinion. If an officers’ meeting has no occasion, then why should it meet? When it is called together there should be both occasion and prepared recommendations. The pastor should have put in so much time on the recommendations that he has no doubt whatever as to the desirability of their adoption. Ten minutes of reflection is not sufficient to settle questions of importance; but when hours have been spent on the same by the pastor, and he can give clear and convincing reasons why such and such action should be taken, then the further discussion of the Board meeting will result in either one of two things: Reveal to him some mistakes he has made, or result in the adoption of what he has desired. In Congregational bodies the action of the church is final and decisive.—That is why such a Board should be called “Advisory.” The church has a right to determine its own affairs. People who provide the sinews of war have a right to know the direction that war is taking, and the reasons for their participation and, in ninety-nine cases out of one hundred they will give interested audience to the counsel of leaders and ready cooperation to what appears to be wisdom’s ways. TRANSACTION OF THE BUSINESS All business should be properly transacted.—There are smooth ways of presenting business, and there are clumsy ways. All my life long I have suffered over the average method of receiving church members by a popular vote. It is usual in churches, that have persons come forward and make application for membership, to have the pastor, or Moderator of the meeting, say, “What is your pleasure, Brethren, about receiving our friend into the fellowship of this church?” In at least fifty per cent of the cases there is an awkward pause, creating oftentimes with the sensitive new convert a fear that he may not be received, and a question as to whether his place in the Body is cordially accorded. All of that could be remedied easily by one of two methods: Either have an agreement with some deacon to move that this person be received into the church, and have another ready to second the motion; or, better yet, the custom employed in the First Baptist Church, Minneapolis, of giving the recommendation of the deacons to the church. “The deacons recommend that this person be received as a candidate for baptism, or by letter,” as the case may be. “Are there remarks? If not, those of you who favor the motion signify by the show of hands; contrary, by the same sign,” etc. This obviates the awkward pause and gives the candidate the impression that he is readily and cordially received. Concerning all business insist on fair presentation and honest action.—Oftentimes in church troubles there are attempts on the part of both factions to pack business meetings. Packed church meetings are at once unfair and non-Christian, and the pastor should do his utmost to see that they do not take place. There are matters of vital concern to the church, and the pastor should insist upon due announcement, and the intervening of adequate time for the entire church to know of the same and respond to its exigency. Frown down, even on the part of your friends, packed business meetings. Victories won by such are only benefits falsely named. Accept the fair action of the church as final.—There are some pastors who are perfectly willing to do that when the action is what they have desired, but are wholly unwilling if the action goes against their personal interests. Of all people the pastor should play the game fairly, and insist that the properly constituted action of the church is final. To be sure, this is true only in Congregational Church Polity. Where there are super-organizations, such for instance as exist in Presbyterian and Episcopalian forms, the whole gamut of court procedure may justly be run, and the highest court alone can settle the vital subjects. If, however, that subject be the relation of pastor to people, the judgment of the superior court will have little or no value. Unless the majority of those served are satisfied with the pastor’s leadership a permanent relation is impossible; where they are fully content its dissolution is unlikely! OUTLINE OF CHAPTER NINE TRANSACTING CHURCH BUSINESS Introductory word—Importance of pastor’s relation to. I. THE GOVERNING BOARD a.The average church has too many Boards. b.A single Board should be carefully constituted. c.The influence of such a Board is immeasurable. II. THE PREPARATION OF BUSINESS a.The pastor should think through church problems. b.The pastor should bring to the Board his recommendations. c.In congregational bodies the action of the church is final. III. TRANSACTION OF THE BUSINESS a.All business should be properly transacted. b.Insist upon fair presentation and honest action. c.Accept the fair action of the church as final. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 38: 03.10. X. MANAGING CHURCH TROUBLES ======================================================================== X MANAGING CHURCH TROUBLES IT IS a pathetic fact, that the greatest single problem facing the pastor is the problem of possible church troubles; in fact, we might say, of certain church troubles. The pastor who goes through any considerable number of years without meeting these, is the rare exception. In truth, in our somewhat extensive acquaintance we have never met him. Church trouble is something like death; it may be escaped for a time, but sooner or later it will come. The rise of church trouble is not necessarily menacing. However, the escape from evil results will depend in no small measure upon the way it is managed; and to a large degree that management will always be, with the pastor. It is as impossible for a Bank to go through troubles and leave the President undisturbed, as it is for a church to pass through the same and leave the pastor untouched, or for a family to experience trouble without involving the parents. In advising upon this subject, we are going to depart from our usual custom and deal in “Don’ts.” DON’T PROVOKE THEM Do your work, and do it well.—The majority of complaints and criticisms landed against a pastor involve his methods of work, quite as often as they do the preparation and delivery of his message. An indolent pastor is certain to come in for criticism. The moment hard working people find that the preacher is resting on his oars they become restless and critical, and justly so. Industry is a sine qua non of success in the ministry. The chief business of a preacher is to preach, and good preaching without careful preparation and hard study is impossible. Too often young preachers become the men of all work about the house. They run errands, take care of babies, wash the dishes, buy the groceries, and do a dozen little jobs, and leave the essential work undone, and undo themselves in consequence. It is my conviction that if a study can be had in the church, better have it there. When I was a young man I foolishly promised my wife once that I would put my study in the home. I did so, and for six weeks I lived in the midst of sweeping, bed-making, dishwashing, baby-crying. I got one sermon—rather a poor one—made in the six weeks; at the end of which time my wife had sense enough to see that it was a failure for both of us, and gently suggested that I move back to my study again, a suggestion cordially received and instantly acted upon. There are two classes of preachers in every criticism: The man who is a failure, and the man who is an eminent success. The first is criticized because of his failure, and the second because he has jostled all the old comfortables out of their easy-going gait and changed the course of the rut in which they had run for forty years. The man who gets by without criticism is a sort of a hybrid, neither a failure nor a success. The most questionable compliment that ever is paid to a dead preacher is that “he had not an enemy in the world”; so, don’t covet that. Do your work well, preach the Word, be a good pastor, acquire success, and take the criticisms that come with it. Suppress your wife’s ambition, and quiet her tongue. —Mark what I say. I do not mean “silence her tongue.” In many instances that would be impossible; but quiet it. The woman who is the preacher’s wife, who thinks she has to hold all the high offices in the church, is just as certain to produce church troubles, as she is determined to preside in the Ladies’ Aid or Mission Circle or direct the choir. In small churches the preacher’s wife can do an important work, provided she is destitute of ambition to hold office, and provided she can hold her tongue. Other women can talk, and do talk; but what the pastor’s wife says goes further, is more contorted, and can create more trouble than the tongues of a dozen beside, for the people naturally identify husband and wife; and, according to Scripture, “they are one.” It is not the best fortune when she is the “one,” the whole one, as is sometimes the case. If you will take my advice, (and some of you won’t), you will seek the girl who would gladly serve Christ without official distinction, and who, while she is a student, is neither a back-biter nor a trouble-maker. Protestantism practically demands a married minister. Your wedding day will have more to do with your future ministry than any other human event. Don’t trust your own judgment, therefore! “If any man lack wisdom, let him ask of God.” If there is one subject upon which the single minister should pray more than another it is the subject of a wife. I have no doubt that most of you are praying on that subject already, but I am anxious that you “watch” as well as pray. Be cordial to, and considerate of, all the members.—Cordiality is a power! Phillips Brooks managed to get by as a bachelor. Perhaps he was the best loved and most highly esteemed of all Boston pastors, though he walked alone. The reasons therefore existed in the combined circumstance that he was a great student, a marvelous preacher, had the ability to smile on every baby and child that belonged to his parish, and thereby won both their affections and that of parents. A smile is the easiest and simplest contribution that a minister can make to the contentment of his congregation and toward his own success. I often dine in a restaurant, not a block distant from my office, and there are five or six waitresses in it. One of them has never yet smiled when she came to wait on me, nor ever spoken the simple sentence, “Good morning” or “How do you do?” The others of them I commonly tip. This one has her first red cent to get from me. If she cannot afford to smile, I cannot spare the dime. Let preachers learn. DON’T PARLEY WITH TROUBLES If trouble is in the offing, ignore it.—According to Webster’s Dictionary the “Offing” is “that part of the visible sea distant from the shore beyond anchorage.” “Out where there is deep water.” Hence, “Distance out at sea” as the phrase we have ‘Twenty miles offing here.” ‘To keep a good offing is to keep a vessel well off shore.” There are some preachers who can scent trouble twenty miles away, and who, the moment they scent it, set their sails for it. What folly! The most successful man I know in the ministry of the day has had more mean things said about him, more ruinous remarks made both concerning his character and conduct than any man I know on earth; and yet, he does not pay any attention whatever to them. In fact, I have heard him say more than once, “I don’t want to hear it,” when people attempt to report to him some critical remark. Without any reference as to whether he is deserving of these criticisms, we put our hearty approval upon his treatment of them. What is the use of making your ear an Achilles’ heel—the place of constant and deadly wound? There are some preachers who, the moment they hear one word of criticism, fly after the folks that make it and demand proof of it; and sometimes they even go so far as to insist upon a trial. The preacher who is put on trial is dead before the trial begins. It doesn’t make a particle of difference whether he is justified or condemned. The fact that he has been tried is accepted by Society as a condemnation. Only a few days ago, I was summoned to an adjacent state where an ex-parte council had been called. The preacher asked me if he should attend it and make it mutual. I said, “By no means. Ex-parte councils have no authority whatever, and no power. Don’t go near it. Don’t permit it to take place in your church. Ignore its findings; treat it with silent contempt.” When I came to the pastorate of the First Baptist Church, Minneapolis, the faction, who could not endure the new methods introduced and the growth that was coming in consequence, were jostled out of their ruts and, still worse, voted out of their offices; and they called two ex-parte councils. Both promptly condemned me and called for my resignation. The recommendations were brought to the church by certain members of the faction, who were still members of the church, and they were promptly laid upon the table without a word of discussion. Don’t fight with every fellow who comes around with a chip on his shoulder. Ignore his challenge; give yourself to the task in hand, and move on. If the trouble is on ship-board, seek its settlement.— By saying “On ship-board” I mean if it is in the membership, and is of sufficient importance to justify interference; and it should be grave indeed when interference takes place. Seek its adjustment! Johnston Myers of Chicago insisted that a method of adjustment was to go to the man who had the grievance and talk things over with him in a kindly way, and get him to go down on his knees with you in prayer, particularly if it was a personal grievance against the pastor. If it is a grievance between brethren, the Scriptures provide a way. The man aggrieved should go first to this brother. If he will not be reconciled he should take with him two or three witnesses. If then he will not be reconciled, he should tell it to the church. However, none of this is liable to take place without involving the pastor sooner or later. If he is not the direct subject of the criticism, he is in danger of becoming involved in it because as counselor he seems to take the side of one or the other party. Be fair; be just; seek to divest yourself of prejudice. Listen carefully and kindly to both sides, and when the case is clear, and you know what God wants, insist upon that. It is very difficult for any man or company of people in a church to go back of the right, or to get by a sound, sensible and spiritual course. Chronic trouble-breeders exclude.—But let me hasten to say, be sure that they are chronic trouble-breeders before you dare take this extreme step. Attorney-General Daugherty in his “The Inside Story of the Harding Tragedy” says: “I always held, as a party leader, that the only way to harmonize an enemy or a traitor, inside the organization, was to throw him over the fence and put a loyal man in his place.” In my judgment this applies in church life as perfectly as in politics. Our mistakes are sometimes our best teachers. My own mistake in dealing with the trouble in the First Baptist Church of thirty-five years ago was to follow the advice of men and women who were too patient, too lenient. I say this lest some young fellow will make a fool of himself by going straightway to the exclusion business. It is an extreme act; and ought not to be engaged in until all other reasonable attempts have been exhausted! But there come times when the best thing that could happen to a church is the exclusion of chronic trouble-breeders. The wise surgeon doesn’t take out his knife every time you have a pain in your side; but when he is convinced that the appendix is festering, to hesitate is to lose his patient and his own reputation at the same time. The principle applies in church life. I was called a little while since to counsel in two instances. In the first instance, a woman had created church troubles for years, evidently desiring to be the whole thing herself in the church, of which she was a member. She had made it difficult for pastor after pastor. She had a little following of half a dozen folks. I advised her exclusion, and it was accomplished, and the church is prospering in consequence. Only a few days since, I was called to counsel in another instance where a man and his wife had, for forty years, horned out pastor after pastor. I took the clerk’s record and looked it over and could not find that any man remained longer than three years in that pulpit, and I found on the field two men who had been deeply gored by this horned deacon and his still more horned wife. I advised their exclusion, and it was accomplished. Time will tell if this also was wise! Let me repeat, it is a desperate act, and should be the last resort. But when it becomes clear that people have done nothing but breed discontent, write unsigned letters, anonymous letters, (the lowest conceivable piece of conduct), get up petitions and, under false pretenses and by foul arguments persuade others to sign them; and, year after year, pastorate after pastorate, have proven themselves ill-contents, critics, slanderers of competence and character, the best thing that could possibly happen to the church is to remove them, and when the time comes for such action, and it is started, go through with it! Don’t get cold feet; remove the cancer! DON’T FAIL TO PRAY The average church trouble exists because there has not been enough prayer.—The adjustment of the average church trouble is difficult because too often its settlement is attempted apart from prayer. In fact, oftentimes the parties to church trouble are afraid to pray about it. They do not want the guidance of the Holy Ghost; they want their own way. They cannot say, “Thy will be done.” Their will stands first, and they are not ready to have it set aside by even the Lord Himself; and, sad to say, sometimes the preacher finds himself in that position where he thinks his way is so unquestionably the right way that he does not need to consult God on the subject. Here we might learn from Abraham Lincoln who, when somebody suggested to him during the days of the Civil War that he call the people to pray, that God might be on the side of the Northern armies, answered, “God is already on the right side. If I call them to prayer, it will be that we may get on God’s side instead of having God come to our side.” That is exactly the spirit that should prompt prayer when troubles arise, that we may discover which side God is on, and stand with Him. Experience has proven the power of prayer in connection with opposition.—The Book of Daniel contains the finest illustration of this fact. There were one hundred and nineteen Vice-Presidents in the reign of Darius the Mede. In their jealousy toward Daniel they held a secret meeting. This is the ordinary way of trouble breeders. Whenever a secret session is held with the object of opposing some servant of God, you may be fairly sure that the people holding it are in the wrong. Right delights in the day and in the open session. Wrong takes cover under darkness and behind closed doors. At the end of the secret session they brought back a lie. They told the King that “All were agreed on the subject of the statute,” and thereby secured his signature. It is a rare thing that holders of secret meetings will tell the truth when the meetings are over. The fact was that the only man who had a right to call the meeting was not even apprised of its assembly, and by that falsehood they secured the King’s signature to the decree. The decree demanded of Daniel one of two things, either disobedience to the earthly, or disloyalty to the heavenly King; and Daniel elected the former,—disobedience to Darius rather than disloyalty to God. Every prophet of God who does not so elect is unworthy of his office. Mark the method of Daniel in meeting this diabolical conspiracy. He did not call an opposition meeting. He did not say, “Now these fellows have had their turn. I will get my friends together and we will hold a counter secret session.” That is the way it commonly occurs in the church. The moment the faction have held their meeting and the report of it leaks out, as it always does, the pastor is tempted to call a few of his personal friends to his house for a counter session. It then remains to be seen who can muster the most friends in the final showdown. Daniel met it in another way. He went down on his knees three times a day, his window open toward Jerusalem. God heard his petition and answered. He answered in several ways. First, by keeping Daniel while in the lions’ den. The true prophet of God has a promise that no weapon formed against him shall prosper. He answered further by bringing the king under conviction, and for the entire night sleep went from his eyes, and even music could not induce the same. God can do marvelous things in over-ruling and even over-turning the machinations of men. Put your trust in Him rather than in councils, secret sessions, or even intimate friends.—The preacher who performs his duties well and conscientiously, who treats criticisms and every strife with patience and intelligence, and who takes to God, in prayer, the difficult problems of his office, who meets in open session and before his own church, fairly and squarely, the issues that opposition may force upon him, will commonly come out unscathed, as Daniel did, with the divine approval upon him; and he will witness the confusion and overthrow of his enemies. All things are possible with God. “Trust in the Lord, and do good; so shalt thou dwell in the land, and verily thou shall be fed. “Commit thy way unto the Lord; trust also in him; and he shall bring it to pass. “And he shall bring forth thy righteousness as the light, and thy judgment as the noonday. “Rest in the Lord, and wait patiently for him: fret not thyself because of him who prospereth in his way, because of the man who bringeth wicked devices to pass. “Cease from anger, and forsake wrath: fret not thyself in any wise to do evil. “For evil doers shall but cut off: but those that wait upon the Lord, they shall inherit the earth” (Psalms 37:3; Psalms 37:5-9) OUTLINE OF CHAPTER TEN MANAGING CHURCH TROUBLES I. DON’T PROVOKE THEM a.Do your work, and do it well. b.Suppress your wife’s ambition, and quiet her tongue. c.Be cordial to, and considerate of, all the members. II. DON’T PARLEY WITH TROUBLES a.If trouble is in the offing, ignore it. b.If the trouble is on ship-board, seek its settlement. c.Chronic trouble-makers exclude. III. DON’T FAIL TO PRAY a.The average church trouble exists because there has not been enough prayer. b.Experience has proven the power of prayer in connection with opposition. c.Put your trust in Him rather than in councils, secret sessions, or even intimate friends. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 39: 03.11. XVI. MANAGING THE MUSIC AND MUSICIANS ======================================================================== XVI MANAGING THE MUSIC AND MUSICIANS TO CONDUCT a church without music would be to accomplish what no one has yet had the hardihood even to attempt. It is true that Charles Spurgeon, owing to his surpassing eloquence, dispensed with all music save a small organ and precentor. And yet, as Dr. Glover of Cambridge, in accounting for Spurgeon’s popularity, indicated, “His marvelous voice and supreme gift of oratory” were in no small measure a substitute for music itself. Music is the one art that appeals to all classes, that reaches and strangely moves the ignorant and the educated, the poor and the rich, the denizen of the home, the attendants at church, and even the gay and godless who gather for social converse. As someone has said, “It is the gift of tongues; and is able, therefore, to speak to each in the vernacular to which he was born.” Among the arts it can come nearest to the claim of divine origin, since, at the finished creation, “The morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy.” (Job 38:7) The art that has such approval and employment cannot be despised by the church of God. THE IMPORTANCE OF MUSIC can scarcely be overstressed. In worship it has a Scriptural warrant.—David of the Old Testament is called the sweet singer of Israel. Neither the Scriptures nor tradition tell us anything of his voice. We do not surely know that he sang at all; but, with the pen of inspiration, he so wrote as to inspire anthems and oratorios in almost endless numbers, and his appeals were such as to stir the most sluggish souls to song. No man ever lived who so often voiced his praises to God or made such multiplied appeals to his fellows to join him. “I will praise thee with my whole heart” is a phrase that rings through the 150 Psalms or Songs written by this inspired man with such constant repetition, as to remind one of the call of morning bells. He is not content with solo work. He would have the forces of nature peal forth the praises of God like an infinite organ; “fire and hail,” “snow” and “vapors,” “stormy wind” and “all deeps.” He would have the earth itself become vocal and “mountains and all hills join in the praise of God.” He would have “the beasts and all cattle,” “creeping things and flying fowl” to utter forth their praise. He would have “the sun and the moon and all the stars of light” to join. He would have “all young men and maidens,” “old men and children” “all people,” including “princes and judges and kings of the earth” praise the Name of the Lord. Yea, he would have “the heaven of the heavens” and “the waters beneath the earth” unite their voices in the glad refrain. Finally, he would have “all angels and all the hosts of heaven” tune their tongues to the paean of God’s praises. The New Testament apostles are no whit at variance with this Old Testament prophet in this matter. On that night before Jesus was betrayed, when He had both instituted and administered the Supper that should forever remain a type of His sacrifice, we read, “When they had sung a hymn, they went out into the Mount of Olives .” (Matthew 26:30) Paul and Silas were in prison at Philippi. They had been mercilessly beaten; their feet were fast in the stocks and their hands were manacled; but “At midnight Paul and Silas prayed, and sang praises unto God; and the prisoners heard them” (Acts 16:25) James, in his epistle (James 5:13) writes, “Is any merry? let him sing psalms.” Evidently he regarded it as an appropriate method of praising God. Paul, writing to the Hebrews, (Hebrews 2:12) said, “I will declare thy name unto my brethren; in the midst of the church will I sing praise unto thee” Singing, then, is not one of those non-essential accretions that have been fastened on the blood-bought Body. On the other hand, it is the very expression of its new, glad life; and Christianity without song is well-nigh inconceivable. Little wonder that Donald Fraser said, “Sing, oh, Christian, on your heavenly way; let God be extolled both in the sanctuary and in the firmament of His power. Let all breath praise the Lord.” Music can be made the medium of service.—One of the essentials of success in church work is a constant increase in the number of those called to participate in the same. The Will of God in the matter of music would seem to have been clearly declared in the creation of vocal organs. The boys and girls, young men and women who are destitute of musical ability are comparatively few. The overwhelming majority could sing if they would. That circumstance is a clear indication of both duty and privilege. While Charles Spurgeon magnified the ministry of the Word, and minimized the service of music, he realized its value and made effective appeal for its consecration. In Vol. 19 of his 20 volume series of sermons, he says, “I should like King Jesus to have our special gifts. I know one who, before his conversion, was wont to sing, and he often charmed the ears of men with the sweet music which he poured forth; but when he was converted he said, ‘Henceforth my voice shall sing nothing but the praises of God.’ He devoted himself to proclaiming the Gospel by song for he said, This is David’s spoil.’ ” And then Spurgeon continues, “Have you not some gift, dear friend, of which you could say, ‘Henceforth this shall be sacred to my bleeding Saviour?’ ” When I consider that a voice is commonly God’s natural gift to men, I confess my amazement, and to a certain degree even my disgust, that so many young men and women are willing to leave it undeveloped, and in disuse! It may represent their one pound for which the Lord will yet come inquiring as to its uses, and concerning which they will be compelled with shamefacedness to say, “I wrapped it in a napkin and hid it away.” The pastor who encourages his young people to cultivate this gift, is not only conferring upon them a blessing which they will increasingly esteem as time moves on, but is also building up a possible contribution to the cause of Christ of increasing, yea at times, of surpassing value. Think of what the singing of P. P. Bliss, Ira D. Sankey, Charles Alexander and Charlie Butler meant in American revivals I And think of what the teaching of D. B. Towner has brought to pass in the production of Rodeheavers, McKees, Hammontrees, Clarks and others too numerous to mention! We next pass to THE PROBLEM OF MUSICIANS There are pastors who think and say that one of the hardest problems of pastoral experience is at this point. They say that musicians are tempermental, difficult to manage; often create division in the church, and sometimes detract from and even destroy the effect of the pulpit ministration. But, a careful consideration of the subject will reveal the certainty that such results need not occur. For the service of song, secure the sane.—The pastor is so positioned as to have great advantages in this matter. His visitation in the homes, his place in the social circles of the church he serves, and his close contact with the assemblies, all provide opportunities of observation. In a small church he can soon learn who have voices and with what sort of disposition they are associated. When he finds the ability to sing connected with an unbearable egotism or a critical spirit, he is under no obligation to suggest that such join the choir; in fact, he may, by a confidential talk with his director, arrange to keep them out. But these queer souls are magnificently in the minority. It is my observation that a singing voice is often connected with a sound body, and a sound body contributes always to a sound mind. We have not found singers a queer lot; on the contrary, we believe that, taken as a class, they are rather superior, and that a proper expression of appreciation, and, on occasion when they have done exceptionally well, kindly compliment will encourage their cooperation in the service and render their attendance upon choir practice and services more certain and regular. The leadership of the choir is of prime importance. —There, power for good really resides. A sympathetic, cooperating choir director is of inestimable aid; but a non-sympathetic and contrary one can well nigh circumvent the pastor’s influence and render his tenderest appeals impotent. This is especially true if the director lacks a sense of the fitness of things and knows not how to quickly select a suitable song. Dr. A. C. Dixon, when pastor of the Ruggles Street Church, Boston, told me this story as his actual experience. He had in that Church a Quartet that was world-famed. Doubtless they have never been surpassed and seldom equaled in the annals of American Church History, but they insisted upon classical music upon almost all occasions. Dixon called the leader aside one week and said to him, “Beloved, you men are great! Your voices are marvelous; your harmony is perfect, but I do long to hear you sing the gospel. Won’t you give me a Gospel number for next Sunday morning?” “Sure,” said the leader, “we will open with one.” Dixon thought he had triumphed. Imagine, therefore, his chagrin when, at the opening of the service the next Sunday morning, the Quartet stood up and sang lustily, “God Be With You Till We Meet Again.” Dixon said, “Riley, I was determined to have some semblance of intelligence, and so I rose, lifted my hand and pronounced the benediction.” Often the difficulty of managing singers is the product of mismanagement.—For twenty-five years after I came to the Minneapolis pulpit I had a Music Committee. It was seldom or never united in opinion. Some of its members seemed to be satisfied with the director and the choir, and others would be a little antagonistic to both. You can readily imagine the result. It kept every director on the anxious seat, and it constantly disturbed the comfort of the choir members. Finally, I dared the dangerous thing of recommending to the Advisory Board, and through it to the church, the abolition of the Music Committee. But I did not employ that term. If I had, there would have been a fight on my hands. “Abolition” is a dangerous word; better let it alone. It is a bit like the story one of our graduates told in a Regional Conference. An Irishman and a Frenchman traveled together. When they were parting the Frenchman said, “Au Revoir.” “Faith, and what is that?” said Pat. “That is ‘good-bye’ in French,” said the Frenchman. “Sure!” said Pat. The next time they met, in response to the Frenchman’s “Au Revoir” Pat replied, “Carbolic Acid.” “What do you mean by that?” queried the Frenchman. “That is ‘good-bye’ in any language,” said Pat. It is much so with “abolition”! I did not talk about abolishing the Committee; I talked about creating Heads of departments, and I named among them the Choir Director, saying, “Let him be the head of this department and create his own committee if he wishes one.” It was accepted and the result is that he and the pastor have been the committee ever since, and for years there has not been a disturbance of any sort. I repeat that sometimes the difficulty of managing musicians is the product of mismanagement. I do not believe in a Music Committee for the simple reason that a three or four or five headed force never knows where it is going. Let one head direct, then there will be no debate over the path to be chosen, the course to be taken. Finally, THE PURPOSES OF MUSIC They are too many for me to attempt even their enumeration. It is an art that has a universal application and consequently is practically unlimited. I am not here concerned with music as it relates itself to mere mirth; as it used to fill in the spaces between salacious theater scenes; as it attends the rhythmic movements of the modern dance, or as it entertains social circles, whether they be gathered in spacious parlors or City Auditoriums. With these forms of music the pastor has little contact and in most cases small interest. But music as it relates itself to the Christian religion moves to very definite objections. First of all, It should voice the praises of a gracious God.—This was its particular employment in the Old Testament times by Israel, as the entire Book of the Psalms attests. Haydn, whose contributions were the climax of Christian sentiment in both note and word, said, “A religion without thanksgiving, praise and joy is like a flower without perfume, tint or nectar. There may be such a flower, but surely no one would care to pluck it.” Being once asked why his church music was so cheerful, Haydn replied, “I cannot make it otherwise. When I think of God, my heart is so full of joy that the notes dance and leap!” It is my candid opinion that the spirit that incites to praise and thanksgiving is the very one that will solve practically all the problems of life itself. The singing man is never a soured man, nor a cynical man; and the man whose lips are filled with praises never burdens them with complaints. He is a welcome guest in social circles, he is a leader in Christian service, and he is commonly prized as an inspiring companion. Walter Trine wrote a book entitled, In Tune With the Infinite. A singer whose lips voice a grateful heart is the living illustration of Trine’s title. All forms of worship, however, may be voiced by music.—Prayer as well as petition; sorrow, suffering, bereavement as well as joy, gladness and rejoicing. Someone has said, “Music has a unique relation to our emotional natures. It fits into our feelings as two serrated edges fit into each other. Better, it has an organic connection with emotions so that when one moves the other turns with it. It has more movement in it than any other art. It expresses feeling; yea, life itself!” That is why it has a place and is often indulged when one is solitary and alone. That is why it is engaged in when the family circle assemble around the parlor piano. That is why it swells into anthem proportions when the people gather in the House of God. That is why it is conceivable that the great hours in heaven and of eternity will be characterized by the song of saints and of all angels. It is the one way to voice worship. Not the only way, but the most natural way, and a divinely approved way. It may be employed in soul appeal.—Thousands have been won to Christ through Gospel songs. Full well do I remember the night in Chicago when the officials of my church, having spent till two o’clock in the morning of the night previous, rose from their knees and shaking hands, said one to another, “She will be saved tomorrow night!” For that time, we had spent in pleading with God for the soul salvation of a young woman who was engaged to be married to one of the most efficient officers we had in Calvary Church. When the night had arrived I preached the tenderest sermon of which I was capable. She listened through it all, most earnestly, and with evident conviction. In the after-meeting I extended my pleadings to an unusual length, but she moved not. Finally, almost in despair, I turned to F. H. Jacobs, one of the greatest singers that American history has known, and I said, “Beloved, sing!” He stood up, and with his matchless voice and pleading tones he rendered “Almost Persuaded.” The notes of that number range to every corner of the room, and these words thrust themselves upon her ears, “Almost persuaded,” now to believe, “Almost persuaded,” Christ to receive. Seems now some soul to say, “Go, Spirit, go thy way Some more convenient day, On thee I’ll call.” till finally he had reached the last verse, “Almost persuaded,” harvest is past! “Almost persuaded,” doom comes at last! “Almost,” cannot avail; “Almost” is but to fail! Sad, sad that bitter wail,— “Almost,” but lost! She then rose before the sound of his voice was stilled and fairly rushing forward, she flung herself into the front seat and said, “I resisted the sermon, but I cannot resist the song!” OUTLINE OF CHAPTER ELEVEN MANAGING THE MUSIC AND MUSICIANS I. THE IMPORTANCE OF MUSIC a.In worship it has a Scriptural warrant. b.Music can be made the medium of service. II. THE PROBLEM OF MUSICIANS a.For the service of song secure the sane. b.The leadership of the choir is of prime importance. c.The difficulty of managing singers may be mismanagement. III. THE PURPOSES OF MUSIC a.It should voice the praises of a gracious God. b.All forms of worship, however, may be voiced by music. c.It may and should be employed in Soul-appeal. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 40: 03.12. XII. THE PROBLEM OF PASTORAL VISITATION ======================================================================== XII THE PROBLEM OF PASTORAL VISITATION IN THIS chapter I speak from an experience of more than fifty years in preaching, and of just fifty in pastoral relations. It has been my fortune not to know an interim in that relation of greater length of time than was required for passage from one city to another; and for thirty-nine years this relation has been sustained to one pulpit, with no reason for its speedy termination. I speak, therefore, out of a long-continued and unbroken experience. It is doubtful if the young man, convinced that God is calling him to preach, gives much consideration to the subject of pastoral relations. His problem is that of a personal surrender and willingness to undertake the prophetic office. The thing that looms in his thought is preaching, not pastoral work; and not until he finishes his preparation and actually enters upon the relationship itself, will the importance of pastoral visitation begin to rise for him. However, when once settled, and about the daily and hourly duties of the divine commission, he will speedily discover that to be a preacher, especially to be a pastor, involves far more than the preparation and delivery of discourses. In other words, the angles of his office will multiply and the relative importance of the pastoral relation to the preaching service will grow upon him. Two or three things may be said of pastoral visitation. THE PLAIN DUTY IS A PRIVILEGE We call pastoral visitation a plain duty, and with good occasion. Apart from it no pastoral relation is complete, or long continued relation possible. The pastor should, therefore, accept the following as both essential and sensible. He should adopt and cultivate the custom of pastoral visitation.—Most ministers who occupy pastoral office, employ their forenoons for study and for the consideration of such church problems as may thrust themselves into the study hours; and they give a considerable portion, at least, of their afternoons to pastoral calling. There are several considerations that such a custom conserves. First of all, when the pastor has put in a forenoon in hard study, and changed to visitation for the afternoon, he introduces that variety which is the spice of life, and which comes nearer recreation than anything short of complete rest. In the next place, the average housewife has the heavier duties discharged by the early afternoon, her house in order, and can receive the pastoral call with comfort of mind and body. In the third place, after the middle of the afternoon, the pastor is likely to meet not only the grown-up children who may be at home, but the school boys and girls just returning from their studies. To make friends of children is a chief objective in pastoral work. These and other favorable incidents of this season for pastoral visitation not only approve the arrangement but doubtless account for the custom itself. We have spoken of adopting and cultivating a custom of pastoral visitation, because to some men it is not a natural pleasure, and cultivation, by the daily practice, is essential. We believe that a man who is divinely called and Spirit-filled will come speedily to love pastoral work, and instead of looking upon it as irksome, will regard it as a personal privilege. The pastor should carry on this work to the limit of his time and strength.—Theodore Cuyler, of Lafayette Avenue Presbyterian Church, Brooklyn, New York, was in many respects a model pastor. In his volume on How to Be a Pastor he gives many excellent suggestions. For instance, “The excuse that the congregation is too large for any man’s visit is absurd. All things are possible to the faithful man who understands the value of time”; on the same page, he admits that “Charles H. Spurgeon is the exception to this rule, for this generation; with a membership of 4,000 souls, with the charge of a theological school, a religious magazine and a dozen missions of charity (and tormenting twinges of the gout besides), he cannot be expected to visit eight or nine hundred families.” It was a relief to this author to have the exception made, for he has an almost equal church membership, a theological school eight times as large, a larger magazine, about the same missions of charity; but, thanks be to God, he is free from “twinges of the gout”: And, yet, though his feet are perfect and his health the best, he has not found it possible, in recent years, to make anything like an annual visit to the members of his flock. However, we do consent to the extreme desirability of such visitation up to the limit of one’s ability, and we remember the appropriateness and even believe in the application of the text, “For the Good Shepherd knoweth His sheep; He calleth them all by name.” Even the overworked pastor should not fail at essential points.—When his people are sick he should see them; when death invades a home he should be there; when public disgrace falls upon any member of a house or family he should be present to counsel,—his presence and counsel should be immediate and sympathetic; when financial disaster, poverty, and want overtake them, they should be clearly conscious of his sympathy and effort at assistance. Just as Jesus Christ came “not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance,” so the pastor’s first duty should be, not to the healthy, but to the sick; not to the happy, but to the troubled; not to the abundantly blessed, but to the bereft; not to the householder of plenty, but to those of poverty. Jesus Christ had a veritable affinity for sinners, sick people, and the Satanic-possessed; They represented to Him an opportunity, and He failed them not. In that, the Master is the minister’s example. PASTORAL PAINS WILL BE REPAID His house-going will produce church-goers.—First of all there is a certain amount of social civility that leads even the obtuse to feel that they ought to return a visit, and brings the socially sensitive to a clear conviction of duty in the matter. Again, when a pastor has, by pastoral visitations, established with one of his church homes, a personal acquaintanceship with the members of the family, and especially when he can call them by name, a sense of companionship is strengthened, and the interest in the pastor’s personality and the church problems is the easy product. Theodore Cuyler says, “Congregations are built up externally by thorough pastoral work, and then they are built up internally by a thorough setting-forth of Bible truth.” Beyond question, these two phases of pastoral work involve mutual approval and contribute to the church progress. It is a bit difficult for the ordinary man in the pew to feel the same interest in what the preacher is saying, when there is no personal acquaintanceship between the speaker and the hearer. It is certain that those who come into the pew, can never feel that the pastor is consciously dealing with their problems, or deliberately attempting to help in their solution if there be no acquaintance. Mutual acquaintanceship, then, is a prime factor in making the pulpit a successful and sympathetic instructor of the pew. The expression of personal sympathy and counsel tends to increase attendance.—Pastoral visitation alone affords opportunity to voice the one, and proffer the other. That layman who said, “The sermon always sounds better to me on Sunday when I have had a shake of my minister’s hand during the week,” was voicing this fact. As a matter of experience, I can bear my testimony that those members of my church with whom I have established an intimate friendship, to whom I have gladly gone when they were in trouble, and who have come to me with equal willingness when they felt themselves in need of counsel, have uniformly been my best hearers and most intelligent co-laborers. Such personal fellowship makes for lasting friendship.—It is doubtful if the average preacher realizes the high esteem in which the average layman holds his friendship. It is my judgment that of all the friendships created in this world, one of the most intimate and prized is what truly great laymen often make with their ministers. John B. Farwell was my loved and esteemed friend, for some years when I was pastor in Chicago, and later when I had come to the First Baptist Church, Minneapolis, I seldom spent an hour with him, or any portion thereof, without his referring with pleasure and pride to his intimate fellowship with Dwight L. Moody. It was equally true of B. F. Jacobs and Dr. George Lorimer. They were spiritual pals. It is my candid conviction that of all the experiences of John Wanamaker’s life, his most prized was that of his relation with J. Wilbur Chapman; and of all the experiences of John B. Farwell’s life, his most appreciated was that of his co-labors with Dwight L. Moody; and of Jacob’s life was that of fellowship in service with George Lorimer. What friends! How faithful! How affectionate! How effective! Possibly the richest return that ever comes to a true pastor is the friendship of those beautiful godly men and women, who give themselves to him and his great endeavors in unlimited love and unstinted labor. The Preaching Will BE Thereby Re-enforced An admiring hearer is always an excellent listener.— “Love thinketh no evil.” A few mornings since I introduced to my students John H. Leslie, my Senior deacon in the Calvary Baptist Church, Chicago, Illinois (1893-’97). I said facetiously, “This man never saw any faults in me; he backed me always,—right or wrong—it made no difference; he believed me to be right!” That facetious remark expressed an absolute fact. Only the man who knows you well, who has had intimate companionship with you, comes to believe in you after that manner, and consequently to receive practically every sentence that falls from your lips without suspicion. When once such a mutual understanding is established, you can preach the plainest and most pungent truths to that man, and even though you deal with his frailties, he will accept what you say with good grace, and even gratitude. I have a good many letters from men who tell me they are fundamentalists and on that account they are unpopular, the people will not receive the truth, and they are thereby compelled to move to a new pastorate. Will I help them? It is a rare thing that I take any stock in the statement. The preaching of truth is not, and never has been a particularly popular procedure, but the man who incites in the minds and hearts of his people an affection for him, can smite their sins and they will not only receive what he says, with grace, but in their innermost souls feel to him a debt of gratitude for his faithfulness. In three instances in the last thirty-eight years of this pastorate I have had men, who were my intimate friends in official relation, part company over questions of administration, and quit my membership; but in every instance those men remained among my admirers. One of them humbly but gladly returned to the fold, and the other two have never failed me in their affection or service, when called upon to manifest the same. We are not only to preach the truth in love, but we are to win the respect and love of our members, and then they will take the plainest truth, and the most corrective counsel without complaint. The pastoral visit affords opportunity of Evangelism. —We hear a good deal in these days about the private ministry of the Gospel, and some speak of it as if it were a novelty in church progress. Not at all! At Pentecost, Peter was the speaker of the day, and his public address produced profound conviction. The private ministry of the 119 others, who had spent with him ten days in the Upper Room won the enormous number of converts, and the 2,500 accessions to the church. There is need of a public ministry, and there is a crying need of the private ministry. The man, therefore, who has preached on Sunday, has not completed his labors. He may have produced conviction for sin, but to follow it with the pastoral visitation is often to fasten the nail in a sure place of the heart. Dr. Theodore Cuyler tells us that he once spent an evening in what seemed a vain endeavor to bring a fine young man to decision for Christ. Just as he was leaving, this young man invited him up to the nursery to see his beautiful children. As he went around and looked at them as they lay, peacefully sleeping in their cribs, Dr. Cuyler said: “Do you mean that these sweet children shall never have any help from their father to get to heaven?” The arrow struck his heart. A month later he became a member of the church, and forever afterwards he was glued to the pastor and steadily glorified God. The pastoral visitation is not merely the performance of a social function; it offers the greatest opportunity for personal evangelism. Finally, Pastoral visitation results in cooperation.— For every hour spent in the same there will come back two and more from the family visited. Paul writes, “Love never faileth.” No one knows the truth of that statement better than the pastor who has won the affection of his people. Henry Van Dyke says, “The crown of love is service.” Pastoral visitation, then, is an investment that brings a large interest return. With the rarest exceptions, the long and successful pastorates have been characterized by the true meaning of “episcopos.” The pastor has had an oversight of the entire flock, and has made the membership to feel his abiding interest and his unflagging affection. It is in such churches that the most souls have been saved; the best buildings have been erected; the most money has been contributed to missions; out from which the most young men and women have gone to the direct service of the Lord. In fact, in such churches, and in such only, has the work been at once both glorious and great. O. P. Gifford quoted Charles Spurgeon as saying to his people, “As for me, I beg a special interest in your prayers, that I may be sustained in the tremendous work to which I am called. A minister must be upheld by his people’s prayers, or what can he do? When a diver is on the sea-bottom he depends upon the pumps above, which send him down air. Pump away, brethren, while I am seeking the Lord’s lost money among the timbers of this old wreck. I feel the fresh air coming in at every stroke of your prayer pump, but if you stop your supplications, I shall perish.” Then Gifford commented,—“The heart of the church throbs in the pulse of the pastor. If that beat strong and high, he is mighty; if that be feeble, he is weak.” But whenever did any people fail to pray for the pastor they ardently loved? “Love never faileth.” OUTLINE OF CHAPTER TWELVE THE PROBLEM OF PASTORAL VISITATION I. THE PLAIN DUTY IS A PRIVILEGE a.He should adopt and cultivate the custom of pastoral visitation. b.The pastor should carry on this work to the limit of his time and strength. c.Even the overworked pastor should not fail at essential points. II. PASTORAL PAINS WILL BE REPAID a.His house-going will produce church-goers. b.The expression of personal sympathy and counsel tends to increase attendance. c.Such personal fellowship makes for lasting friendship. III. THE PREACHING WILL BE THEREBY RE-ENFORCED a.An admiring hearer is always an excellent listener. b.The pastoral visit affords opportunity of evangelism. c.Pastoral Visitation results in cooperation. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 41: 03.13. XIII. THE PROBLEM OF PASTORAL VISITATION ======================================================================== XIII THE PASTOR AND THE PROBLEMS OF FINANCE BEYOND dispute, this is a subject of vital concern. At this point the minister faces the Scylla and Charybdis of success or failure. He will either pass through safely, or be impaled by debt on the one side or dishonesty on the other. In entering the ministry as a calling, every young man should keep that fact in mind, and unless he intends a financial course of integrity, let the office severely alone. It should be borne in mind also that the problems of finance are more than one, and at every point where the preacher is involved, the utmost painstaking and care are a necessity both to his safety and his sacred influence. There are Personal Problems of Finance: Professional Problems of Finance: and Precarious Problems of Finance for every preacher. THE PERSONAL PROBLEMS Primary among these is The problem of the tithe.—Possibly among the most serious sins of the church this one is paramount. There are members who “rob God.” It is as true of the New Testament Israel as it was of the Old Testament Israel that oftentimes, “Ye are cursed with a curse: for ye have robbed me, even this whole nation.” (Malachi 3:9) And if it be asked, “Wherein have we robbed Thee?” God’s answer is “In tithes and offerings.” “Like priest: like people.”—If the pastor is not a tither his lips are sealed on the subject of Christian giving, for the Old Testament demand is not discarded in the New Testament teaching. Paul’s injunction to the Corinthians, “Upon the first day of the week, let every one of you lay by him in store, as God hath prospered him” (1 Corinthians 16:2), is no abrogation of the Old Testament law, but a Christian interpretation of it instead. It is hardly conceivable that the shepherd of the flock should be exempt from the law under which he expects his members to live. In Peter’s first epistle, 1 Peter 5:2-3, he writes: “Feed the flock of God which is among you, taking the oversight thereof, not by constraint, but willingly: not for filthy lucre, but of a ready mind; Neither as being lords over God’s heritage, but being ensamples to the flock.” A benevolent pastor can create a giving people. When generosity toward the cause of Christ characterizes the overseer, it will inevitably influence the loyal in the grace of giving. Furthermore, there is The problem of honest payment of debts.—Here the preacher’s peril is quite acute. There are men in the ministry who buy without regard to pay day. Just because the profession itself invites credit, they abuse that privilege. When the community learns of this fact, the minister’s influence is sharply curtailed, and when at last the church is apprized of the custom, it will likely call for his resignation. Newell Dwight Hillis in his volume The Quest of Happiness, says: “There are no tragedies like those of men who have mortgaged their all to another’s will. Happy, indeed, the man who can say that he owes no man anything. It is doubtless a fact that men who have grown rich rapidly have done so by taking great risks and going in debt. Now and then there is a man who intuitively seems to be able to foretell future events, possessed of such self-reliance and courage that he can not only pay the interest on his debt, but also achieve a fortune for himself; but these men are as occasional as the big trees of California. One Sir Walter Scott is warning enough for an entire generation. When his debts piled up, through worry, his brain faltered, his nerve grew feeble, and his hand could scarcely hold the pen, yet the interest would soon be due and the money must be paid. Year after year, therefore, he scourged himself to his task. His servants used to lift Scott into his big chair, put the writing pad on his knees, place the pen in his fingers. ‘I must be at my work,’ he whispered to Lockhart. An hour later his son-in-law found the old man sitting, with his white hair and the tears streaming down his fine old face, helpless to drive the pen or follow the thought—‘and yet the interest must be paid.’ And so the greatest man of his time was slain by debt.” The course that wrecked Sir Walter Scott, the peerless writer, has ruined the prospects of many a preacher, burying both his office and influence under the heap of unpaid bills. Paul had no thought whatever of making exception of the minister when to the Roman Christians he wrote: Provide things honest in the sight of all men .” (Romans 12:17) Then there is The problem of lending to the poor.—The minister is the one man in every community to whom the poor make most persistent appeal. That fact contains a fine compliment to his office. Jesus Christ was a friend of the poor. He fed them, and He healed them; and the report of His conduct in the matter is known in all the nations where His Gospel has been preached. The minister of Christ is supposed at least to be His representative, and consequently to partake of His Spirit, and there will be many hands held out to him for help. Discrimination here is biblically essential. The Word teaches, “If any man will not work, neither let him eat” To condone and aid indolence is not necessarily Christian. To contribute to the purchase of intoxicating liquors, or intoxicating drugs, is not to lend assistance to the beggar; but to give bread to the hungry and water to the thirsty in the name of the Lord is an obligation that rests upon every professed follower of Jesus Christ; an obligation that will make multitudinous exactions of the minister. The pastor need hardly fear to divide his living with the righteous poor. God has a habit of taking care of those who lend to his little ones. It will be remembered that Elijah, the Tishbite at the end of a long journey, came to the gate of the city, and a widow was gathering sticks, and he called to her and said: “Fetch me, I pray thee, a little water in a vessel, that I may drink. And as she was going to fetch it, he called to her, and said, Bring me, I pray thee, a morsel of bread in thine hand. And she said, As the Lord thy God liveth, I have not a cake, but an handful of meal in a barrel, and a little oil in a cruse: and, behold, I am gathering two sticks, that I may go in and dress it for me and my son, that we may eat it, and die. And Elijah said unto her, Fear not; go and do as thou hast said: but make me thereof a little cake first, and bring it unto me, and after make for thee and for thy son. For thus saith the Lord God of Israel, The barrel of meal shall not waste, neither shall the cruse of oil fail, until the day that the Lord sendeth rain upon the earth. And she went and did according to the saying of Elijah: and she, and he, and her house did eat many days. And the barrel of meal wasted not, neither did the cruse of oil fail, according to the word of the Lord, which he spake by Elijah.” (1 Kings 17:10-16) It is a rare thing for the servant of the Lord to impoverish himself for the sake of the needy, and then he himself be forgotten of God. In fact, we should say it is a thing unknown. THE PROFESSIONAL PROBLEMS The problem of educating in the grace of giving.— The average church lives at “a poor dying rate,” and the average gift of its members is a fair measure of its spiritual life. In most cases the fault is more with the pulpit than with the pew. The preacher who practices tithing and then preaches tithing in the power of the Spirit, will see his membership grow in the grace of giving. In a somewhat wide observation, we have seldom seen even a small country church dry up and die out under such a ministry. On the contrary, we have seen a multitude of them become fairly efflorescent in both giving and growth, having caught the spirit of their leader. Such changes do not take place over night. Time is an essential element in teaching; a task that may look even hopeless at the beginning will look better at the end of a year, and still better at the end of five. Line upon line and precept upon precept make their impression, and the final product is fruitfulness. Teach and tell men what God has to say upon the subject; repeat His deliverances over and over until the mind is impressed with them, and the heart is moved by them. I doubt if any church is, by nature, more stingy than another. The practice and preaching of an A. J. Gordon will produce a Clarendon Street for giving. The problem of directing expenditure plans.—Here God pity the minister who lacks in judgment or who fails in leadership. It is not at all unusual to have building committees go awry at this point. Some years ago I knew the chairman of a building committee to decide upon a location for a new mission house. On the south side of this location was a dangerous street car track-crossing for unattended children; on the north side of it a big park with no population; to the west a beautiful church house of another denomination, and to the east a successful church of the same denomination as the mission itself. When we were taken to the place and shown it, we prophesied its failure; but rather than have trouble with the committee men, we subsided in opposition and let the building go ahead. It ran for about a year, and was closed for lack of patronage, and we regretted not having taken stronger ground against the investment. Some times people build a house unto the Lord when their ambitions are bigger than their abilities to pay. In several cities of America such temples stand today more in mock than mark, for they have been lost on mortgages; and in the secular uses to which they have been put they point with unerring finger to a pastor’s weakness in permitting the procedure. This thought ramifies in different directions, and no man can be a successful shepherd of a flock, whose influence is not great enough to determine the church’s expenditures. The problem of compelling official honesty.—The young man who enters the ministry is altogether likely to meet some shocking experiences in this matter. Think, for instance, on this as an example: A church, dwelling in a fine building, characterized by considerable wealth in its membership, collecting through the dual envelope arrangement for missions and current expense account, found itself running behind in the payment of current bills. Its officers met and by a motion unanimously carried, ordered the treasurer to take from the mission fund sufficient amount to meet the current shortage. More than once evangelists who have gone to American churches with an agreement that when the current bills of the campaign were cared for, the offering made to the evangelist in envelopes should be his compensation for the service rendered, have discovered that portions of the same had been kept back. In fact so often has this occurred that many of the evangelists have had to do the apparently discourteous thing of insisting that the envelopes should not be opened except in their presence, or in the presence of a trustworthy representative. These things sadly reflect on official honesty, and every pastor should make it known to his church and committees that he expects, and shall demand, common honesty in such matters. THE PRECARIOUS PROBLEMS There are more of these than can be mentioned in the limits of this brief chapter. We select, however, three or four of supreme importance. The proposed support of the Church by various sales. —There are hundreds of churches in America where those in charge of the money raising seek to make the members, and the public in general, pay die bills by varied barters,—church fairs, popular lectures, church suppers, etc. Such a church lives at a “poor dying rate,” to use the phraseology of a sentence from one of our hymns. Such sales affect an anti-Christian influence; they dry up the fountains of benevolence, and they leave the church of God on a little better financial basis than that of the beggar. Years ago Dr. Arthur T. Pierson, speaking on this subject, said: “We have fallen upon a day of universal patent automatic sweetmeat machines, which guarantee to return a package of sweets for every penny put in the slot, and their influence seems to be perceptible even in our church life. We have heard of a little fellow who, on putting a penny in the offertory box on Sunday, asked his mother which she thought would come out, chocolate or caramels. We shall never have well developed beneficence in our churches until we get the sweetmeat machines out of our thought; and nothing will impress the true law of unselfishness in beneficence but a bold and constant advocacy of every form of benevolent work. The pastor must insist that the church doors shall swing open for all benevolent enterprises, and that all waters which carry healing and help to humanity shall find a channel for their stream through the house of God. He must not be afraid of the effect of such insistence and persistence. The historian Froude, for his singularly bold treatment of historic questions, has had attached to him a new word—Froudacity. We should be glad to see every pastor deserving of some such descriptive title in view of the courageous perseverance with which he educates his people in benevolent activity .” The Pastor must watch against the promotion agent. —This fellow understands the power of influence and seeks to secure the same in his own financial interest. More than once this author has been offered a beautiful trip for both himself and wife, without expense, going or coming, to the oil fields of California and the oil fields of Oklahoma and of Texas. All that they demanded was that he should grace the party by his presence, but knowing what lay back of that invitation, he has politely declined. Some years ago an ex-evangelist, a member of this author’s church, handed him several thousand dollars worth of stock in a Canadian Gold Mine; “a mine where millions of dollars were in full view, and only a few weeks would be required for this stock to skyrocket to the point where all his future needs would be forever provided.” The stock was instantly and politely handed back with the explanation that we could not accept it for the very simple reason that we had not seen the mine, and our ownership would induce others to purchase. Suffice it to say that nothing ever came out of the mine; but the agent had a serious court fight to keep out of the pen. Don’t be put in the position of decoy ducks. The specious plea of the denominational program.— The principle of cooperation is beautiful and biblical. If one can chase a thousand, two can put ten thousand to flight. To link hands with our brethren in accomplishing desirable Christian ends should be our common custom; but to back every kind of program because some denominational officials put their seal upon the same is to show lack of discernment or want of courage. Why should a man who believes the Bible to be “the very Word of God” and Christ to be “God manifest in the flesh,” who believes what the Bible teaches about the atonement, back programs on foreign fields that go contrary to these truths, or lend his assistance in constructing a church at home that stands for none of them, simply because the denomination undertakes such acts as a part of its program? We have no sympathy whatever with any organization which declares its intention to destroy the denominations; nor with any which announces as the occasion of its gathering “the holding of the post-mortem of the church.” We do not believe that the greatest sin of Christendom today is denominationalism. On the contrary, we hold it true that denominationalism has been a blessing to the world, and that the friendly spirit of rivalry between the varied sects can offset the slight differences over the essential doctrines of the church. But while we thus hold, we cannot advise men to transgress conscience in the interest of ecclesiastical favors, to support blindly every proposal handed out from the office of the secretary of a board, or to approve and back programs which are not in accordance with the revelation of the Book. It has become a habit now with every examining committee, to inquire of the candidate for ordination whether he will back the denominational program. It should be an equal habit on the part of that candidate to respond, “Yes, willingly: provided it is in keeping with the teachings of God’s Book; and not otherwise.” OUTLINE OF CHAPTER THIRTEEN THE PASTOR AND THE PROBLEMS OF FINANCE I. THE PERSONAL PROBLEMS a.The problem of the tithe. b.The problem of honest payment of debts. c.The problem of lending to the poor. II. THE PROFESSIONAL PROBLEMS a.The problem of educating in the Grace of giving. b.The problem of directing expenditure plans. c.The problem of compelling official honesty. III. THE PRECARIOUS PROBLEMS a.The proposed support of the church by various sales. b.The pastor must watch against the promotion agent. c.The specious plea of the denominational program. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 42: 03.14. XIV. THE PASTOR AND CHURCH ORGANIZATIONS ======================================================================== XIV THE PASTOR AND CHURCH ORGANIZATIONS A CHRISTIAN church is an organization. On that account the State requires of it Incorporation, for the purpose of holding property, transacting business of legal sort and after a lawful manner. In America, at least, the Church is subject to the State like any other Corporation; and while it is not a State Church it does enjoy certain specific privileges on account of its religious, and, particularly its educational character. Chief among these is its exemption from taxation. In this respect it rests upon the same basis as schools and other educational and eleemosynary institutions that exist for the purpose of serving the people, and not for the private gain of its officers or members. THE CHURCH ORGANIZATION The New Testament organization was simple.—Its first feature is recorded in connection with the birth of the church itself. “The same day there were added together about three thousand souls.” (Acts 2:41) Doubtless the reason for the words in italics which, as you understand, were inserted by the English translators, “unto them”—was the practical certainty that the 2,500 new converts of that day were added to the 500 previously existing, creating a membership of 3,000 all told. That the church existed as an organization is further proven in a later passage: “There arose a murmuring of the Grecians against the Hebrews, because their widows were neglected in the daily ministration. Then the twelve called the multitude of the disciples unto them, and said, It is not reason that we should leave the word of God, and serve tables. Wherefore, brethren, look ye out among you seven men of honest report, full of the Holy Ghost and wisdom, whom we may appoint over this business.” (Acts 6:1-3) That day the Diaconate was born. The fact that the organization was further developed is evident in the report in Acts 14:23 where Paul and Barnabas are reported to have “ordained elders in every church.” This was not the creation of this office, for it had been previously recorded in Acts 11:30, but it was the further extension of the same. The differences in the various forms of church organization found as between the Episcopal, the Presbyterian and the Congregational forms is largely the product of interpretation. The Episcopal people interpret the word “Episcopos”—which means “overseer”—as making possible even a bishop; and with Rome still higher orders; while the Congregational polity interprets that same word as belonging to the office of the pastor or overseer of the flock. Hence variety of organization. Organization, therefore, in the church has become complex.—We have ramified it not only by different interpretations of Biblical words, but also by adding offices and names unknown to Old or New Testament teaching. The average church has its wheels within wheels; but oftentimes its complexity is without power. The wheels exist but they are not in action. However, that the New Testament intended a further ramification of labors, if not of offices, is made plain when the apostle Paul writes about the operations of the Holy Spirit. In his first epistle to the Corinthians he says: “Now there are diversities of gifts, but the same Spirit. And there are differences of administration, but the same Lord. And there are diversities of operations, but it is the same God which worketh all in all. But the manifestation of the Spirit is given to every man to profit withal. For to one is given by the Spirit the word of wisdom; to another the word of knowledge by the same Spirit; to another faith by the same Spirit; to another the gifts of heeding by the same Spirit; to another the working of miracles; to another prophecy; to another discerning of spirits; to another divers kinds of tongues; to another the interpretation of tongues; But all these worketh that one and the selfsame Spirit, dividing to every man severally as he will. For as the body is one, and hath many members, and all the members of that one body, being many, are one body: so also is Christ.” (1 Corinthians 12:4-12) Over-organization, however, is easily possible.—A great many churches are over-organized. Beyond all question our denominational Conventions are cursed by over-organization. We have done in religion almost exactly that which we have done in matters of State,—we have created offices for the sake of the office, particularly for the sake of the office-holder. There was a time years ago when a Justice of the Peace was necessary in every little town. Travel was slow, tedious, expensive, and to go to court twenty or twenty-five miles away and bring the disputants and witnesses to the same was impractical; but, with the introduction of the modern motor all of that is changed. Twenty-five miles is no distance now; not more than two miles was forty years ago. The result is that the States are cluttered with legal machinery for which there is little or no occasion, and loaded with endless expense and consequent taxation. To abolish these offices is difficult because the officers who hold them and draw salaries from them are influential; and abolition commonly comes by popular vote. Changes of any sort that are radical are accomplished after the same manner, and that is why the most needful ones are at all times most difficult and sometimes almost impossible. The same thing obtains with reference to the church. There are always men and women in every church, who want new organizations and new committees created, and sometimes these individuals are ambitious for the creation in order to make office for themselves. It is well to remember that the New Testament church organization was comparatively simple, and yet within that organization there was a marvelous opportunity for the exercise of every gift. Paul, in his letter to the Romans, is not writing so much of organizations as of the exercise of gifts under the direction of the Holy Ghost, and that indeed is not only the object of church life but the opportunity of Christian service. “For as we have many members in one body, and all members have not the same office: So we, being many, arc one body in Christ, and every one members one of another. Having then gifts differing according to the grace that is given to us, whether prophecy, let us prophesy according to the proportion of faith; or ministry, let us wait on our ministering: or he that teacheth, on teaching; or he that exhorteth, on exhortation: he that giveth, let him do it with simplicity; he that ruleth with diligence; he that sheweth mercy, with cheerfulness. Let love be without dissimulation. Abhor that which is evil; cleave to that which is good. Be kindly affectioned one to another with brotherly love; in honor preferring one another; not slothful in business; fervent in spirit; serving the Lord; rejoicing in hope; patient in tribulation; continuing instant in prayer; distributing to the necessity of saints; given to hospitality. Bless them which persecute you: bless, and curse not. Rejoice with them that do rejoice, and weep with them that weep. Be of the same mind one toward another. Mind not high things, but condescend to men of low estate. Be not wise in your own conceits.” (Romans 12:4-16) THE COMMITTEES CREATED Committees in church work are often a convenience. —Doubtless certain of them are a necessity. The pastor is the overseer of church work, but that does not mean that he is to undertake all that is to be accomplished. In fact, the overseer commonly does less real labor than those who serve under him; but he is compelled to do more thinking and planning if affairs move well whether it be on a southern plantation, western ranch, or in the Church of God. It is a very great convenience when financial questions arise to have a Finance Committee for consultation; it is a very great convenience when there is a leak in the roof to have a House Committee who can be set to the task of correcting the same. It is a very great convenience when the subject of missions needs emphasis and an educational campaign to be carried on, to have a committee on Missions who will at least function with the pastor, in undertaking the same. It is a very great convenience when the church is large and there may be a dozen sick at one time, to have a Committee on the Sick, to have a Committee on Benevolence to provide for the poor, etc. Henry Ward Beecher said that when he was in his first pastorate in Indiana, he constituted all the committees, and he was also the janitor; but in the larger church with more complex conditions the same man shifted to a higher and better ground. However, it is very easy to create needless committees; and still easier to create useless ones. A committee that is too large commonly belongs to the latter class. Charles Spurgeon said the most effective committee possible was a committee of three, one out of town and another sick abed. By which he meant to say “What is everybody’s business is nobody’s business”; but when you can saddle on a single individual a definite responsibility you are liable to get results. This fact, however, should influence the size of the committee. It is a rare thing, and a rarer occasion, that requires large ones. Their creation, therefore, should be with care.—There are certain people who are unfit for committee work. This is due to one of several possibilities—they may be over-bearing, and will demand the adoption of their thought in every matter, and so be an unwelcome member of any committee; they may be extremely sensitive and the slightest discussion may hurt their feelings; or they may be simply adverse, ready to oppose everything presented by another. Such people are better left off committees. Any man who talks much about the authority of office is a dangerous man on a committee. People who serve best in such capacity are those who are not looking for personal prestige, or demanding the acceptance of personal opinion, but are anxious to serve the Lord and advance the church. You may remember that in The Little Minister the leading elder was never unconscious of his eldership; and on every occasion he reminded his pastor that the eldership was as important as the office of pastor at any time. Such men make poor elders. And it is not the business of the pastor to go into politics to secure the election of such officers as he wants and the appointment of just such men as he wants for committees; it is the pastor’s privilege in influence to have it so, for in the majority of cases both the church and the nominating committees desire the same objective and will, therefore, consult him on these subjects and a few words will determine their course. The Pastor should be an ex-officio member of all committees.—This fact is not always recognized by churches. On the contrary in one of the leading churches sometime since, a Scotch leader reminded . the pastor that he “Had no business attending the Board meetings at all.” But, it is as absurd for the officials and committees of a church to insist upon running the same without the presence and advice of the pastor, as it is for the directors of a bank to imagine that it is their official right to run the same without the presence or advice of its president. However, since it is perfectly clear that the pastor should be ex-officio member of every committee, it is equally certain that on that very account he should not be too self-assertive. It is as true of the pastor as it is of the elder or the chairman of any committee that when he begins to talk about his authority he begins at the same time to lose his influence. It is not because he is the head of the institution that he rules the same; the fact of the matter is the minister is the servant of all, and if he rule at all, it will be by poise and judgment, by the exercise of his spiritual influence and never by the assertion of his authoritative position. Possibly more men fail in the pastorate at this point than at almost any other. They hold too high an estimate of the dignity of their office and make too great demands upon their fellow Christians to recognize their official station. Officialdom is only powerful in proportion to its righteous and divinely approved influence. For the first year, and possibly for the second, or even the third, there are likely to be many times when the pastor will need to mollify his own feelings and repress resentment; but if he impart good sense, indulge only good counsel, in the course of time officers, committees, and the church itself will look to him for leadership and will follow, not only with willingness, but with zeal. THE INCIDENTAL ORGANIZATIONS The church, while it is an organization, is, just on account of its constitution, an organization of certain complexities, and these must be recognized and their interests conserved. The Young People’s organization is important. Father Clark hit upon a great thought when he conceived the Christian Endeavor Society. He saw that the young people of the average church were not developing. Their youth and natural timidity kept them from taking the time supposedly belonging to seniors for testimony, for instance; the same thing affected them in the matter of public prayer. It was left to the elders, and so on. The result was arrested growth. Father Clark, seeing that fact, set himself to the task of solving that particular problem for youth, namely its spiritual development. Who will say that in this matter he was impractical ? It is an interesting thing to study the apostle Paul and his relationship to such juniors as Timothy and Titus. He sought these young men as his co-laborers, pushed them to the fore, and rejoiced to see them develop into strong men. Even in the Old Testament they had the School of the Prophets, evidently a company of young men who were being equipped for the ministry of the Word. The young people’s organizations, then, that have come to the Church of God in the last century have come to it as a blessing, and the wise pastor will seek the development of the young of his flock. The women’s organizations also are both potent and problematical. There is a sense in which the critics of the same are just. This century especially has copied the world to a certain degree and created multitudinous organizations where the sexes are separate, but for this practice we have no New Testament precedent. Circumstances, however, alter cases. We live under conditions where women will often take time for meetings concerning their own sex and particularly such themes as missions, and ministries that require a woman’s touch. So profit may be had, and often has come from such organizations. That they may create problems is. beyond question. Chief among these is the social problem. So often women want church fairs, church suppers, dramatic performances, etc. History is replete with illustrations of the fact that these things are not helpful to the average church. However, there are ways of meeting this matter that a sane pastor should consider. One Southern preacher boasted that his way was to abolish them all. But it takes more than one swallow to make a spring and there are other ways. Commonly the president of such organization is both capable and sensible. Counsel with her on the subject of methods that make for progress, and what will meet the same, and at times with the program committee, and this may result in changes being slowly, but certainly made that will solve all of these difficulties and bring the organization to spiritual ground, rendering it willing to do such work as visiting the sick, providing clothing, and other essentials, to the poor, lending assistance to ministers and missionaries in remote and difficult parts, and even undertaking church visitation on a large scale, and so on; in fact, the opportunities of service are never scant. What is required is to think them through and then get your women busy with you to serve. According to the New Testament teaching, women played no inconspicuous part. The daughters of Philip were prophetesses; the woman at the well bore testimony of the sort that brought many to believe; Dorcas was a woman full of good works and almsdeeds which she did. When Christ was risen from the grave, it was women who bore the first testimony of the resurrection; and among the early martyrs for the Faith they took their place with their brethren and paid the price of life itself in proof of loyalty and love. It is inconceivable, therefore, that women’s work should be either disregarded or minimized in the church of God. The organization of men may prove a power.—To be sure, in the average church, most of the organizations are headed by men; the Boards of Control are commonly either men, or overwhelmingly masculine. Experience has demonstrated the fact that men’s organizations can be made effective for the cause of Christ. For thirty-five years in my Minneapolis pastorate we had no such organization. For four years we have had the Men’s Forum. Facts compel me to pay it high compliment. The best organization for visitation that the church has ever seen was worked out by one of the men of this Forum. This districting plan was well-nigh perfect. It required weeks of solid work to perfect it, for so large a membership, but it was accomplished. The same Men’s Forum conceived the idea of multiplied neighborhood prayer meetings, associated with Bible study and a social hour, and it has been largely successful and has proven itself capable of far greater and more profitable extension. This Forum also has on several occasions brought to its banquets speakers who both instructed and inspired the men assembled; and its Father and Son Banquets have been not only eminently successful but, in our judgment, intellectually and spiritually profitable. The whole question of any organization is that of its spirit and objectives. So long as these can be kept under the direction of the Holy Ghost, helpfulness is the sure result. Organization for Bible study is clearly essential.—Here we touch upon one of the most important functions of the church,—that of Scripture and spiritual instruction; The Sunday School is to date the finest organization known to that endeavor. It is not necessary here to emphasize the importance of this work. It must be conceded by all if youth is not reached with the Word of God, the future of the church is bleak indeed. But if it is reached with that Word, and that Word is believed by the teachers and taught effectively, the future of the church is secure. Simply this remark in closing: When a Sunday School is in the church and of the church it is in no sense independent; it is, in fact, the church engaged in Bible study, dependent upon the church and under the absolute control of the church. It therefore has the right to appoint its officers and teachers, or elect them as the church may determine. The church becomes responsible for the Sunday School support, and is under obligation to guard its welfare at every point, and to see that its work is performed in both a satisfactory and Scriptural manner. In this relation, of course, the pastor is ex-officio a member of the Sunday School Board, the Officers and Teachers Association, and other such organizations as have the same in charge. To win the child for Christ is not difficult; to fail to win him is ruinous! Of all the organizations known to the church to the present moment, in importance, not one surpasses the Sunday School. OUTLINE OF CHAPTER FOURTEEN THE PASTOR AND CHURCH ORGANIZATIONS I. THE CHURCH ORGANIZATION a.The New Testament organization was simple. b.Organization, therefore, in the church has become complex. c.Over-organization, however, is easily possible. II. THE COMMITTEES CREATED a.Committees in church work are often a convenience. b.The pastor should be an ex-officio member of all committees. III. THE INCIDENTAL ORGANIZATIONS a.The organization of men may prove a power. b.Organization for Bible study is clearly essential. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 43: 03.15. XV. THE PASTOR AND SPECIAL SOUL-WINNING SERVICES ======================================================================== XV THE PASTOR AND SPECIAL SOUL-WINNING SERVICES OUR volume on The Perennial Revival is a plea for continuous soul-winning in connection with the regular Sunday and week-day meetings of the local church. We hold that the first objective of preaching is the winning of men to Christ, as conversion is the initial step to culture and regeneration must precede growth. But, however faithful a pastor may be in sounding the evangelistic note Sunday after Sunday, both the teachings of Scripture and the history of Christianity agree that there should be Pentecostal periods, the product of special and continuous meetings. It is not to be forgotten that the church was born of one such, and the plain record is found in the first and second chapters of the Book of Acts. There are people who object to these revival efforts. They argue that they are spasmodic, emotional, and unduly expensive, and that the products are short-lived and make but slight contribution to the real church which constitutes Christ’s Body. Let it be said, in answer, that history refutes the indictment. A large proportion of our best church members were saved in a season of special meetings. As for the cost of securing these converts, when Dr. J. Wilbur Chapman and his company held their simultaneous campaign in St. Paul, notwithstanding the fact that the evangelists were rather richly rewarded for their time, the treasurer reported that the cost per capita for the professed converts was a little less than $2.00. At Manchester, New Hampshire, before the Annual Meeting of the American Board for Foreign Missions, Dr. W. E. Bartlett, pastor of the First Congregational Church, Chicago, some years since said: “Last year all of the 33 Boston churches added but 430 to their number on profession of Faith. It cost $200, 000.00 or nearly $500.00 per capita to reach and win them with the Gospel, while in Chicago, 876 were added to 73 churches at a cost of $241,000.00 or $276.00 per capita for each convert.” However, we readily admit that this comparison is not fair on its face. The regular services account for most of the opportunities of evangelism and for other valuable work carried forward by a church, while evangelistic endeavor looks almost solely to immediate accessions. The comparison, however, is a complete answer to all the opposing charges. We proceed, therefore, to discuss ways and means for such special meetings, under The Essential Plans, The Intelligent Procedure, and The Desired Products. THE ESSENTIAL PLANS For such meetings we should prepare.—That preparation, while it will include much that may later be mentioned, involves the preacher first of all. A great many pastors are wondering why there is no revival in their church, and are searching assiduously for the cause of its spiritual dearth; but, their suspicion looks always to some circumstance of church, some failing in officials or membership or some hostile atmosphere of the very city or country place itself. Strange to say, this failing preacher seldom indulges in introspection! Let it be remembered when the disciples of Jesus, on one occasion, defaulted before an unclean spirit and asked their Master, “Why could not we cast him out?” He answered, “Because of your unbelief .” The song that sings “Lord Send us a Revival, and Let that Revival begin in me” is one that every pastor and evangelist should often employ. It is doubtful if ever any minister has witnessed both a deep and wide work of Grace within the limits of his parish and under his preaching, who had not first felt both the deadliness of sin, and the immortal worth of the soul held in the embrace of the same, and who, in consequence, knew something, yea much, of anxiety over the eternal fate of those who came within the sound of his voice or the reach of his personal influence. Self-preparation, then, we would assign to first place in essential plans. Associated with self-preparation is solicitous prayer. —Beyond doubt, among the dependable and successful pastor-evangelists of the close of the 19th century and the opening of the 20th, Dr. Reuben A. Torrey held high place. In speaking of preparation for a revival he said: “When a few of God’s children get thoroughly right with God themselves, absolutely surrendered to Him in person and purse, let them get together and pray; not a mechanical kind of prayer that does not amount to anything, but praying with Holy Ghost earnestness that will not take ‘no’ for an answer.” He recites how when the great Irish revival of 1860 began, a few humble men met together in a school house at Kells and commenced to pray for a revival. After they had been praying for several weeks they said, “Now we must go out and preach and testify.” They went out and failure faced them. They returned to their prayer room and remained until the Spirit of God was in possession of their hearts and lives, when they re-appeared to preach in power, and the Irish revival was on. We doubt if there has ever been any great work of Grace that did not originate as the Pentecostal Revival of the New Testament occurred. There you have the explanation of Pentecost itself, with its thousands saved, in the report of the prayer meeting in the upper room, “Where abode both Peter, and James and John, and Andrew, Philip, and Thomas, Bartholomew, and Matthew, James the son of Alphaeus, and Simon Zelotes, and Judas the brother of James. These all continued with one accord in prayer and supplication with the women” until “the day of Pentecost was fully come.” (Acts 1:13-14; Acts 2:1) There have been many attempted departures from this plan. Failure is written after each and every one of them. God’s plans require no improvement and permit no departure from essentials. The rule of the first Pentecost is the rule of all Pentecosts,—prayer first, testimony and preaching later. Reverse the order, and disappointment is your predestined experience. A recent writer said,—“False revivals abound; Singing Evangelism, without prayer, tears, or conviction of sin.” Yes, too often! But God’s way is not only the best way; it is the only way. To preparation and prayer must be added sane publicity.—When we speak of sane publicity we do not mean flamboyant advertisement of either the pastor or the invited evangelist. If he is a man widely known, the due and extensive announcement of his coming will naturally increase the audience. If he is unknown, the likelihood is that an extravagant write-up, excites more suspicion on the part of the thoughtful than confidence. However, there are Biblical and approved methods of publicity, that fit perfectly with all that is sane and spiritual. Some thirty-five years ago we went to the First Baptist Church of Fort Worth, Texas, to assist Dr. Luther Little in a twelve-day evangelistic campaign. Before our arrival in that city, he had preaching at six different points in the city, and among the men thus engaged were such notable names as Dr. Scarborough, Dr. Gillon, and others, who later became nationally famous. On our arrival, Dr. Little united the six meetings, and centralized all at the First Baptist Church. That method assured a full house with which to begin, and brought with it an atmosphere that was at once spiritual and expectant. The result was that some days before the meetings closed, Dr. Little contributed an article to one of the Southern Baptist Papers in which he said: “To date 330 persons have been converted and received into the fellowship of the church, and there is every expectation that this number will be tremendously increased before the twelve-day engagement is at an end.” If I were asked what was the most paralyzing influence to be faced in the average church to which I am called for a campaign of evangelism, I should be compelled to answer, “The utter lack of preparation.” Too many pastors seem to think that when their Board has voted favorably an invitation to a man of sufficient reputation, the full part of pastor and church has been filled, and they can complacently fold their arms and await the time of his arrival. The result is that he commonly begins on what we sometimes call “a cold collar.” He has to build his audience, create his atmosphere, effect, with the people hearing him, some spirit of consecration, and, above all, lift an unexpectant people to the level of expectancy. It often takes a week, two weeks, and even three weeks to accomplish these things, and with those of us who are pastor-evangelists, the work—all of which should have been done before our arrival—is only approaching development at our departure. This fault lies largely with the pastor. AN INTELLIGENT PROCEDURE Here I speak of the part to be performed by the preacher, whether it is the pastor or a visiting evangelist. His first job is that of— Securing some consecration on the part of church members.—Until the members of the church are willing to give time, and thought, and prayer to a protracted meeting, it will lack in power. It is our judgment and experience that at the first meeting there should be a call for the officers of the church, to know whether the elected leaders are present and ready for the campaign. If found absent, a meeting with them for counsel and prayer should be announced for the next day, and so on, until the last man of them is in line. It is not difficult to explain why the early church was a success. Its Board of Deacons were “men of honest report, full of the Holy Ghost and wisdom.” Those men were the financial trustees of the time. It is not likely that the elders were of less spiritual account. A godly, consecrated soul-winning official force, is a primary essential to either a temporal or perennial revival. One reason why the coming of an evangelist often creates a disturbance in the smooth fellowship, (that his opponents announce as having existed before his arrival,) is only the result of his having disturbed the spiritual slumber of certain church officials. But, while Billy Sunday was an adept at so doing, he was also an agent of redemption for both dead church members and men dead in trespasses and in sins. The plain truth is a disturbing pronouncement, and the presence of the Holy Ghost is as antagonistic to spiritual slumbers as an alarm clock is unwelcome to a sound sleeper ; but there could be no revival without both. In drawing the net, begin with youth.—The interest in a meeting is immediately and greatly enhanced by the response given to the first appeal for decision. If it is nil or small, superficial souls will immediately begin to get discouraged and even critical; if it is large and ready, both the superficial and the Spirit-guided will rejoice together and take on enthusiasm in both expectation and endeavor. That is why some of us prefer to preach a week to the church, and wait for the assembly of the Sunday School to make our first appeal for decision. In this connection let me recite two of my recent experiences, the first held in the Gospel Tabernacle of Rev. Morris Johnson, Racine, Wisconsin, and the second in the church of his brother, Rev. B. J. Johnson, the Salem Evangelical Free Church, Chicago, Illinois. In both instances I addressed the Sunday Schools on Sunday morning at the Sunday School hour, and asked for public confession on the part of those who accepted Christ as Saviour and Lord. In Racine ninety-three responded; in the Salem Free, Chicago, one hundred and thirty-seven. In both instances some good, but inexperienced men had complained to me that I was going on from day to day without giving the invitation to the unsaved; but when that invitation was finally given, and they saw the response, they came back with apology and expressed satisfaction. You can preach your heart out to men and women in the sixties and seventies, and small will be the result. Your after-meetings, instead of inspiring, will discourage; but you can present, in a simple, clear way, the Gospel plan of salvation to boys and girls in their teens, and young men and women in their twenties, and the result will be an inspiration to pastor and people. There are people who imagine that it means vastly more for a hardened old sinner to be saved than it does for a ten-year-old child to take his stand. Such are sadly mistaken! In the first instance, you save a soul, but the life has been lost; in the second instance you save a soul and redeem a life to the Lord. D’Israeli once said, “History of heroes is the history of youth.” And certainly, if you took from the church of God the contributions of youth, you would so far despoil her as to practically destroy her. Utilize new converts to increase interest.—It is said that the early Methodists in America made it an almost uniform custom, in their protracted meetings, to put the new converts back of the chancel railing, and, as from night to night they assembled there and their crowd increased, they became at once an inspiration to the workers and an appeal to the unsaved to quit their sinful companions and join this new and ever increasing company. The method was so excellent a one that we marvel at its having been forsaken! But a decline in Faith fruits in the loss of divinely improved methods. Methodism has, for some years, been drifting from orthodoxy and, at the same rate, declining in evangelistic interest and success. As a matter of personal experience, I have found it extremely helpful to have new converts come forward several times in a series of meetings, and to appoint one or two nights, near the close of a campaign, for the presence of all such, creating at the same time opportunity for testimony from them. The young men or women who are turning backs upon former companions are greatly strengthened by the feeling that in making this movement they have many companions turning also to journey with them. THE DESIRED PRODUCTS Special meetings should be planned for, and made to move toward, objectives. There are at least three of those that we would mention in this connection.— First, a conviction of sin.—That is necessarily primary in preaching. For its accomplishment, however, two things must be had. First, the plain presentation of God’s Word concerning man’s sinful estate. Until hearers are brought to believe the statement of Scripture, “The soul that sinneth it shall die,” they will remain indifferent. The only possibility of their acceptance of that statement as true rests with the Holy Ghost, whose office it is to convict of sin, “Of sin because they believe not on Christ.” However, no minister need entertain fears that when he has done his part of preaching God’s Word, the Holy Ghost will fail either him or it. The Old Testament promise will be fulfilled: “For as the rain cometh down, and the snow from heaven, and returneth not thither, but watereth the earth, and maketh it bring forth and bud, that it may give seed to the sower, and bread to the eater: So shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that winch I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it.” (Isaiah 55:10-11) The preacher’s part is to preach the Word; the Spirit’s work is to convict of sin. Where the first is done, the second is sure! The old hymn sung very constantly fifty years ago, when our fathers were faithful to God and trusted His Word, “Weeping will not save me— Through my face were bathed in tears, That could not allay my fears, Could not wash the sins of years,— Weeping will not save me,” was Scripturally true, but experimentally it is also true that salvation without a tearful sense of sin seldom or never occurs with those who have gone beyond their childhood. Moderism has well-nigh smothered out the agonizing emotions that the Spirit would willingly work, and to that extent it has also suppressed the spirit of evangelism which effects conviction for sin as the first step toward salvation. Conversion from sin is the further step.—Conviction in itself is not enough; it is a work of the Holy Ghost, but a beginning only. We have known men to be under conviction for years, but who never reached the stage of conversion or turning from sin to God. Evidently the reason in these cases is that some unholy idol retains its position in the heart, and God is not permitted occupation. Evan Roberts, the great Welsh evangelist, asserted that there were four steps to salvation. Beyond doubt, one could quote Bible texts to confirm his claim. They were, repent, confess, submit, obey. I should re-arrange them,—repent, submit or surrender oneself fully, confess openly, and prove that Faith by works. Finally, culture in Christ, should be accomplished.— It is a blessed day when a babe is born into a home; but if that babe does not grow into a man or woman, the joy of his arrival is soon eclipsed by the sadness of arrested development. Some of the most pathetic sights that we witness in this life are along that line! Once in a while we see a child wheeled about the street by an attendant. We learn, to our amazement, that though infant in size, he is fifteen or twenty summers old! It is a sight to make angels weep! One case I knew where a boy grew to manhood in size and years, but, in mind, remained a babe. That is sadder still! And yet, a sadder sight is so common as to become a subject of little attention and even less interest, namely, an undeveloped soul,—a Christian upon whom spiritual infantile paralysis has laid its hand, and the character, that was promised in the hour of conversion, has failed to materialize! Christ said “I am come that ye might have life, and that ye might have it more abundantly.” OUTLINE OF CHAPTER FIFTEEN THE PASTOR AND SPECIAL SOUL-WINNING SERVICES I. THE ESSENTIAL FLANS a.For such meetings we should prepare. b.Associated with Self-preparation is solicitous prayer. c.To preparation and prayer must be added sane publicity. II. AN INTELLIGENT PROCEDURE a.Securing some consecration on the part of church members. b.In drawing the net, begin with youth. c.Utilize new converts to increase interest. III. THE DESIRED PRODUCTS a.First, a conviction of sin. b.Conversion from sin is the further step. c.Culture in Christ should be accomplished. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 44: 03.16. XVI. THE PASTOR AND THE MISSION PROBLEM ======================================================================== XVI THE PASTOR AND THE MISSION PROBLEM “Go YE therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world” (Matthew 28:19-20) No volume of pastoral problems would be complete without a chapter upon this subject. In our volume The Perennial Revival we discussed “The Perennial Revival and World Evangelization,” but in this chapter we approach the subject from another point of view, namely that of the pastor. THE MISSION PROBLEM That there are many problems now connected with the work of missions at home and abroad will be readily conceded. Perhaps never since William Carey set sail for India have those problems been greater in number or more serious in character. In this brief chapter we shall attempt no more than a flashlight illumination of a few of the more important ones. There is the problem of inspiration.—No church official has an opportunity, even approaching the pastor’s position in this matter. Several times a week he has the ear of his congregation. They look to him for leadership and listen to him for inspiration. His opportunity of exciting interest in the Cause of Christ at home and abroad, and of kindling the fires of enthusiasm, is immeasurable! Of all the themes that belong naturally to the pulpit, no one of them should thrill the saved, excite in them the enthusiasm of an endeavor, and create in them a willingness to send or go,—as the Lord might demand, —as the challenge of missions—the challenge of setting free immortal souls, held by the iron chains of sin; and of civilizing and bringing into a state of moral and intellectual culture, converts from heathenism. The problem of information.—It is the pastor’s responsibility to know world conditions; to sound, by study, the sunken estate of those who have never heard the Gospel. We admit that these are times when the educators of the world, and even the general public, make most unreasonable demands upon the preacher of the Gospel. They expect him to be an expert in every direction. The modern standardizing scheme is an effort to make of him a man as well acquainted with the law as any practitioner at the Bar; as familiar with medicine as any allopath; as widely read as any Doctor of letters; as intimately in touch with the affairs of State as any politicians; as deeply involved in civic interest as any devoted reformer; and so on, to the end of conceivable human accomplishments. Such expectations are, upon their face, absurd; such standardizing schemes are, by nature, insane. But this exaction will be conceded by all thoughtful men, that the minister should surpass at the point of his own profession; and, since he is commissioned to labor with and for a world of dying souls, he should be so far familiar with their spiritual estate as to intelligently diagnose their needs, and, by imparting this acquired information to his people, he should rouse them to saving endeavor. No source of information quite equals the direct one. Seeing is not only believing; it is understanding. If every pastor were so situated, financially and with leisure time, as to visit the greater missions of the round world, and learn the degraded condition of men and the consequent need of our saving Gospel, it would indeed be well worth his while. But, books on missions, missionary magazines, addresses of returned missionaries, mission reports in even the daily secular press, and other sources of information multiply, so that no pastor has a right either to ignore or neglect them. If his people are to be instructed and inspired, the pastor must be informed. The problem of continuation.—“Go ye therefore, and teach all nations” is a command of wide sweep. It is all right to commence at home; to witness in Jerusalem; to be interested in getting the Gospel to Judaea; but it is just as essentially Christ’s command to carry it “to Samaria and to the uttermost parts of the earth” The only local limitations laid upon missions is “the end of the earth”; and the only time limitation is “the end of the age” The current of the times is square against the spirit of the great commission. Materialism, the philosophy of the present, little concerns itself with soul-interest. The love of pleasure, now so dominant in the world, repudiates the thought of self-sacrifice for the sake of others. Intellectualism often finds the realization of its self-ambitions so unsatisfactory, as to leave its questioning whether the ignorance of the heathen were not better undisturbed. The churches in the world too often are tempted to become of the world. To buck world philosophies and break them down, to bring the saved to be searchers after the lost, and to stimulate them to effectiveness in that endeavor,—these are lines along which lie— THE PASTOR’S OBLIGATIONS But how shall he discharge them? In answer to this question, there are a few suggestions. First, he should lead in interest and gifts.—If the pastor is not concerned about the deadly danger of the unsaved at home and abroad, neither will his people be. Hosea said, “And there shall be, like people, like priest”; (Hosea 4:9) Perhaps our better rendition of it is, “Like priest, like people.” There are pastors who imagine that they have no obligation to give to the current expense of the church they serve. I have yet to know any church, served by such a pastor, that became famed for its generosity in support of its own work; and I have yet to know any church that would give largely to missions, unless the pastor set the example. He should utilize intelligent organizations.—It is a fact that the New Testament church is not an institution of multiplied offices, committees and intricate organizations; but it is not a fact that it is wholly destitute of the same. When, in the church at Jerusalem, there arose occasion to have daily ministration funds apportioned to the widows of the congregation, the twelve advised the creation of the diaconate; and when Jesus Christ delivered the Great Commission, He converted the eleven disciples into “a committee of the whole” for its execution. The average church holds in its membership certain individuals who have a natural zeal for missions at home and abroad; such should be brought together and, in a Board or Committee, set to the task of teaching and inspiring others. Reason demands, and revelation approves! There are pastors who pride themselves on the abolition of all committees and who have little or no sympathy with organization. They imagine, vainly we think, that the pulpit should direct and determine all that is undertaken. Church history hardly justifies such egotism. S. D. Gordon brings this out in a striking illustration. Christ had expected His Cause to conquer the world and He had committed it to Peter, John and James—faithful men. When He was asked, “If they fail, then what?” His answer was, “I have no other plan.” This example is worthy of a pastor’s imitation. The pastor must counsel about fields and men.— These are difficult days in the whole matter of methods and message. The so-called “Inclusive Policy,” adopted by many of the Denominational Boards, and paraded as a method of having brethren, who do not and cannot see eye to eye, affect a close fellowship by working together, has proven a fallacy. The prophet’s question “Can two walk together, except they be agreed?” (Amos 3:3) is still pertinent. The honest pastor believes that the Bible is God’s inspired revelation to men; that Christ, the Virgin born Son of Mary, is also God manifest in the flesh. He cannot possibly approve Unitarian representation upon the foreign field, or ask his people to support a gospel that he believes to be “another gospel” and consequently “no gospel.” The mists that have been generated by Darwin— modernists are so deep that the militant church is in grave danger of false steps and strokes, and the pastor is under obligation to so rise above that mist that he may direct both the course and conduct of his membership, in order that they may not be fighting with the foes of Christ or against His friends. Nearly 2,000 years ago John said: “For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. . . . If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed”: (2 John 1:7; 2 John 1:10) In our day that company of deceivers has been immensely increased, and the pastor’s task is complicated accordingly. But this much, at least, may be accepted as certain, that the pastor is set to save his people from following such, or giving any support whatever to men or fields that repudiate the saving power of the shed Blood of the Son of God. However, to make such demands upon one who is only human would be practically unreasonable were it not for— THE LORD’S PROMISES “Lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world” (or age). (Matthew 28:20) These eleven faithful servants of the Saviour, while named in this connection “disciples,” are known to us as “apostles,”—the sent ones. To such this text seems peculiarly applied. The missionary is assured of Christ’s presence.— What that means in the way of encouragement in inciting daring and in undertaking what seems to be impossible, only the missionary himself fully understands. The endurance of Carey for years with such meager visible results, the patient waiting of a Morrison for the Lord to manifest Himself in power, the endurance of Clark in Africa as he faced a hostile climate, beasts, serpents and cannibals—“these all endured as seeing Him who is invisible.” Had you taken away from any one of them the deep-seated conviction that Christ was with him, his courage would have failed and the unpromising task would have been voluntarily surrendered long before the first fruits of his endeavor appeared. Beyond all question the inspiration of the early apostles, in their post-pentecostal endeavor, was in the conviction that Peter expressed, when that day in Jerusalem he declared the faith of his fellow-disciples: “This Jesus hath God raised up, whereof we all are witnesses. Therefore being by the right hand of God exalted, and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost, he hath shed forth this, which we now see and hear. . . . Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ.” (Acts 2:32; Acts 2:36) It is a significant fact that the Great Commission is preceded by the great declaration, “All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth!” To believe that is the first equipment of missionary endeavor. Robert Speer, easily one of the most noted of missionary enthusiasts on the American continent, said some years ago, “One great weakness of our Christian life today, in our colleges and outside of the colleges, is that we have thinned it out. We have crowded out the miracle and the magic and the supernatural. We have made it just a veneer, a moral purpose or an admiration; and we have lost those great dynamic energies by which alone the thing can ever really be. ‘I am crucified with Christ; nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me!” Who doubts that this is the dynamic of missionary endeavor. It is great to have Christ with us; it is even greater to have Christ in us. “All things are possible to them that believe,” because God is in them, and all things are possible to God. The Age done limits this promise— “Alway, unto the end of the age” The Bible recognizes the Church period. The ordinances are given for the same. At the institution of the Lord’s Supper, He said: “As oft as ye eat this bread and drinks this cup, ye do show the Lord’s death till He come!” That is the consummation of the Age and the only limit in time to the Christian’s responsibility to proclaim the Gospel. Friday, May 29th, 1935, this great audience-room overflowed into these galleries beyond the curtain, and scores stood through the entire service. Sixty-six young men and women were graduated from the Northwestern Bible School. Eighteen of them had declared their willingness to devote their lives to the foreign fields, to live among, and try to lift up, by making known Christ to the peoples that have sat in great darkness. The rest of the company would undertake a kindred work in the home land. Who can measure, or even imagine the final result? A hundred years ago, William Carey caught the vision of attempting a world for Christ. The result of that dream is given in The Annals of Light for Heathen Lands. One day Count Zinzendorf offered room on his great estate to a company of emigrants who came out of the Moravian mountains in northern Bohemia, under the leadership of one Christian David; under the inspiration of John Huss’ doctrines, on those estates a town was built, industries established, and a Missionary Training School was born; and, today, the Moravians, though comparatively small in number, have carried the message of life and light to the uttermost parts of the earth. Add to the efforts of all the heroes of the faith, including Francis Xavier and his company of Catholics, and every Protestant endeavor from Carey’s day until now, and yet we face the sad fact that two-thirds of the world still wait the knowledge of Christ. It amounts to a Macedonian cry that arises from every benighted land of the earth, a cry more anguished than those who make it understand; but a cry which has entered into the ears of the Lord of Sabaoth, “Come over and help us!” How many are there who will answer in the language of Isaiah, “Here am I, send me!” OUTLINE OF CHAPTER SIXTEEN THE PASTOR AND THE MISSION PROBLEM I. THE MISSION PROBLEM a.There is the problem of inspiration. b.The problem of information. c.The problem of continuation. II. THE PASTOR’S OBLIGATIONS a.First he should lead in interest and gifts. b.He should utilize intelligent organizations. c.The pastor must counsel about fields and men. III. THE LORD’S PROMISES a.The missionary is assured of Christ’s presence. b.The age alone limits this promise. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 45: 04.0.1. SEVEN NEW TESTAMENT SOUL-WINNERS ======================================================================== Seven New Testament Soul-Winners BY William Bell RILEY, A.M., D.D., L.L.D., Pastor, First Baptist Church, Minneapolis, Minn. Author of “Pastoral Problems” “Revival Sermons” “My Bible; An Apologetic” 40 Volumes covering the entire Bible, etc., etc. Copyright © 1939 by WM. B. EERDMANS PUBLISHING COMPANY Grand Rapids Michigan ======================================================================== CHAPTER 46: 04.0.2. FOREWORD ======================================================================== Foreword Recently a gifted and experienced layman, who is at the same time a capable author of many books, wrote me concerning my volume, Revival Sermons, as follows: “They are filled not only with much sweet, edifying truth attractively administered, but they tell, without the shadow of a doubt, the line of work for which you were divinely fitted.” He further admonishes to this effect, “The two gifts with which your brethren have credited you, ‘Pastor and Evangelist’, move in such different spheres, as to be impossible in one and the same man.” We cannot fully accept this course of reasoning, even though it comes from one whose depth of conviction and clarity of mind we have long admired. For half a century, I have enjoyed to the full the work of pastor, but through that entire period I have been privileged, by indulgent churches and sympathetic officers, to divide my time almost equally between pastoral service and soul-winning evangelism. It was a pleasure therefore, to present to my own congregation these seven New Testament samples of soul winners. In climaxing them with, “JESUS the Supreme Soul-Winner,” I had at least the precedent of Paul’s conduct in his Epistle to the Hebrews eleventh chapter, for it is well known that when he desired to emphasize faith, he selected as his first illustration, Abel, the second son of Adam, and while introducing in the argument, Enoch, Noah, Abraham, and others, he reached his climax in Hebrews 12:2, presenting JESUS as the perfect believer; in fact, the Author and Finisher of faith. So in this series, few will question that John the Baptist was a pioneer in soul-winning work, or that Andrew, Philip, Ananias, Peter, and Paul, present the soul winner in ascending form; but, that the subject should find a fit conclusion, the incomparable CHRIST had to be included. In the delivery of this series, I was conscious of a blessing, not only in my own experience, but also that it had its effect in inspiring others to new and more urgent endeavors. We are fully persuaded that the first and highest duty of the Pastor himself is not the care of the sheep only, but the accomplishment of conversion of sinners to CHRIST. I have therefore dared to dedicate this volume to the two classes mentioned among the gifts of our ascended Lord, “Pastors” and “Evangelists.” If it shall bring inspiration to either, I will have an adequate return; and if, perchance, to both, my joy will be double. W. B. Riley ======================================================================== CHAPTER 47: 04.1. JOHN BAPTIST – THE PIONEER SOUL-WINNER ======================================================================== John Baptist – The Pioneer Soul-Winner “Again the next day after John stood, and two of his disciples; And looking upon Jesus as he walked, he saith, Behold the Lamb of God! And the two disciples heard him speak, and they followed Jesus. Then Jesus turned, and saw them following, and saith unto them, What seek ye? They said unto him, Rabbi, (which is to say, being interpreted, Master,) where dwellest thou? He saith unto them, Come and see. They came and saw where he dwelt, and abode with him that day: for it was about the tenth hour” (John 1:35-39) I AM beginning with you, this morning, a series of seven sermons on Soul- Winning. I propose to bring from the New Testament the names of seven men whose experiences are recorded by the pen of inspiration, and who are worthy examples of this superb work. Those seven men will be:- John, Baptist - The Pioneer Soul-Winner Andrew - The Fraternal Soul-Winner Philip - The Faithful Soul-Winner Ananias - The Skillful Soul-Winner Peter - The Popular Soul-Winner Paul - The Passionate Soul-Winner JESUS - The Supreme Soul-Winner It will be conceded, without controversy, that soul -winning is essential in the development of the individual Christian’s life, and is a sine qua non in the on-going of the church of GOD. We doubt not that these seven names will be accepted as the most outstanding of the personal workers known to the New Testament. I begin with John the Baptist because he was a pioneer in this work, and I invite your attention to three suggestions born of this inspired record of his success: - He Introduced the Saviour; - He Proclaimed Substitution; - He Secured Disciples. He Introduced the Saviour He affirmed that JESUS was the Messiah of promise. The Old Testament prophets had been describing the coming One under varied figures: - The Psalmist as THE ANOINTED ONE (Psalms 45:7 and Isaiah 61:1); - Isaiah as THE LEADER AND COMMANDER (Isaiah 55:4); - Daniel as THE MESSIAH (Daniel 9:25), and other features of His character too numerous to mention. But now, if John be right, He has arrived, and to that fact he refers when, seeing JESUS coming unto him, with uplifted finger, he said:- “Behold the Lamb of God!” To be sure, the language itself suggested sacrifice and substitution, but the subject of both, according to the prophets, was to be THE MESSIAH. “Familiarity breeds contempt.” We can hardly know what such an announcement meant. Keep in mind that this was the Person of prophetic promise, and for centuries the faithful had looked for him; and John’s announcement would almost be akin to the astonishment of the “shout” that shall enlist the instant and ecstatic attention of saints when, in His Second Coming, he shall cleave the sky and they shall hear “the sound of His voice.” In one of the chapels of Oxford University there is a beautiful stained-glass window decorated on the outside with sacred pictures of the Old Testament and on the inside with corresponding pictures from the New, so that when the sunlight falls upon the window the two are blended; and those who study them sitting or standing inside the sacred enclosure see at one and the same time the Old Testament type and its New Testament fulfillment. For instance: Abraham’s sacrifice of Isaac on the outside, and CHRIST on the Cross on the inside. A writer, calling attention to this, declares it beautifully illustrates the connection between the Old Testament and the New, and that which pictures can do (and in this instance do do) language accomplishes as well, for pictures may be verbally painted. John’s exclamation “Behold the Lamb of God!” was the New Testament interpretation of the Old Testament promises of the Messiah to come. Time has in no wise changed this necessity. If we will be personal workers today we have to point men to the CHRIST and declare His Messiahship, His Saviourhood. John declared himself His servant only. In answer to the query, “Who art thou?” we have him replying:- “I am the voice of one crying in the wilderness, Make straight the way of the Lord . . .” (John 1:22-23). And later: “Whose shoe’s latchet I am not worthy to unloose”; And still further:- “He . . . is preferred before me . . .” (John 1:27). He assumes, then, not only second place, but a servant’s place. It was of minor importance what people thought of him, but it was all important that they should know His Master, His Saviour, His Lord! Is not the present trouble with church membership at that point? We do not appreciate the Saviourhood of JESUS CHRIST; we do not realize the dire need men have of Him. When Dwight L. Moody was yet alive, he said one day: “I believe that if an angel were to wing his way from earth up to Heaven, and were to say that there was one poor, ragged boy, without father or mother, with no one to care for him and teach him the way of life; and if GOD were to ask who among the angels were willing to come down to this earth and live here for fifty years and lead that one to JESUS CHRIST, every angel in Heaven would volunteer to go. Even Gabriel, who stands in the presence of the Almighty, would say, ‘Let me leave my high and lofty position, and let me have the luxury of leading one soul to JESUS CHRIST’.” And yet there are thousands of His professed servants who never apply for that privilege or even deem it important that they undertake that task! GOD pity us, and let the example of John instruct us! He emphasized the Nazarene’s infinite superiority. He not only reminded them that CHRIST was preferred before him, but a little later he said of CHRIST:- “He must increase, but I must decrease.” (John 3:30). In other words, he clearly apprehended the infinite superiority of JESUS. He did not belong to the company of men who instituted comparison between JESUS of Nazareth and other prophets, or a comparison between the CHRIST of Scriptures and the 20th century philosopher, and pay Him the doubtful compliment of being a possible superior. Carnegie Simpson says:- “It were an easy task to compare Him with other saints or heroes of history and show that He was morally better than they. To do this would be, however, but to say the least part of the truth about the character of JESUS. Let us state the complete truth at once. He had not simply less sin and more virtue than others. His supremacy is not comparative; it is absolute. He is the stainless man, the sinless Being;” yea, and He also is the God-man, the world’s one and only hope! When John attracted the attention of his disciples to Him, he meant to say no less of Him. Are we telling men of this wonderful One, this “Counsellor”, this “mighty God”, this “everlasting Father”, this “Prince of Peace”? If not, why not? He Proclaimed Substitution He presented Him as the Paschal Lamb. “Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world” (John 1:29). Go back to Exodus 12:3 f. and you will find a vivid description of this Paschal appointment:- “Speak ye unto all the congregation of Israel, saying, In the tenth day of this month they shall take to them every man a lamb, according to the house of their fathers, a lamb for an house:” Pharaoh had so often hardened his heart against GOD, that the Lord had brought upon him the tenth and last of His humbling plagues. This time the first-born in every house was to die. For every Jewish family a perfect lamb, or its equivalent, was to be slain; but the killing was not sufficient, for it was not the death but the blood - the life - that was to save Israel from this judgment. “And ye shall take a bunch of hyssop, and dip it in the blood that is in the basin, and strike the lintel and the two side posts with the blood that is in the basin; and none of you shall go out at the door of his house until the morning. For the Lord will pass through to smite the Egyptians, and when he seeth the blood upon the lintel, and on the two side posts, the Lord will pass over the door, and will not suffer the destroyer to come in unto your houses to smite you” (Exodus 12:22-23). If one would know what anxiety was brought to Israel, what infinite agony it imposed upon the Egyptians, and what was the extent and value of the miracle of Grace to believers through the shed Blood, then he might also comprehend something of the value of “the blood of Jesus Christ His Son” which “cleanseth us from all sin” (1 John 1:7). What is the problem of life, anyhow, other than finding salvation for sin; and to what source has mortal man looked with any degree of success, save JESUS? Charles Darwin started his life as an ardent believer. His early studies were with the view to the ministry, but his grandfather’s philosophy of Evolution undid his faith and made of him an infidel. Admiral Sir James Sullivan tells us that Darwin often expressed to him his conviction that it was useless to send missionaries to the Fuegians, probably the lowest of the human race. Sir James, on the other hand, had replied that he doubted if any beings existed, too low to comprehend the simple message of the Gospel of CHRIST. Finally, when the Fuegian Islands were dotted with churches, and the cannibals had become Christians, Darwin admitted his mistake and sent a Five Pound Note by the hand of Sir James to help on the Cause! What finer proof of John Baptist’s claim than is found in that fact! Many a savage island has been influenced after a kindred manner. Missionaries have visited them and found them living on so low a moral level as to be little, if any, above the brutes. Without money to entice them, without armies to compel them, they have brought to them JESUS and His love, and in a few years have seen the same change that Joseph Clark witnessed in the heart of Africa, - naked savagery beautifully garbed; low lust lifted to the level of pure love; cruelty displaced by kindness; selfishness by the spirit of sacrifice; heathenism changed to Christianity. There is but one Who can work it, and He is “the Lamb of God” whose Blood “cleanseth us from all sin.” John saw Him receive the Spirit’s seal. A. J. Gordon, in his classical work, The Ministry of the Spirit, tells us that one of the most instructive writers on Hebrew worship and ritual says that it was the custom for the priest to whom the service pertained, having selected a lamb from the flock, to inspect it with the most minute scrutiny, in order to discover if it was without physical defect, and then to seal it with the temple seal, thus certifying that it was fit for sacrifice and for food. The Father’s seal upon JESUS CHRIST was set in the descent of the HOLY SPIRIT upon Him, - a testimony to His Sonship and the seal of His separation unto sacrifice; and John saw that, and, referring to it, said:- “But he that sent me to baptize with water, the same said unto me, Upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending, and remaining on him, the same is he which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost” (John 1:33). Little wonder, then, that He declared Him to be the Son of GOD. When Billy Sunday was about to enter upon his Boston campaign, he was consulted by a newspaper reporter, and in the interview he asked Billy what was the matter with our country. To this question, that successful evangelist replied:- “The curses of America today are Modernism, Materialism, Humanism, and Communism. They absorb everything but the truth. They deny everything but falsehood. They are tunneling under our faith and homes and churches and government. A keg of powder in one hand and a fuse and a box of matches in the other, they are teaching our boys and girls in most of our schools and colleges that you have no mind; you have no soul; you are a piece of animal machinery, and you respond to the stimuli. In other words, there is no GOD; there is no Devil; there is no Heaven; there is no hell; there is no right; there is no wrong! There is nothing but you, and you are nothing but an animal descended from a monkey or a gorilla. What you want you have a right to have. Today the individual opinion is the seat of authority. “I brand that numbskull philosophy as anarchy, pure and simple. America can be saved from these four, and all other curses by the old and ever new Cure, the Gospel of our Lord JESUS CHRIST.” He is the Son of GOD! He is the Saviour of men! Fosdick once preached a sermon on “The Peril of Worshipping JESUS”, but the language employed was misleading. The true peril is that of profession without conviction, Christianity without CHRIST. The world will never come to know GOD aside from JESUS of Nazareth; He and GOD are One! “ . . . He that hath seen me hath seen the Father . . .” (John 14:9). “He that hath the Son hath the Father also.” “There is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved” (Acts 4:12). John’s Gospel, - “behold the Lamb” - then, remains the Gospel of today - the lone Gospel; and, thanks be to His name, THE SUFFICIENT GOSPEL! He Secured Disciples First of all he made friends to himself. These two disciples who followed JESUS were John’s disciples first! That is essential in successful soul-winning. The man who cannot win his fellows to him will never win them to the Lord. That is the chief difficulty in the personal work of some people; they lack winsomeness; or they lack tact; oftentimes they lack the personal appeal; and sometimes - even though blessed with all of these they lack interest - men and women alike fail or refuse to employ the influence that should be exerted upon others for CHRIST. I have read somewhere of how two strangers happened to attend the same church for several Sundays. No one spoke to either of them. One said:- “I will give that church one more chance. If nobody speaks to me next Sunday I will never go there again.” The other man said:- “I don’t like this sort of thing. If no one speaks to me next Sunday, I’ll speak to someone.” As it happened, the usher placed the first man in a seat in front of the second and, as often occurs, no one greeted either of them. As the first man was about to stalk out of the church forever, the second man turned and put out his hand and said:- “Good morning, Sir. I’m glad to see you. Fine sermon, wasn’t it?” They were both pleased at having made a friend, and continued to come. It is an illustration that needs no application. In case one is too dumb to see the main point, then I will find out whether it had any significance for you at the close of this service. John deliberately turned over his disciples to JESUS. That should be the work of every Christian; in fact, that is the supreme service that one can render to the Son of GOD; and when I say “that one can render” I mean that “anyone can render,” - I care not how high, how intellectual; I care not how lofty, how cultured in mind, how exalted in office. Gladstone, seeking the salvation of his humblest fellow by pointing him to the Son of GOD, is Gladstone at his best. The Christian Index, some years ago, rehearsed the story of how when outlaws murdered Governor Stuenburg of Idaho, William E. Borah - now a conspicuous Senator - was the prosecuting attorney, and Clarence Darrow - the uniform friend of criminals - was the defender. On a certain afternoon, in connection with the trial, Darrow usurped some hours in a tirade against religion, against government, against home, against everything that good men are accustomed to regard as desirable, and wound up with a string of abuse against CHRIST and the Bible. Borah sat like a statue through these hours, and when his colleagues were ready to spring to their feet in answer to the insults, he motioned them down. At last the defense rested, and then the great lawyer- statesman stood up, walked directly in front of the jurors. He looked at Darrow for a moment; he looked to the face of the judge, and then turned to the waiting crowd in the courtroom. Turning from them to the jurors, he said:- “Gentlemen, when I heard the attorney from Chicago uttering his sneers at your religion and my religion, there came back to me, as there must have come back to you, the recollection of the time when, as a little boy, I stood at my mother’s knee and heard her read from our Bible.” Then, with a swift, sweeping gesture of his mighty arm at Darrow, his voice rang out through the courtroom: “Too late, too late, after two thousand years to cry ‘fraud’ to the God-man of Calvary! Too late, too late, in the dawn of the twentieth century, to write ‘imposter’ on the brow of the Figure on the Cross!” Thank GOD for the man, who, like John the Baptist, can lay his talents at the feet of JESUS! And, like John the Baptist, count it the climax of Christian accomplishment to win one convert to Him! When Roy L. Smith was yet in Minneapolis, in one of his sermons he said:- “You men who have professed loyalty to JESUS CHRIST, compare your loyalty to Him with your loyalty to other things. The man who is loyal to his favorite team takes time off for the games and pays admission at the gate, and keeps informed as to the team’s progress, and boosts hardest when it is most in need. The man who is loyal to his club behaves after a kindred manner, keeping his dues paid up and regarding its rules and regulations. “Can a man be loyal to CHRIST and use nothing of time, money or interest for Him?” Nay, verily! I tell you, brethren, the more I reflect upon these things, the more I am convinced for myself and for you, that our deadly indifference to the unsaved about us, our unconcern for the un-churched, is the proof that our profession is more shoddy than substantial, more meaningless than meaningful, more a matter of respectability than of the Christian religion. What John commenced, CHRIST completed. He pointed his two disciples to JESUS. One day with CHRIST made them forever disciples of the Man from Nazareth. Taylor Smith tells us that the great Scottish scholar, Professor Duncan - familiarly known to his students as “the Rabbi” because of his Oriental scholarship - was one day found by his biographer talking to a poor old woman. Wishing to speak to Dr. Duncan, the narrator lingered near and heard the learned man say, as he put his hand on the old lady’s bent shoulders,- “Now, you have promised to seek; only remember, seeking won’t save you. But if you seek, you will find, and finding, He will save you!” What more can I say this morning? What more need I say? It is just as true this moment as it was when John announced it:- “Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world” (John 1:29). Look and Live! ======================================================================== CHAPTER 48: 04.2. ANDREW – THE FRATERNAL SOUL-WINNER ======================================================================== Andrew – The Fraternal Soul-Winner “One of the two which heard John speak, and followed him, was Andrew, Simon Peter’s brother. He first findeth his own brother Simon, and saith unto him, We have found the Messias, which is, being interpreted, the Christ. And he brought him to Jesus. And when Jesus beheld him, he said, Thou art Simon the son of Jona: thou shalt be called Cephas, which is by interpretation, A stone.” (John 1:40-42) OUR subject this morning is “Andrew - The Fraternal Soul-Winner.” Our statement of theme rests with the fact that Andrew was no sooner convinced that he had found the CHRIST than he went after his own brother Simon. Dr. Alexander Maclaren, in his sermon on “The First Disciples” remarks that these two followed behind the Master, fancying themselves unobserved, not wanting to speak to him, and possibly with some notion of tracking Him to his home, with the hope that they might interview him at a later time. “But He who notices the first beginnings of return to Him and always comes to meet men, and is better to them than their wishes, will not let them steal behind Him uncheered, nor leave them to struggle with diffidence and delay. So He turns to them, and the events which I have read in the verses that follow as my text for this morning, ensue.” Permit me, therefore, to bring to you the following suggestions: Acquaintance with JESUS: Introducing a Brother: Accomplishing a Convert. Acquaintance With JESUS Introduction is commonly the first step looking to acquaintance. John Baptist introduced Andrew to JESUS, and Andrew followed John’s example. In one of my scrap books I find this clipping. “What did you preach about on Sunday?” was the question asked of a city pastor the other day. “I preached about Andrew” was the reply, “and do you know, I found him a most interesting character.” “What was there about him that was remarkable?” “Well, I do not suppose you would call him a great man, but the significant thing about him was that every time he is mentioned in Scripture he was introducing someone to JESUS. Would that we had more of the Andrew type! More men who are thus engaged; more Sunday School teachers who adopted that practice: more Deacons who made introductions to JESUS their business: more preachers who copied Andrew’s example. I read a few days since from that same scrap book another clipping that brought the blush to my face, a sense of the sin of neglect to my soul. It related how a pastor, passing a big department store, suddenly turned through the door and went straight to its office. Finding the proprietor, he said to him, “Mr. T - I have talked with you on many subjects, but never yet have I engaged in conversation with you on the subject of my chief business in the world. Would you give me a few minutes?” Being taken to a more private office, the minister said, as he drew his New Testament from his pocket, “My business is to show men to CHRIST, and I have neglected you.” In a few minutes the great merchant was looking at him through tears, and he said, “Pastor, I am seventy- six years of age. I was born in this city; I have been in contact with more than five hundred ministers since I came into this business, and with many times five hundred church officials; but you are the only man who has ever yet spoken to me about my soul.” Minneapolis multiplies that story many fold this morning, to the shame of us all. When and where did you, did I, seek to introduce a man to CHRIST. A review of this matter will not be comforting, even for those of us who have enjoyed the same; and ought to bring deep conviction to those who have never seriously considered such a step. Acquaintance with JESUS depends upon companionship. When these two had spent the day with Him they had no doubt as to who He was, what His mission to the world, nor yet as to his Messiahship - his Saviourhood. In a city where a revival was going on, a widowed mother, incited to interest in her own child, said to little Alex, “Allie, you joined the church tonight; tell me what led you to want to be a Christian? “Was it what I have taught you? Did your Sunday School teacher lead you to CHRIST? Was it the preaching of our pastor? What?” Looking up into her face, he replied, “No, Mamma; it was none of these. Do you remember when we were coming here from St. Albans. I wanted to go on the engine and ride with the engineer, and you wouldn’t let me, until the conductor told you that he was a good man and no harm could come to me! “Well, when about ready to start from the station where I first went in, the engineer knelt down for just a moment, and then got up and started his locomotive. When we stopped at another station he knelt down again, closed his eyes and said something. So I asked him, ‘Are you praying?’ ‘Oh, yes, my little lad, I pray constantly. I have to; there are over two hundred people on this train entrusted to my care. A little mistake on my part, or failure to do my duty, might cause them all to lose their lives and I have never had an accident.’ “And Mamma, I have never forgotten it.” That engineer cultivated acquaintance with the Lord. Time is required for a true cultivation of CHRIST. Andrew, with John, spent a day with JESUS. Have you ever spent a whole day with Him? What a marvelous day it must have been! What a wonderful opportunity to listen to His words, to sense His spirit, to be inspired by His teaching, to have Heaven itself illumined by His instruction, and life made meaningful as He talked with these two. The difficulty with the average Christian is lack of acquaintance with CHRIST. We do not spend enough time with Him to get to know him. Henry Clay Trumbull once said, “The more we think about CHRIST, the more we will think of Him”. And the parallel statement would be equally so: the more we fellowship with Him and listen to Him, the more ready will we become to speak for him, and win others to His discipleship. Dr. Howard Kelley is a man whose name is known all over America, and is a synonym for high Christian living; and his advice, as to the secret of success in this matter, if we are to grow from faith to faith, is: “We must step by step and day by day acquaint ourselves with the Word of GOD. We must give it free course in our lives, and meditate also upon its teachings under the recognized guidance of GOD’s HOLY SPIRIT. Only in this way can we realize in time those deeper things of GOD which belong to his experienced followers.” Now, since CHRIST is no longer with us in visible form, the only way to cultivate His acquaintance is by prayer, and through the knowledge of His Word; and that fellowship which comes by the work of the HOLY SPIRIT in the heart, revealing CHRIST in all His fullness. But, Andrew thus becoming acquainted with JESUS himself is recorded as Introducing His Brother Experience with Him enabled Andrew to witness for Him. So it is with men to this hour! It is the man who knows JESUS best, who can, and will, bear the best testimony. When I was graduating from college, Will Baird was one of the loved circle that received the diploma of Hanover in ‘85. Sam Moffatt had graduated a year before, and after finishing a course in the Presbyterian Theological Seminary at Chicago - which in those days was far sounder than it is now - they set off together for Korea where they, with their wives, accomplished that marvelous work to which the attention of the Christian world has been called more than once. Early in the life of that mission they adopted an unwritten law that no one should be admitted to full membership in the church until he had shown his zeal by persuading another to become a Christian. Little wonder that the church marked such progress; and that the Korean Christians, before these two consecrated souls laid aside their endeavors, exceeded 350,000. But lest anybody should imagine that this was to be accredited to the names of Moffatt and Baird, let it be further known that the explanation was in the conduct of the laymen, who not only won another man or woman to CHRIST before being received into full membership in the church, but who were accustomed to finish the Lord’s day services with the common salutation, “Now that the meeting is over, let us go out and engage again in personal work.” Their behavior is in keeping alike with CHRIST’s practice and CHRIST’s precept. The truly convinced man can commonly persuade others. Andrew, fully won by JESUS, was fitted to be a personal worker. We sometimes imagine that one has to be highly educated in order to be successful in this endeavor. Our mission boards have often taken the stand that only the university and finished theological seminary school product should receive appointment to the foreign field. But for this country at least, and I suspect it is just as true in the heathen world, what we need most are men and women who know the Lord. Dr. Harold S. Laird, speaking at the 1938 commencement of Wheaton College, said:- “One of the keenest bits of Christian philosophy that has ever come to my notice was a word spoken by a full-blooded Navajo Indian woman, born in heathenism and reared in superstition on the plains of Arizona, but now a true Christian. Following her conversion to Christianity she was brought east by one of the missionaries to the Indians as an exhibit to the churches of the power of the Gospel among her people. Never having been off the reservation before, the trip east was filled with many new and strange experiences for her. She had her first sight of and ride upon a railroad train. Upon her arrival in the eastern cities she saw for the first time our modern skyscrapers, our underground and overhead railway systems, with the thousand and one other stranger sights. When she returned to her own surroundings after weeks, and possibly months, she was asked by one of the missionaries what it was that impressed her most among the strange experiences she had had. Without hesitation she replied, ‘The great number of white men and women who are trying to live the Christian life without being born again’.” Think of this statement given by another Indian and recorded by John Foster: “Brothers, I have been long in the warfare; fifty-nine years on my way. I’m seventy-six years of age. The winds have blown hard on this old carcass. But the good hope is here. I see you white people brought up at home, able to read, taught arts and sciences; and yet you live without JESUS! Poor me! - I grew up wild; no father; brought up in the woods! Yet I found Him. Some of you have known me many years. Poor me! - couldn’t read; knew nothing; yet gave JESUS my heart. The first Bible I ever had I took home, put under my pillow, and slept with it there. This old frame totters; the strong wind shakes it, and it must go down. But I bless JESUS; I’m on the way to glory.” When Mingo had closed his testimony not a few were weeping and praising GOD. What we need for personal work is to know JESUS; then we can serve with love and consecration. Who, above a brother, should be our first concern? “He first findeth his own brother Simon, and saith unto him, We have found the Messias, which is, being interpreted, the Christ. And he brought him to Jesus” (John 1:41-42). What about your brother? What about my brother? If either of them is without CHRIST what about your conduct? What about mine? I fear a good many of us might have to face the sort of charge that was brought against Charles Simeon by his own brother, who, on his last bed of illness, said:- “Charles, I am dying and you never warned me of the state I was in and of the danger to which I was exposed by neglecting the salvation of my soul!” Charles answered:- “Well, I thought I took every reasonable opportunity of bringing up the subject of salvation in your presence, and several times alluded to it in my letters to you.” “Yes,” exclaimed the dying man, “you did; but that was not enough, and you know it! You never came to me and took me by the collar of the coat and told me I would be lost! And now I am dying and you haven’t done much toward my salvation; but secretly I have learned of the Grace of GOD: else I would have been forever undone.” I am telling you this morning that if every father in this church, who has unsaved sons, should deal directly with them; every mother should talk face to face with her children; every Sunday School teacher plead with the individuals of her or his class and every man with friend, employee and business associate, there would be such a revival on, and that shortly, that we would not need to transport John Brown for our pre-Easter service, but rather, to enlarge the capacity of this auditorium to hold the crowd, and hundreds of them would be here to accept and confess the CHRIST! Alexander Maclaren says:- “Nobody said to Andrew, ‘Go and look for your brother!’ “ If we spent more time with JESUS, nobody would need to tell us to go after our loved ones. That impulse would be as natural as the more abundant life would be certain. When I was a boy they used to have a proverb:- “The man who owns the grindstone is the man whose axe is dull.” There is another proverb:- “The shoemaker’s wife always is the worse shod.” And too often it is true that the members of our own family are the ones in whom we reveal the least interest in spiritual things! I am not asking at all that we annoy people by multiplied references to their spiritual estate; but I am suggesting, for myself and you, that we should not be eternally silent or even customarily so. Finally,- Andrew Accomplished a Convert. He established the necessary contact between the two! “He brought him to Jesus.” Sam Higginbottom, one of the graduates of Mount Hermon School, and later a missionary to India, once said of Dwight L. Moody: “Among the other things that characterized Moody was this,- he expected GOD to do things through him; he expected GOD to save men through him.” We have a right to the same confidence. Andrew’s powers were untested; Peter was his first attempt at soul winning, but it was successful none the less. Success never attends the man who makes no endeavor. Andrew’s first convert became a leading apostle. At the time he went after Peter, Peter - like himself - was a social nobody. He had no university degrees; he had no financial standing; he lived by daily fishing; he had no social rating, but was reckoned among “the ignorant and unlearned.” But men are often transformed in becoming Christians; so with Peter. He became not only a disciple of CHRIST, but an outstanding figure of the centuries! Two thousand years of time have not dwarfed him! He stands among the notable names of the past,- a veritable giant! His Pentecostal sermon has survived the writings of thousands of doctors of letters. His small books, known as Epistles, are more widely read than are the addresses of any Greek orator or Indian philosopher or English scientist. Who can tell what will be the result when he wins one to CHRIST? In the south, Dr. J. B. Hawthorne was an orator sought by scores of churches and heard by thousands and tens of thousands of auditors. On one occasion he went to help a southern church in a two weeks’ evangelistic campaign. At the end of it only a little unpromising boy had made a profession, and Hawthorne was a bit chagrined over the result. But that boy became A. T. Robertson - my classmate, the son-in-law of John A. Broadus, and the greatest American Greek scholar of the 20th century! A similar thing took place in Scotland. A church went through a whole year with only one profession, and when that was reported at the annual convocation, they said: “None except Wee Bobbie, and he’s so sma’ he’s no worth the countin’.” But Wee Bobbie became Robert Moffatt, the flaming torch that illuminated the night of Africa and blazed the trail for the great and marvelous David Livingstone,- his son-in-law! Oh man; Oh my sister! Despise not the day when you win a child to CHRIST! Only GOD knows what that contribution may mean to the church of the redeemed! To accept CHRIST involves an immeasurable change. Peter, the plain fisherman, became Peter the immortal apostle. No man is ever the same after he has received JESUS! He is not only another; he is a better man, a bigger man; and only GOD knows to what heights that change may carry! We measure men by station; GOD measures them by service instead. We look on the outward appearance; He considers the heart. A Christian worker in Arizona tells the story of an uncouth cowboy who came to him asking for copies of Mark’s Gospel. When he inquired why he wanted them, the cow boy said:- “I went to San Francisco and threw away my money in revelry. I slept late after a night of dissipation. When I awoke the next morning there was a little book on the table near my bed, named The Gospel of Mark. I threw it on the floor. I did the same thing for three successive mornings, and then on the fourth I took the thing out into the park and began to read it. I found JESUS saying to a leper, ‘Be thou clean’; to a paralytic, ‘Thy sins be forgiven thee’; I heard Him commend a widow for her mite; I saw Him take little children in His arms and bless them; I listened while He pathetically asked his disciples, ‘What; couldst thou not watch with me one hour?’ As I read on I saw Him die, and when He hung on that cross, and I read that it was for me, it broke my heart and changed my life, and I am another man,- a different man! And now, stranger, I want the Gospel of Mark to give to other people that they too may know CHRIST and be changed!” ======================================================================== CHAPTER 49: 04.3. PHILIP – THE FAITHFUL SOUL-WINNER - ACTS 8:1-40 ======================================================================== Philip – The Faithful Soul-Winner - Acts 8:1-40 THE four Gospels and the Book of The Acts constitute the New Testament Pentateuch. They are historical in character and romantic in interest. History appeals to the student in proportion as it links itself to the lives of individuals. In fact, human history is only a record of the doings of men, and the personnel of the same is ever the source and center of interest. The Gospels are a history of the CHRIST, and The Acts a history of His disciples or churchmen. The present study brings us the very heart of heroism as that is exhibited in this Book. When Stephen stood in the midst of his enemies, they hurled at him their anathemas, gnashing their teeth for very anger. His face lighted with a light from Heaven, and his eyes opened as they had never opened before, and the vision vouchsafed him was one seldom enjoyed by man; and the martyr Stephen stood ready for the stoning that sent him into the presence of GOD. The greatness of his soul was as surely proven in his death as it had been demonstrated in his life, and the prayer upon which he expended his last breath - “Lay not this sin to their charge” - was as gracious an evidence of his spirit, as was the sleep that followed a sign of GOD’s personal interest in His own. “And devout men carried Stephen to his burial, and made great lamentation over him” (Acts 8:2). When one Prophet of GOD is taken, the Spirit has another who will stand in his stead. Strange to say that the Saul introduced into the fifty-eighth verse of the seventh chapter and shown in his raging enmity against CHRIST and the Church in the opening verse of this eighth chapter is unconsciously on his way to succeed Stephen; but GOD already has co-laborers of the martyred saints who will carry on, and Philip is chief among them. It will be interesting then to follow the history of Philip, and we have elected to do this under three heads: 1.Philip’s Personal Progress, 2.Philip’s Prominent Proselytes, and 3.Philip’s Passing Popularity. Philip’s Personal Progress He was a faithful layman. We rest this statement upon the reputation that he sustained in the church at Jerusalem. Character is essential to competence; consecration is competence in activity. We are always glad when a genius is devoted to GOD and I am sure that most people of literary taste would admit that Edgar A. Guest, the American poet, belongs in that class, and Guest’s devotion to CHRIST and interest in church work is widely known. Among the poems of recent years he has written one intended to stimulate laymen in particular. It runs after this manner:- The Laymen Leave it to the ministers and soon the church will die, Leave it to the women folk, the young will pass it by, For the church is all that lifts us from the coarse and selfish mob, And the church that is to prosper needs the laymen on the job. It’s the church’s special function to uphold the finer things, To teach that way of living from which all that is noble springs, But the minister can’t do it, single-handed and alone, For the laymen of the country are the church’s cornerstone. When you see a church that’s empty though its doors are opened wide, It is not the church that’s dying, it’s the LAYMEN who have DIED, For it’s not by song or sermon that the church’s work is done; It’s the laymen of the country who for GOD must carry on! The Church at Jerusalem was to be congratulated in having Philip in its membership. If the mantle of Philip could descend upon the laymen of the present hour, no statistics could mark the progress of Christianity, for every passing hour would change the figure and always for the better, bigger. Philip was shortly made a deacon. The record of this experience is in Acts 6:5. “And they chose Stephen, a man full of faith and of the Holy Ghost, and Philip, and Prochorus, and Nicanor, and Timon, and Parmenas, and Nicolas, a proselyte at Antioch.” This is the original deaconate, the first Board of Deacons the world ever saw in the first Church the world ever knew. Note that Philip is the second man named in the list. There was but one who received a larger vote and that was Stephen, the courageous saint who became the first martyr of the church of GOD. We have not the least doubt that this order of Scripture is another evidence of the verbal inspiration of the Book. These men are put in the order of their value - Stephen first and Philip second. What else could the Church do but elect Stephen and Philip? A church that would have failed to exalt such laymen to office would have proven itself derelict, despiritualized, dumb. There are some men who are forever trying to get into office. They love power and crave prominence and covet honors. They are seldom fit for membership even, much less for office administration. There are other men who cannot keep out of office. Their course and conduct in life is such that their brethren demand it of them, and whether they will or not, select them and set them aside for the same. Philip belonged to that company. In other words, when the conditions of becoming a deacon were determined - “the man of honest report, full of the Holy Ghost and wisdom” - Philip measured up, and the membership of the whole First Church in Jerusalem said with unanimity of speech, “That is the man! Make a deacon of him.” If the organization of the early church had been as redundant as that of the present- day ecclesiasticism, they would have elected Philip to a half a dozen offices, but in the simplicity and efficiency of that body, few offices existed; in fact, at that time not more than two were at all recognized, and Philip is destined to fill both of them. The deaconate has been a power in the Church of GOD, but what it would have accomplished had the original condition of membership in it been retained, who can tell? He developed into a lay evangelist. That record you will find in verse five. “Then Philip went down to Samaria and preached Christ unto them.” It looks very much like a voluntary service. The text doesn’t say that he was sent down to the city of Samaria. There was no State Convention secretary to send him; there was no bishop in existence to appoint him; there was no superintendent of religion to suggest it. At that time, in the history of the Church of GOD, the HOLY SPIRIT was the Bishop and suggestions came through Him, and the men of the Philip sort responded with willing hearts. “Philip went down to the city of Samaria and preached Christ unto them .” The average deacon, if he goes to another city, goes to attend a convention and vote, or to sit in council and give advice. How seldom is a deacon heard of going to another city in search of souls and for the purpose of preaching the Gospel! Alas, how far we have departed from our New Testament model! The promise of the evangelist had been with Philip from the first. A new convert who spends the day after his personal salvation, appealing to other men to come to CHRIST, is on the way to preaching the Gospel. The man who voluntarily wins one will almost invariably go on and win many. Once the taste of soul-winning is experienced, men will continue in the joy of the same, and to what measure of success GOD may bring the personal worker, who can prophesy? And yet no man ever did the big thing first and few men ever do the smaller thing without being privileged the larger a little later. We have records of great meetings in which cities have been turned upside down; the sick have been healed, the demonized men have been dispossessed, and saints set to singing, but let it be understood that the original revival of that sort was led by one who began as a layman, was exalted by his brethren to the office of deacon, and directed by the HOLY SPIRIT to the office of an evangelist. It is with difficulty that one passes from the report of this revival without commenting upon it. - We would like to call attention to the circumstance that wherever the Gospel is faithfully preached, miracles occur. - We would like to affirm the historical fact that wherever the Gospel is faithfully preached, unclean spirits are cast out. - We would like to remind our readers of how a revival of religion is the best basis of rejoicing ever known to the mind of man; but we pass these subjects, worthy of sermons everyone, to call your attention to Philip’s Prominent Proselytes We employ the word “proselyte” with good reason. It means one “brought over to any opinion, belief, sect, or party; and especially one who has been won over from one religious belief to another.” Philip did not face men without religion. The world has seldom been without a religion and seldom had as much as now. If religion could save the world, it would have long since been redeemed; in fact, CHRIST never would have come. From time immemorial, false religions have flourished and the work of the prophet of GOD is and has been the winning of men from these to the religion that is true and divine. At this Philip was a success. He swayed the populace with his words. “And the people with one accord gave heed unto those things which Philip spake, hearing and seeing the miracles which he did” (Acts 8:6). How marvelous is GOD’s method of making orators! Overnight he took a plain fisherman in Peter and exceeded a Demosthenes and Cicero; and, here, in a few short weeks, a man who had probably never spoken before sways a multitude. His homiletics had been learned in no theological seminary, and yet when did man-made elocution excel in desirable results the product of Philip’s preaching? We have referred many times to the modern effort to standardize the ministry. We suggest to our brethren, who are advocates of this endeavor to run all occupants of pulpits through the same mill, that there was a standardized ministry two thousand years before they were born, and that was the standard of the Spirit’s indwelling which will never be surpassed; and that all the universities and theological seminaries of the land cannot equal in minister-making the work of the HOLY GHOST. Witness Philip! He turned the cult-leader to Christianity. In his day, as in ours, there were cults. Simon, the sorcerer in that same city, had given out that he himself was a great one, and it is amazing how many people will follow such an announcement. Self-advertisement is successful with the superficial; and, mark you, the superficial are in every section of society, for the text says, “They all gave heed, from the least to the greatest, saying, This man is the great power of God” (Acts 8:10). In a Western city, a so-called religious movement has reached great proportions, and at present the exposition of the leader has made the movement itself a laughing stock; and yet, strange to say, in it are the representatives of all classes - not the poor and the ragged and the hungry only, but the dwellers from the boulevard residences, a high city official, the judge from the court - they have all given “heed, from the least to the greatest” saying, “This woman is the great power of God!” Apparently it is easier to create and bring to success a cult than it is to get people to follow the CHRIST. The work of Simon, therefore, had been far less important and far more easy than is the work of Philip in showing Simon his error and turning him to believe. When a convert from such station is made, it is an accession of one who has the spirit of leadership, and second, it is commonly the end of the foolish following and the unprofitable organization that is round about him. It is interesting to follow this case to the end. Simon will prove himself a sorcerer again when he sees the power of the HOLY GHOST. He will think to purchase it. Let us not be too hard on Simon; he only illustrates a universal principle. Any long-established custom is hard to break up. The man who has once been addicted to drink will find sobriety difficult even though he believe and profess; men and women who have once yielded to lust will find it hard to recover cleanness of thought and action, and the individual who has once given himself over to money-grafting in the name of God - will find it hard to break from that sacrilegious habit. I say without hesitation that the greatest peril to the present-day ministry is at this point. The riches of the world tempt the Apostles of the church. Money is truly “the root of all evil,” but its mischievous influence is never more frightfully felt than when a preacher commercializes the Gospel as Simon sought to do. GOD knows, there are many of them. There are men in America by the score who have given themselves to evangelism because they saw Billy Sunday making his thousands out of the same. They go into a church and for a week they expect as big a return as the average pastor receives for twelve months’ service, and if it isn’t forthcoming they browbeat the pastor, criticize the officers, and leave the church in disgust, having also disgusted all behind them. There are others who are forever in promotion schemes, employing the preacher’s standing to seduce the gullible, who have an idea that GOD’s prophets can do no wrong. They sell stocks that advocate promotion enterprises, and uniformly take a big “rake-off”. Such is Simony, and when once one is in the power of it, it is easier to break from liquor or lust than from godless greed. He saw a state treasurer saved. “And the angel of the Lord spake unto Philip, saying, Arise and go toward the south, unto the way that goeth down from Jerusalem unto Gaza, which is desert. And he arose and went; and, behold, a man of Ethiopia, a eunuch of great authority under Candace Queen of the Ethiopians, who had the charge of all her treasure, and had come to Jerusalem for to worship, Was returning, and sitting in his chariot read Esaias the Prophet. “Then the Spirit said unto Philip, Go near, and join thyself to this chariot. “And Philip ran thither to him, and heard him read the Prophet Esaias, and said, Understandest thou what thou readest? “And he said, How can I except some man should guide me? And he desired Philip that he would come up and sit with him. “The place of the Scripture which he read was this, He was led as a sheep to the slaughter; and like a lamb dumb before his shearers, so opened He not His mouth: In His humiliation His judgment was taken away: and who shall declare His generation? for His life is taken from the earth. “And the eunuch answered Philip, and said, I pray thee, of whom speaketh the prophet this? of himself, or of some other man? “Then Philip opened his mouth and began at the same Scripture, and preached unto him Jesus. “And as they went on their way, they came unto a certain water; and the eunuch said, See here is water,’ what doth hinder me to be baptized? “And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God” (Acts 8:26-37). Evidently there was a dual bigotry to be met here. The first existed in the fact that this man was apparently a believer in the Old Testament Scripture, either a Jew or a proselyte of the gate. He had his religion, then, fixed and satisfactory. Such men are seldom moved in the interest of another faith. Again, he held high office of state; he was the treasurer of Ethiopia, the financial counselor of Candace. It is a natural but none the less sad fact that men of exalted station are difficult to reach with the Gospel. JESUS CHRIST demands humility versus pride, and repentance versus self-assertion, and obedience to another rather than self-government of one’s life. These steps are not difficult for the humble, the lowly, the poor, but they are so hard for the high that CHRIST Himself once said, “ It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter the Kingdom of God” (Matthew 19:24). We should be hopeless concerning the rich had He not followed that with the statement, “With God all things are possible.” GOD was with Philip and GOD was in the Word that Candace’s treasurer was reading, and the angel of the Lord who said unto Philip, “Arise, and go toward the south” had Himself gone the same way and set the treasurer to the study of the sacred Scripture. Whenever any man, no matter who he is, how high and haughty, how unholy and wicked, how arrogant and even atheistic, begins to study the Book, he is on the way. Work with him then becomes possible, easy, and the issue fairly certain. I recall an experience in my own ministry of a foreman in Bloomington, Illinois, who commanded his wife to cease church attendance. When first I went to talk with him about the domestic difficulty that arose in consequence, he was insolent, insulting. When I went back the second time, he was morose and silent. When I approached his house on the third visit, he sat on the porch with the Bible in his hand. On the former occasions I had actually knelt in his presence to pray, afraid for my physical safety, for he sat bolt upright in his chair, his face clouded with a frown, but when I approached his house on this third occasion and saw the Bible in his hand, all fear, yea, even anxiety, fled my heart at once. I knew that my man was on the way and that the Spirit of GOD was winning. Practically the only hope of turning men from false faiths to the true one is in the Word. There are many sincere men who accept and advocate false faiths. There are many men who believe the Bible that have had the same falsely interpreted to them and have taken their spiritual attitude in consequence of such instruction. If, however, those same men would do as the Ethiopian treasurer did, continue to study, the Bible itself would lead them forth and reveal to them the CHRIST. The Jews of the world dare not carefully, and with a prayer on their lips, read their own Scriptures. If they did, their pride would be crushed and penitence would come. Their haughtiness of spirit would give place to humility, and their rejection of the CHRIST would become their conviction through the study of their own Scriptures, as occurred with Candace’s treasurer. The best way in the world to reach any man is by an appeal to the Book. One sentence from sacred Scripture is worth more to the soul of the sinner than hours of scholarly argument. It is the truth that makes men free, and GOD’s Word is truth. But we pass on with our studies to Philip’s Passing Popularity When in all the New Testament did any man ever rise more rapidly in office and honor and successful ministry than did Philip? And yet how strange that with the completion of this incident, Philip drops out of sight and is only seldom heard of again! How like life is that! His rise, we have said, was exceedingly rapid. Not a day intervenes between his conversion and his success as a soul winner. Only a few days intervene between his salvation and his selection to the deaconate. Not a month has passed when lo, this new convert is the outstanding preacher, Peter excepted, of the entire company of disciples. Stephen’s bravery and loyalty indicated the largeness of his soul, but his martyrdom cut his ministry so short that we have no experiences by which to measure what might have been his success. Somehow Philip has escaped a kindred consequence. We doubt very much if Philip was a warrior. There is a big difference between the sermon Peter preached at Pentecost and the speech that Stephen made in the seventh chapter and Philip’s utterances. Both of those charged Israel with the resistance of the Spirit, crucifixion of the Son. even with an affront to GOD. We do not find anything akin to that in Philip’s preaching. He emphasized “the Kingdom of God” and exalted “the Name of Jesus,” but he seems to have been careful in his speech. Such men often rise rapidly. They go easily to their zenith. They escape the certain oppositions that greater courage always excites and in consequence, they are not retarded by criticism and enmity and persecution. There are evangelists in America today who get on with seldom a jar, whose ministry is an enormous commercial asset. They preach CHRIST; they declare the things concerning the Kingdom; they witness a good many souls converted; they take issue with no one. Some of them have even said that they wouldn’t sign a Confession of Faith that they themselves had written. That could not be because they did not believe it, for if they wrote it themselves they would certainly believe it; but it is because it would commit them in the open and require from them a defense and excite for them opposition; and it is more popular and financially profitable not to have anything in the way, but to get the track open and the rails greased and the wheels in action and make every station on time. We would not charge Philip with any false teaching; he was not guilty of that. We do rejoice that “he preached Christ.” We are glad that GOD gave him many souls. We are happy that his rise was so rapid, but we are not surprised that this incident is the prominent one of his entire preaching experience. The way of ease is the quick way, but it is seldom the finally effective and most successful way. His prominence was short-lived. It is always amazing to trace the history of boy-preachers and baby-evangelists. Where, in all the annals of the church, has one of them ever proven to be a man of power or a woman of permanent spiritual influence? They get the crowds, these infants! They commonly speak those platitudes of the Christian faith that produce no opposition whatever. They combine baby faces with infant messages. As a rule, they lay their emphasis upon “miracles,” and sometimes they witness “the departure of unclean spirits,” for the most stained man would dare to enter the sanctuary where a baby speaks. Almost uniformly they spread the spirit of good cheer. Meetings led by infants are soulful and songful, but in a few years their charms have failed. Maturity has spoiled the baby look and it has also rendered impotent the baby appeal. “When I was a child, I spake as a child, 1 understood as a child, I thought as a child, but when I became a man, I put away childish things” (1 Corinthians 13:11). This declaration of the Apostle is demanded by the public. They expect a man to be manly; they look for courage; they listen for convictions, and if they do not find them, they depart. To be sure, there are other things that cut short ministerial prominence - laxity in morals, greed of gain, dishonesty of profession, excessive self-admiration and self-advertisement - but we can scarcely think that Philip was guilty of any of these. We believe the weakness of Philip’s ministry to have been that he sought the way of ease; that he was one of those sweet souls that hated a conflict and remained forever a spiritual man, but in consequence of lack of courage, an ineffective one; and Philip has had more successors than Peter, claims of the papacy to the contrary notwithstanding. One of the pitiful features of church history is the ministerial failures to be found by the way - men who started well but did not increase. Of the greatest of all ministers, our ensample in our Saviour, CHRIST, it was said, “Of the increase of His government and peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to order it, and to establish it with judgment and with justice from henceforth even for ever” (Isaiah 9:7). However, Philip’s ministry had its point of permanence. He did not end his evangelistic career in disaster, nor does it seem probable that he ceased from evangelism and turned to the sale of life insurance or oil stocks. For over in the Book of the Acts (Acts 21:8), Paul, the then peerless Apostle, with his companions came to Caesarea and “entered into the house of Philip the evangelist, which was one of the seven; and abode with him. And the same man had four daughters, virgins, which did prophesy.” There is, therefore, a twofold testimony to the permanence of Philip’s ministry. He continued in evangelism and was now known in that office rather than as a deacon. It makes no difference to what office the church may elect one, his true office will be the one to which the Spirit exalts him, and in which GOD’s blessing has been upon him. With Philip this was not in handling the money of the church - the office of a deacon - but in evangelism - the office of a soul-winner. There is every evidence that he had a quiet, modest, but continuous ministry of evangelism. We need men after this manner. It is not best that all evangelists should be impetuous Peters nor polemical Pauls. There are churches that will not touch either, and there are communities that can not be reached, though both come in succession. They will turn from them; but Philip’s ministry to such places is both pleasing and profitable. They want a quiet man, a man with no spirit of criticism in him. They don’t like a fiery speaker; they want a smooth and polished one. They are willing to have souls saved if it is done in a very quiet and correct way, and they call only for the kind of a man who will fit their policy. If Philips did not exist, such people might never hear the Gospel, or, if they heard it at all, might never engage in an evangelistic campaign. Dr. J. Wilbur Chapman, himself a model evangelist in many ways, recognized this fact. When he assembled his great company for his famed simultaneous campaign, he had in it the stormy and the scholarly; the polemic and the peacemaker; the man whose voice was adapted to the outdoors and the quiet “parlor” and “ladies’ meeting” kind. He also revealed much genius in appointing them, suiting the man to the section: and we are inclined to think that during our ministry of forty-five years, J. Wilbur Chapman, in a comparatively brief period of time, accomplished more for the true upbuilding of the churches of America than any other evangelist we have known. Furthermore, Philip’s ministry was made permanent through its adoption by his daughters. They were four, and were prophetesses everyone. This also is doubly suggestive. It seems strange to the average individual that the most successful minister seldom has a child make choice of his profession. Peter left no junior to carry on his work; John, no children to complete what he had commenced; James, no ministerial descendants as far as the record goes. The same remark may be made of the prominent church fathers, and even with modern ministers it is a rare thing that the prominent preacher has a prominent son. Charles Spurgeon’s two boys illustrated the exception. People wonder why this fact is true. The reason is not unreasonable. The explanation is not far to seek. The successful leaders in other professions are seldom followed by successful sons. Pitt the younger was one in ten thousand. Success on the father’s part is a serious handicap for the children. No greater calamity ever befalls youth than that it be cast into the lap of luxury, into the house of honor, into the circle of social prestige. Poverty is youth’s hard master, but best teacher. Want and hardship combine to conduct the world’s best college. A diploma from “the university of hard knocks” is often promise of unusual success. Doubtless, Philip’s daughters were the children of economy, adepts at daily duties. Sunday was sweet to them because it was the only holiday of the week; the church service was attractive because it was the social event of the same. There they met their friends. They were treated with favor because they were the children of the preacher himself. They occupied front seats in the assembly because all people paid respect to them, and the ministry became in their eyes an honored office. Then again, GOD was evidently with Philip, and when GOD is in the house, the children feel it and their decisions for life are affected by it. When the day opens with family prayers, the curtains of night will very likely shut the petitioners into some quiet room where He can talk back in a still, small voice, showing them the way. We almost envy Philip. We think that the man whose son or daughter follows him in the ministry is favored of GOD. In our youthful lives and fleshly ambitions, we may desire sons who shall be prominent in one of the professions, statesmen, or great financiers, and daughters who shall be the belles of society, but the more sober thought of age and the more sure result of observation reverses all of this and convinces us that of all the possible vocations of life, the highest is that which the Son of Man Himself selected, namely to seek and to save the lost - the ministry of the evangel! ======================================================================== CHAPTER 50: 04.4. ANANIAS – THE SKILLFUL SOUL-WINNER – ACTS 9:10-18 ======================================================================== Ananias – The Skillful Soul-Winner - Acts 9:10-18 THE conversion of Saul of Tarsus was a matter of such importance, in the early history of Christianity, that the man himself became the center of attention in the inspired report of that event. However, there are incidental interests and associated individuals that are worthy of careful study, and full of suggestive lessons. Chief among such individuals is Ananias, the Christian believer, selected by the HOLY SPIRIT as Saul’s initial instructor. Believing, as we do, that the Spirit of GOD always selects the right instrument or agent, for the service to be performed, we must consent that Ananias was peculiarly fitted for this particular post of teaching Saul the further steps essential to his complete salvation. A thoughtful perusal of these verses, Acts 9:10-18, suggests at least three things concerning Ananias: 1. He was on talking terms with GOD: 2.He received a Tough Assignment: and 3.He Dared to Undertake. On Talking Terms with GOD “There was a certain disciple at Damascus, named Ananias: and to him said the Lord in a vision, Ananias. And he said, Behold, I am here, Lord” (Acts 9:10). Then his Lord knew him by name. That statement involves more than its mere utterance would indicate. If it means anything, it means that GOD himself is an intelligent person, capable of thought and speech, and acquainted with His creatures, and especially so with His chosen servants. That is the sort of GOD everywhere revealed in the Bible. Go back to the book of Genesis and when GOD walked in the garden of Eden at the close of the day, He called unto Adam and said unto him, “Where art thou?” He knew him; He named him. In the fourth chapter, when Cain had murdered his brother, the Lord said unto Cain, “ Where is Abel, thy brother?” Also, we have Him calling Noah by name, and so on, including many Old Testament saints, poets and prophets. The GOD who numbers the hairs of your head knows your name better than the parents who gave it to you, or the friends who, when they give you attention, call the same. There are many men who do not know GOD; there are no men unknown to GOD. One preacher has declared that there is an almost an “infinite spring of consolation in the conviction that CHRIST knows His disciples.” This much is certain, that if He did not know us, our salvation would be insecure; and if He were not sufficiently familiar with us to call us by name, our communion with Him would be a questionable thing indeed. I have a great many acquaintances whose names I could not call. I said to my church officers, this past week, that if I only knew the names of every boy and girl in our Sunday School and church, and of every young man and woman, members of the same, as perfectly as I know some of them, it would be not only an unspeakable pleasure to me, but a power for GOD and the Gospel. Therein is the Lord’s superiority, “His sheep hear His voice.” “He calleth His own sheep by name.” How wonderful! Their names are legion, yet CHRIST is never under the necessity of saying what often attends our embarrassed speech, “Pardon me; I know you well, but I cannot recall your name.” The Lord could talk to Ananias. There was evidently ground of intimacy between them, for when He spoke his name, Ananias responded, “Behold, I am here.” How wonderful it is to be not only on speaking terms with the Lord, but on terms of visitation. The Old Testament record of Samuel bears this out. When that prophet was a little lad, and the Lord called his name, so distinct was the voice that he thought it was that of Eli, his senior and superior; but when once he realized that it came from a higher source, his response was, “Speak, Lord, for thy servant heareth.” My great and lamented friend Leander Keyser, said a very true thing when he declared that we are too prone “to think of CHRIST as far away in the heavens.” Some people deny that you can be on intimate terms with the Son of GOD, but Christians certainly should know Him from experience and daily walk with Him, and engage in repeated conversations. Dr. Keyser was right in remarking, “Only that faith which receives CHRIST himself into the most intimate fellowship will experience the fullness of joy and the peace of GOD which “passeth all understanding.” My good predecessor, Dr. Wayland Hoyt, speaking of our Lord’s presence with us, said, “Far up in the dome of St. Paul’s Cathedral in London there is what is called the ‘Whispering Gallery.’ You stand within the gilded railing of that gallery, and as though the mighty dome were sensitive, even each little whisper of yours gets reply of echo.” So it is in the spiritual realm! CHRIST has placed himself in such relation of personal experience with us that there is an instant and constant reply to our hearts. I do not claim to have ever heard an audible word that came from Heaven, and yet I earnestly contend that I have talked with the Lord many, many times, and He has talked with me just as often. In prayer we talk to Him; by the still small voice of the Spirit, and through the words themselves of sacred Scripture, He talks with us. So the Christians of this day can be as definitely instructed and as surely guided as was Ananias when the Lord said to him “Go into the street which is called Straight, and enquire in the house of Judas for one called Saul, of Tarsus.” There is but one reason why we do not hear from the Lord more often; that reason is in our own fault. If we talked with Him more often, He would speak to us more often. If we sought His presence more often we would hear His speech more often. This leads me to a further suggestion: Ananias was attentive to GOD’s word. The text says, “Ananias went his way, and entered into the house; and putting his hands on him said, Brother Saul, the Lord, even Jesus, that appeared unto thee in the way as thou camest, hath sent me, that thou mightest receive thy sight, and be filled with the Holy Ghost” (Acts 9:17). However, for our encouragement, I will not pass over the fact that Ananias had faults in common with all of us. Before he acted obediently he had to reason it out with the Lord, and had to tell the Lord how much evil Saul had done, and how he had even come to this city with evil intent, and with authority to bind all that call on the Lord’s name. Man’s egotism is such that he seldom surrenders even to the Divine voice without an argument. One day Peter preached in the streets of Jerusalem a sermon that was evidently delivered in the power of the Spirit, and great conviction fell upon the people, and being pricked in the heart, they said unto Peter and the rest of the apostles, “Men and brethren, what shall we do?” Peter said unto them, “Repent and be baptized everyone of you for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.” Those words still contain the prescribed path for all men and all women who are under conviction for sin and inquiring the way. And yet, every few days I read another disquisition on why we need not be obedient on the matter of baptism, why the method of baptism does not matter, or why we need to be baptized at all, as one of our Baptist churches recently announced that it is not necessary for entrance into their membership. Fredrick Robertson was right when he said, “Nothing can be love to GOD which does not shape itself into obedience.” The surrendered will is the sine qua non of success. A missionary to India tells of an experience that he had at Lucknow, India. He was at prayer when a voice seemed to say to him, “Are you ready for the work to which I have called you?” To which he replied, “No, Lord, I am not. I am done for. I have reached the end of my rope.” The voice answered, “If you will turn this over to me and not worry about it, I will take care of it.” To which he quickly answered, “Lord, I close the bargain right here.” In speaking of it, he said, “A great peace settled into my heart and pervaded me. I knew it was done. Life, - abundant life - had taken possession of me. I was so lifted up that I scarcely touched the road as I quietly walked home that night. Every inch was holy ground. For days after I hardly knew I had a body. I went through the days working all day, and far into the night, and came down to bedtime wondering why in the world I should ever go to bed at all, for there was not the slightest trace of tiredness of any kind. I seemed possessed by life and peace and rest - by CHRIST Himself.” It is our increasing conviction that the man who is taking his orders from the Lord is in line with the Divine will, is the man the Lord himself empowers for every assigned duty, and for him there is assured success. This commission involved A Tough Assignment Saul was the man Ananias did not want to meet. Nor would we like to meet such a man - an enemy of our profession, a persecutor of CHRIST’s people, and a man clothed with authority to arrest, try and convict. The most of us are so easily scared that we can hardly speak to a child on the subject of accepting JESUS. A full grown man or woman increases our fear, and if a Judge of the Court, or a Queen of Fashion, or a King of Finance should come into the audience, and we knew that he, or she, was without CHRIST, the very suggestion that we go to such an one and speak to him or her, would set our teeth chattering, and our knees knocking together. I remember some years ago there was an unconverted woman who used to come into this audience, and in a protracted meeting I saw one of the earliest students of Northwestern and his wife make a bee line for the old lady who had enjoyed means, who was well educated, and I thought to myself, “Fools rush in where angels fear to tread.” But once again my judgment was as remote from GOD’s way as was the conduct of these two young people in keeping with His will, for the woman later said, “If I was disposed to give my heart to CHRIST, those young people could help me, for I believe in them and in their sincerity of profession!” “The fear of man bringeth a snare!” One reason why the most of us are worthless in personal work is at that very point. Courage is not in our makeup. When I think of what Peter dared on the day of Pentecost, in facing the very people who had crucified CHRIST, and calling upon them to repent, I feel like promising GOD never to refer again to Peter’s cowardice at the High Priest’s palace. For the most of us, the pallid fear of the High Priest’s palace is constantly on us. Our lack of courage accomplishes a paralysis for our tongues, and a shaking of our knees, and we say not a word. On the other side, Ananias was the man Saul wanted to see. GOD had spoken to Saul also in a vision, and had named Ananias as the one who should come and put his hand upon him that he might receive his sight. Who can tell what was Saul’s anxiety to see this man; what were the thrills of hope as he waited for this agent of the Lord to arrive. A few weeks ago we had in our midst Dr. Kallenbach, who is blind. Suppose that GOD had said to him, “There is coming to this church, in which you are preaching, in a day or two, a man that I have sent. He shall lay his hands upon you and light shall break into your sightless eyes. These glass balls will be turned to flesh and blood, and your vision will be instantly and perfectly restored!” Do you think he would have slept in between the announcement and the hour fixed for the event? Paul was blind; totally blind! For three days his eyes had been sightless. But in a vision it had been promised him that a man by the name of Ananias was to come and put hands upon him that he might see again. The sightless are all about us! The pity of it is that the most of them, “having eyes, see not;” and consequently are not sensible of their own condition. Yet, your obligation, my obligation to bring the light to them is none the less on that account. What are we doing for them this morning? Are we indifferent to their condition? Are we dead to our own responsibility? Some time ago the Sunday School Times told the story of a young man in Indianapolis who had intellectual difficulties about accepting CHRIST. Doubtless, as is usual, they had been superimposed by some older skeptic. A layman of that city, hearing of this, made up his mind that he would see if he could not help the young man. He found him at his boarding house and in his bedroom, and sitting down beside him frankly stated why he had come, and said, “Let me hear about these difficulties, see what they are, and what about them!” One after another they were presented and answered. Finally, when the last one had faded away, this layman said, “Will you kneel with me in prayer?” The young man consented. At the close of the prayer, the layman turned to him and said, “Cannot you now accept and surrender to CHRIST?” And the young man answered, “I will,” and he did, and that layman went back to his pastor and reported, “I have had many thrilling experiences, but that one outranks them all.” Who was that layman? Benjamin Harrison - ex-President of the United States. Ananias must have had many great hours in his life, but never a greater than when he led this young Jewish attorney to CHRIST. It was the Spirit’s guidance that brought them together. There is a principle involved in this story that marks the uniform operation of the HOLY GHOST. The same GOD who convicted Saul commissioned Ananias. I sometimes wonder if there is ever a convicted man without another commissioned at the same moment. I doubt seriously if GOD ever brings a man under condemnation for sin without saying to some one of the saints, “Go to that man!” Turn back one chapter, to Acts 8:1-40 and what a marvelous illustration of that truth we have. There is a eunuch - treasurer under Candace - on his way home from Jerusalem, reading Esaias the prophet, and wondering in his heart what Esaias meant. But he was not left to wonder long, because GOD had an obedient soul-winner at His command, in the person of Philip, and the Spirit that had convicted the eunuch, said to Philip, “Go near and join thyself to this chariot.” You know the rest of the story; how that eunuch was led into the light and was baptized. I think it is a marvel how often the Spirit brings together the sinner and the soul-winner. Many of you will remember when the Chapman campaign was on in Minneapolis, and you will recall Henry Ostrom, both because he was of that campaign and because he has been in Minneapolis often since that time. This week, when I received from London The Advent Witness, I found in it a story from Ostrom that related to the time of that work. He said that it happened in a city of some two hundred thousand. He was preaching in a downtown church. When the hour for service came he could not deliver the sermon that he had prepared. He asked the song leader to sing a hymn, and then another and another. When he realized that the audience would not longer wait for the sermon, he got up and said: “You have come tonight in answer to the announcement to hear a certain subject discussed. I cannot speak on it! If there is anybody here who is disappointed, it will be all right, he may retire, for the Spirit of GOD is constraining me to speak on another theme.” And he says, “I turned loose on a subject I never had used.” The next morning there came to a certain man’s residence a woman who asked the privilege of confessing a plot to blackmail him for $25,000.00. The wife was called in, and the woman told her story. She said, “I have already received $500.00 for my part in this plot. The plot was hatched in this city, and a certain attorney was the leader in the same. But I felt led to come to church, and Dr. Ostrom’s sermon on Sin convicted me. I went home and slept not a wink, and on my knees I promised GOD both to return the money and to come and make this confession.” The lawyer was disbarred immediately by his fellow attorneys. How strange! And yet how natural to the work of the Spirit! He knew the woman’s need; He found in Ostrom a spokesman, and in that church house they were brought together, and the result was the salvation of one man’s reputation and of one woman’s soul. Fear not, He who commissions you will go with you! He dared undertake Setting his fears aside, Ananias obeyed! The text reads: “Ananias went his way, and entered into the house and putting his hands on him, said, Brother Saul, the Lord, even Jesus that appeared unto thee in the way as thou earnest, hath sent me, that thou mightest receive thy sight, and be filled with the Holy Ghost.” Permit me to call especial attention to Ananias’ spirit and method. He is facing now a man that he has good reason to hate, as well as fear. He knew what Saul had done to his brothers and sisters - the saints; and now when Saul was blind and consequently impotent, how easy it would have been for him to have told Saul what he deserved, to have humiliated him, declared his judgment from the Lord just and long over due; to have said, “Good - you got what was coming to you all right!” But the exact opposite characterized both his manner and his message. He tenderly laid his hands upon him; he called him “Brother Saul.” He admitted that he had had a visit from the Lord, and he gave the afore- time persecutor to understand that he had not come as an enemy to taunt him nor as a coward to cringe before him, but as a brother, to love him. I wonder if this kind of an approach is not the way to win men? I wonder, if we dispensed with our foolish fears and made all our approaches kind, if we could not win? Looking back over my own history in evangelism, I recall two incidents of winning men that hold place in happy memory. One of them was an atheist; the other one a skeptical lawyer. When I first approached the atheist he was resentful and sarcastic; but by GOD’s help I was able to maintain toward him a cordial attitude, and in four days, the result of a little conversation at the close of each meeting, he capitulated and gave his heart to CHRIST. In the incident of the lawyer, he knew the love that I bore to his parents, and he held in high esteem the dear old lady who had sent me to see him, and those circumstances accomplished a hospitable reception, and a half hour was sufficient to complete the task of leading him to CHRIST. Success commonly attends the spirit of obedience. The text says: “Immediately there fell from his eyes as it had been scales, and he received sight forth with, and arose, and was baptized.” I have little doubt that both the suddenness and the completeness of this experience surprised Ananias as much, or more, than it did Saul. He had the promise from the Lord that this would be the result; but what ecstasy comes to us when GOD’s promises are made good in our experiences. A few times in life I have seen people healed instantly in answer to prayer, and it has always surprised me, brought to me a spiritual stimulus unknown to any other hour; made me feel the nearness of GOD as I never felt it on any other occasion. A. J. Gordon’s great co-pastor told me one day when he was speaking of the character and accomplishments of his chief, that whenever Gordon witnessed a clear instance of Divine healing in answer to prayer, it seemed to bring to him an abundance of life, and for days following such an experience his exuberance of spirit was manifest. His faith seemed to take wings and dwell in the heavenlies. Little wonder! Finally: This convert was immediately commissioned. Of Saul it is written: “Straightway he preached Christ in the synagogues, that he is the Son of God.” And it is further said that “Saul increased the. more in strength and confounded the Jews which dwelt at Damascus, proving that this is very Christ.” This should have been no surprise to Ananias, for when the Lord sent him to show Saul the way, He said to him, “He is a chosen vessel unto me, to bear my name before the Gentiles, and kings, and the children of Israel.” How little we know what will be the final result of a sound conversion. Dr. Alexander Bruce, speaking of GOD’s elect, says, “They are chosen not so much to privilege as to function. Their vocation is to be the light of the world, the salt of Society.” Certainly Paul was “a burning and a shining light” and his gospel is “the savor of life unto life.” We never know when we lead a man to CHRIST what contribution we may be making to His cause. On occasion I have referred to my friend Charlie Gremmels, of New York. It was his partner in business, Mr. Campbell, who led Will Borden to CHRIST, and Will Borden, the nephew of my own great layman William Borden when I was pastor at New Albany, Ind., and the heir to a million or more, became in turn the greatest representative of Christianity known to Yale University in the first decade of this century. - He opened up the Yale Hope House with a $200,000.00 building on the University grounds, where hundreds have found salvation. - He gave to the National Bible Institute of New York City another $100,000. - He opened five rescue homes in New York where the cup of salvation is offered to every soul seeking their shelter. - In Madison Square Garden he preached the Gospel to passersby. - Under the impulse of the Still Small Voice he went to India, that he might tell them of JESUS his Savior and his Lord, and though he died in his comparative youth, he had already given his life and a million dollars to the cause of CHRIST. Charlie Gremmels, in a recent address, recited this history to illustrate the Scripture from the twenty-third Psalm, “My cup runneth over.” We have had a good deal from the New Dealers on “the full” even “the abundant life,” and when one of them defined what they meant by it, it was physical and even carnal. But the Scriptures reveal an overflowing life, and Saul, when once changed into Paul, illustrated it. He did not stop with personal salvation. Instantly he became GOD’s agent of salvation to others. “My gracious Lord, I own thy right To every service I can pay, And call it my supreme delight To hear thy dictates, and obey.” ======================================================================== CHAPTER 51: 04.5. PETER – THE POPULAR SOUL-WINNER ======================================================================== Peter – The Popular Soul-Winner IN BRINGING to your attention the outstanding soul winners of New Testament record, we have discussed John the Baptist, the Pioneer Soul Winner; Andrew, the Fraternal Soul Winner; Philip, the Tactful Soul Winner, and Ananias, the Skillful Soul Winner. Peter was intentionally reserved for a later and higher place as we intended from the first to present these names in an ascending scale. It will not be forgotten that the Gospels have much to say concerning this apostle, but the Gospel record deals with him as a disciple of JESUS, rather than an apostle, a student rather than a commissioned man. His conspicuous place with James and John, constituting the inner circle of CHRIST’s intimates, had occasions, of course; and, in spite of his three -fold denial of the Master in the crisis hour, Peter still retained those greater essentials to final success, which the Master’s discerning eyes had clearly seen. It requires, therefore, the Book of the Acts to bring before us this apostle’s ability and value; and it can never be forgotten that that book opens with the story of the baptism of the Spirit, the promised enduement from on high. All that is recorded of Peter from Acts 1 on, seems a certain result of that spiritual experience as it affected what we call inborn or native talents. In a cursory survey of the Acts’ record, we are impressed with: 1. “Peter, the Pulpit Orator;” 2.“Peter, the Personal Instructor,” and 3.“The Private Ministry of Peter.” Peter, The Pulpit Orator “It was when the day of Pentecost was fully come,” when the HOLY GHOST had fallen upon, the Christian company, that Peter became conspicuous. The report of his speech and conduct impresses us with the following facts: First, he compelled attention! “Peter standing up with the eleven, lifted up his voice, and spake forth unto them, saying, Ye men of Judea and all ye that dwell in Jerusalem, be this known unto you, and give ear unto my words” (Acts 1:14). To rivet the attention of any crowd is an oratorical art. To compel the attention of an excited and vocal crowd requires both a dynamic personality and a superb speech. That ability was never more needed than now. The mad race for money and pleasure, the stream-lined transportation conveyances, the airships - these are all symbolic of an age indisposed to quiet and attention. Church attendance, therefore, is on the wane the country over. Sunday night services have been given up entirely by a big majority, and even in our so-called evangelical sanctuaries. Among those that still keep open house, most questionable advertising and procedures are often employed to attract attention and effect attendance. Thousands of preachers find themselves in kindred cases with the lad who came in from the lake with his pole over his shoulder and fishing sack empty. A stranger, meeting him, said, “Well, boy, what luck?” To which the young fisherman replied, “None; I couldn’t seem to git their attention.” Arthur Pierson, that matchless minister of yesterday, said sanely enough, “There is no higher secret of all true study or application of mind than the convergence of all the faculties toward one point - the gathering up of the thoughtrays in the focus of attention.” And then, he sadly remarked, “How few people there are who know the fine art of listening.” Peter then is to be congratulated in that, no sooner had he begun to speak, than the crowd calmed, and thousands were giving attention. Second, he appealed to Scripture. Defending his fellow disciples against the charge of drunkenness, he said, “This is that which hath been spoken through the prophet Joel: And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out my Spirit upon all flesh; and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams, etc., etc.” (Acts 2:16, ff). From the moment he opened his mouth until he had reached his conclusion by charging them with having “crucified both the Lord and Christ,” he ceased not his Biblical quotations. The Pentecostal sermon was neither more nor less than a quotation and application of Scriptural texts. Might not that be the explanation of the Pentecostal result - thousands brought under conviction? If we were asked to name the most debilitating feature of the average twentieth century sermon, and thereby account for its non-effectiveness, we should, without hesitation, say “Its non-scriptural character.” GOD never made any promise to pulpit eloquence, nor yet to mental speculation, or philosophies - new or old. He has, however, made very definite promises concerning His word. By Isaiah, the mighty Evangel of Old Testament times, he said, “For as the rain cometh down and the snow from heaven, and returneth not thither, but watereth the earth, and maketh it bring forth and bud, and giveth seed to the sower and bread to the eater; so shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I Please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it” (Isaiah 55:10-11). Paul, also, in writing to the Romans said, “I am not ashamed of the gospel: for it is the power of God unto salvation to everyone that believeth; to the Jew first and also to the Greek” (Romans 1:16). To the Corinthians he wrote, “The preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness, but unto them who are saved, it is the power of God.” We hear a great deal these days about the need of Revival. Quite a few people are engaged in praying for the coming of revival, and beyond all question the future of the church is dependent upon a revival. But this may be accepted as certain, viz., no revival can come or will come, until both the preachers and the laymen return to the use of the Word of GOD - the Spirit’s sole instrument of salvation. Peter was not an educated man. He had no university degree, no high school diploma; and I am not even certain that his education, in secular matters, would have sufficed the demands of the grade school. But Peter had one fitness for preaching, which can never be ignored by any denomination or even discredited by any committee on organization, and that was familiarity with the Holy Book and ability to draw from its treasures convicting truths. A few days since my attention was called to what Charles Augustus Briggs, the outstanding leader among liberals at the end of the last century, had to say upon the authority of the sacred Scriptures. Little wonder that he was put on trial for his infidelity. In his volume, Whither, he asserts, “The sacred Scriptures are not the only source of Christian theology . . . The Bible does not decide all questions of religion. It does not decide the mode of baptism, etc. “The Bible does not decide on questions of doctrines; it does not give us the mode of creation, the origin of sin and evil, etc. “The Bible does not decide on questions of morals; it does not decide against slavery or polygamy; it does not determine thousands of political and social questions that have sprung up in our day.” How far removed from the claim of the Bible itself and the faith of the Fathers were such assertions. The French Confession, the Belgic Confession, the Westminster Confession, the Church of England Confession, the Congregational Confession, the Baptist Confession, and the Confession of the Methodists - these all agree in paying to this Book the tribute of clear teaching, a divine revelation upon all subjects of human concern. It was the denial of this fact spoken by Briggs, and adopted by certain of his brethren in unbelief, that has effected an arrested development in the evangelical denominations of the world, brought to thousands of churches a spiritual paralysis, and produced not only dearth of water baptisms in the name of the risen Lord, but crucified much of our foreign mission work, eviscerated the Christian influence of our schools and colleges at home and abroad, and prepared continents, even, for cordiality toward atheistic communism. The secretary of the Chicago Prayer League said to me sixteen months ago, “We need a world campaign on ‘Back to the Bible.’ “ Thank GOD for a Peter who found it unnecessary to run a moving picture show in order to attract a crowd, or put on a so-called Christian drama in order to maintain a second Sunday service. Third, he produced conviction! Turning to our text again, we read, “Now when they heard this, they were pricked in their hearts.” The sense of sin is slowly departing from social circles. There is now an organized endeavor to hasten that procedure. Only recently, in a little western town where a Baptist college is located and is largely dominant, a young minister, cultured, capable and consecrated, preached the Word, and believing it still had power to produce results, dared to ask for a show of hands on the part of those who, being convicted of sin, desired the prayers of the saved. Instantly there was organized resentment. A company of students protested the procedure and demanded its cessation. Young Brougher struck back by charging its leaders with communistic sentiments. Doubtless he was justified! For years modernism had been privileged in that particular school, and modernism and communism have at least this in common, that neither of them believe in the damning effect of sin or the necessity of the soul-salvation. That is one reason why Liberals maneuver in each one of our denominations to get rid of preachers of the Apostle Peter sort - men who are not skilled in the present day philosophy, men who are not titled in the realm of science, but men who dare to preach the Word of GOD with fervor. Fortunately, and owing to GOD’s grace, we have never been on the self defense in this matter. We have our college and university degrees earned and honorary, but it is our profound conviction that the Church of GOD would be better off today if it had a ministry of the Apostle Peter’s sort - destitute of all literary honor, but entirely familiar with the Word of GOD - than it is under the superintendence of those who can speak the language of science and the speculations of philosophy, but who know not the sacred Scriptures. However, the pulpit orator reaches the limit of his ability when he has brought men under the conviction of truth. Then another procedure becomes essential; namely, Peter. The Personal Instructor “When they heard this, they were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter, and the Test of the apostles, brethren, what shall we do?” (Acts 2:37). Scripture preaching incites soul-questions! Joseph Parker, easily one of the finest ministers of the nineteenth century, speaking of this famous sermon preached by Peter at Pentecost, says, “Observe the effect; not that they were awed by the eloquence; not that they were excited in their imaginations; not that they were gratified in their taste! The result was infinitely deeper and grander. ‘They were pierced in their hearts’. An arrow had fastened itself in the very center of their life. In their conscience was inserted the sting of intolerable self-accusation. This was the grand miracle.” Has that miracle failed today? To a large extent. Why? For the very simple reason suggested above - too many men have ceased to employ the “sword of the Spirit, which is the Word of God.” The average preacher thinks the fault is with society. He assigns the deadly indifference of the day to the social customs that have captured the people - the drink habit, the gambling habit, the dance hall, the theater and picture shows, - the passion for pleasure; and beyond all doubt these are very, very effective, and even more effective still is the college philosophy which, as Dan Gilbert has shown, crucifies CHRIST. But after all has been said that may be said, it still remains a fact that men are uneasy in spirit; that men are dissatisfied in heart; that men and women are still forced to question the future with fear and to consider the state of the immortal soul. When Charles Spurgeon was active in his great ministry at the Metropolitan, there was shown to his study a young Hollander who had come by boat from Flushing to put to him one question, “Mr. Spurgeon, tell me what I must do to be saved.” The great preacher said to him, “Do you mean you have come all this way to ask me that question?” “I do.” “But,” replied the preacher, “you know the answer, ‘Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved’.” To this the young Hollander replied, “But I cannot believe in JESUS CHRIST.” “Well, now,” said Mr. Spurgeon, “I have believed in Him a good many years, and I am still trusting Him; and if you know something against him that makes my faith a fallacy, tell it to me, for I don’t want to be deceived either.” The young man swallowed and said, “Well, sir, I don’t know anything against Him.” “Why don’t you trust Him, then? Can’t you trust me?” “Yes, Mr. Spurgeon, I could trust you with anything, even my soul, if you wanted that.” “But, you don’t know anything about me.” “True, but all I’ve heard about you has been good.” “Fine,” said Mr. Spurgeon, “that is exactly why I trust CHRIST, and you admit you have nothing against Him; the record is clear that He was GOD’s Son; that He came to save men from sin, and that in order to do so, He had to die on Calvary’s cross - that He willingly did this to prove His love; then ascended to the right hand of the Father and became our high priest to make intercession for us, that we through his atonement should be saved, and you can’t trust HIM?” “Yes; yes; yes; Mr. Spurgeon,” said the young Hollander. “I can! I will!” There is not a week, and there is not a journey that I make across this continent, without hearing by letter or personal visit from some one who says, “I heard you preach CHRIST; I believed, and was saved.” It is far easier to stand in the pulpit and proclaim a revealed truth than to sit beside the inquirer and show him the way; but the second work is as essential as the first, and Peter engaged in it. He prescribed steps in obedience. For when they asked “What shall we do?” Peter said, “Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.” Too bad Peter had to be such a simple-hearted, non-suspecting believer! According to Charles Augustus Briggs, professor of Hebrew and cognate languages at Union Theological Seminary, “the Bible does not decide the mode of baptism; it does not clearly determine whether infants are to be baptized.” If that be true, Peter never found it out. To him the mode was exactly what his master practiced in the Jordan at the hands of John, and exactly what Paul told the Romans, “Buried with Christ by baptism and raised to walk in newness of life with Him.” What a symbol when baptism is administered; and how clear the Scriptures become when once the spirit of obedience to the Word of GOD is regnant in the heart. Nearly forty years ago, after a conference with William Francis, the state secretary of the Y.M.C.A. in Minnesota, he said, “I have fought GOD’s word long enough in this matter. I must be obedient to what the Bible plainly teaches.” I baptized him in the baptistry in the old church building, and he became one of the noblest associate pastors any minister ever had. Thirty- five years ago that great and almost matchless layman, W. E. Blackstone, author of JESUS Is Coming, speaking in my presence at a conference in Cleveland, Ohio, said, “Baptism when Biblically administered is a beautiful symbol of death to sin, burial with CHRIST, and resurrection to walk in newness of life.” I very soon took up with him the question of personal obedience and later in that same baptistry in the same building, I laid him beneath the baptismal wave. Twenty-five years ago, the pastor of the People’s Church in St. Paul came with Dr. Schmidt and others of his officers to that same study and same building of former days, and said to me, “I have never been baptized Biblically. Will you go with me out to Lake Calhoun and permit me to enjoy that New Testament rite at your hands?” And of course I accommodated him. Eight or nine years ago “Daddy” Horton, founder and president of Bible Institute of Los Angeles, together with his wife, came to me and both were laid beneath the baptismal wave in a baptistry in Pasadena. Only this last May, dear Paul Rood, president of the World’s Christian Fundamentals Association, and my own successor in office, in connection with the great conference at Waterloo, said to me, “My conscience is troubling me. The Bible is very clear as to the mode of baptism, and I desire to be obedient. I would like immersion at your hands.” And it was my high privilege to baptize him. Peter was right. Baptism is not an essential to salvation, but it is an act of obedience to GOD, and, if one wants to be saved, the spirit of obedience must be present. That is why he said, “Buried with Christ by baptism and raised to walk in newness of life with Him.” Obedience is more than mere ceremony. The only sense in which baptism saves is that it becomes “the answer of a good conscience toward God.” It is the blood that cleanses, and it is faith that saves, but a definitely prescribed ceremony becomes GOD’s own illustration of regeneration itself. If you are dead to sin, then accept this symbolic burial that when you are raised, you may reveal to the world, by a new life, the redemption itself. But the record of Peter’s ministry is not only in the second chapter of Acts. It continues its way through this volume until Paul becomes the individual of surpassing interest. There are three other records in Acts in which Peter plays a conspicuous part. The Private Ministry of Peter These three reveal - a Ministry of Judgment, - a Ministry of Healing, and - a Ministry of Instruction. First of all, a Ministry of Judgment! In Acts 5:1-42, the church became the medium of a ministry, and “none lacked, for as many as were possessors of lands and houses sold them, and brought the prices of the things that were sold, and laid them at the apostles’ feet; and distribution was made unto each, according as anyone had need.” In that connection Ananias, excited by the big offering of Joses - surnamed by the apostles, Barnabas - sold his possessions and kept back part of it, and together with his wife attempted to lie their way into the good graces of the church as its greatest givers. You remember the result. It fell to the lot of Peter to speak the word of judgment that brought death to them both. It was a dire ministry, and we can readily imagine that it was the most harrowing experience of the apostle’s life, but “believers were the more added to the Lord, multitudes both of men and women” (Acts 5:14). Possibly one reason why the church today is so powerless is that it privileges place and honor to so many false professors. Church discipline is both a delicate and difficult task, and yet who doubts that a clean church is a conquering one? If Peter lived now and passed a few such judgments upon the penurious well-to-do for their falsely professed generosity, a committee would be appointed to wait upon him and advise that he seek a new pastorate. But the record would not be what it was in Acts 5:1-42; namely, that on his departure “believers were the more added to the Lord, multitudes of both men and women.” Still further we find with Peter, A Ministry of Healing. “ . . . a certain man named Aeneas, which had kept his bed eight years and was sick of the palsy. And Peter said unto him, Aeneas, Jesus Christ maketh thee whole; arise, and make thy bed. And he arose immediately.” (Acts 9:33-34). There are those, and many of them in the pulpit, who oppose divine healing as unbiblical and many of whom denounce it as a deception. However, as Joseph Parker once remarked, “Let us not give way to the mischievous suggestion that certain things happened in apostolic times which are impossible now. It is not so; that is where the church has lost her inspiration, her weight and her spiritual philosophy. She is content to have a CHRIST two thousand years old.” Why? Is not the CHRIST “the same yesterday and today and forever?” Have His powers become paralyzed with the passing of time? Hardly! It is not so much a question of whether we believe in divine healing, but whether we believe in the divine One, in GOD manifest in the flesh with whom was and is “all power in heaven and on earth,” and who “is the same yesterday, and today and forever.” Do you believe in Him? If so, you can take not only your sins to him, but also your sicknesses. “That it might be fulfilled which was spoken through Isaiah the prophet saying, Himself took our infirmities and bare our diseases” (Matthew 8:17). *** BBB NOTE: It is often said, “We believe in divine healing, but not divine healers!” *** But we follow Peter still further into this book of Acts; to his Ministry of Instruction: In Acts 10:1-48 a centurion of the Italian band in answer to prayer came under conviction, and longed for someone to show him more perfectly the way. GOD revealed to him the place and office of Peter, and at the same time made known to Peter the need of Cornelius. “Being brought Peter opened his mouth and said, Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons; but in every nation he that feareth him and worketh righteousness, is acceptable to him. The word which he sent unto the children of Israel, preaching good tidings of peace by Jesus Christ (he is Lord of all) that saying ye yourselves know, which was published throughout all Judea, beginning from Galilee after the baptism which John preached; even Jesus of Nazareth) how God anointed him with the Holy Spirit and with power; who went about doing good, and healing all that were oppressed of the devil, for God was with him. And we are witnesses of all things which he did, both in the country of the Jews and in Jerusalem; whom also they slew, hanging him on a tree. Him God raised up the third day, and gave him to be made manifest, not to all the people, but unto witnesses that were chosen before of God, even to us who ate and drank with him after he rose from the dead. And he charged us to preach unto the people, and to testify that this is he who is ordained of God to be the Judge of the living and the dead. To him bear all the prophets witness, that through his name everyone that believeth on him shall receive remission of sins” (Acts 10:34-43). The result was, instantly the HOLY GHOST fell upon them. Baptism in the name of the Lord followed. Preaching is GOD’s own appointed way to save them that believe, but “teaching” is an element of preaching that can never be ignored. No man is a true preacher who is not also at the same time an effective teacher. Joseph Parker again said, “Until our teaching be right our life must be wrong. We must ask for the pure bread, the pure water, the undefiled Bible and live on that; out of such nutritious food there will come proper results, such as fellowship, sacramental communion, and common prayer.” Break Thou the bread of life, Dear Lord, to me, As Thou didst break the loaves Beside the Sea; Beyond the sacred page I seek Thee Lord, My spirit pants for Thee, O living Word! Bless Thou the truth, dear Lord, To me - to me, As Thou didst bless the bread By Galilee; Then shall all bondage cease, All fetters fall; And I shall find my peace, My All in all. Thou art the bread of life, Oh Lord, to me, Thy holy Word the truth That saveth me; Give me to eat and live With Thee above; Teach me to love Thy truth, For Thou art love. O send Thy Spirit, Lord, Now unto me, That He may touch my eyes, And make me see; Show me the truth concealed Within Thy Word, And in Thy Book revealed I see the Lord. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 52: 04.6. PAUL – THE PASSIONATE SOUL-WINNER ======================================================================== Paul – The Passionate Soul-Winner “For I could wish that myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh” (Romans 9:3) THE history of the apostle Paul, as recorded in the Book of Acts, is so well known that it would compare in familiarity with the history of Moses as recorded in the Old Testament or even with that of CHRIST as recorded in the New. From the day of his conversion, as given in the 9th chapter of the Book, to the end of that volume, he takes first place in that ancient archive. This exaltation is due solely to his accomplishments, character, and competence. When one is introduced to Saul of Tarsus he immediately becomes cognizant of the fact that he has met a real man - a scholar and saint combined in one. He is of the sort that rivets attention, rewards study, and excites ever-growing admiration. While we have selected this text of Romans 9:3 as a fit expression of our theme - PAUL, THE PASSIONATE SOUL WINNER - we propose to interpret it in the light of the Acts’ history. Proceeding on that basis, we will be impressed with 1.The Apostle’s Radical Conversion, 2.The Peril of His People, and 3.The Passion of His Service. His Conversion Was Radical He was unexpectedly convinced of CHRIST’s Deity. When he went to the High Priest and secured of him letters to Damascus that he might effect the arrest, trial and conviction of the Christians, he was thoroughly convinced that CHRIST was a deceiver. He knew the history of Theudas who had boasted “himself to be somebody; to whom a number of men, about four hundred, joined themselves: who was slain, and all, as many as obeyed him, were scattered, and brought to nought” (Acts 5:36). He also knew the history of Judas of Galilee who had drawn “away much people after him:” and also how he had miserably perished, “and all, even as many as obeyed him were dispersed” (Acts 5:37). And he was convinced that CHRIST was only another of the same sort. But when, “as he journeyed, . . . there shined round about him a light from heaven: and” as “he fell to the earth” he “heard a voice saying unto him, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me?”; and in response to his question “Who art thou, Lord?” the answer came,- “I am Jesus whom thou persecutest” his conversion was instant! His doubts of Deity died at that moment! Perhaps, after all, there is no argument for the Deity of JESUS CHRIST comparable to that of a clear word from Him. To this same hour that instrument - His Word - is potent. It was when the young Charles Spurgeon heard from the Lord the words “Look unto me all ye ends of the earth and be saved” that he was convinced. It was when Frederick Brown, Sr., the editor of Ram’s Horn, heard a word from the Lord that he was saved. It was a word from the Lord that reached the heart of B. H. Carroll and, in a few minutes, changed him from a skeptic to a Christian. Little wonder that Paul later wrote:- “For I am not ashamed of the Gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to everyone that believeth, . . .” (Romans 1:16). Nor yet is it any amazement that he enjoined upon his junior, Timothy,- “Preach the word.” There is power in the Word! His conversion was as sudden as complete. There are people who would persuade us that conversion is the product of information, - the gradual effect of education. Such teachers tell us that the period of puberty in children is often to be identified with conversion; that the physical changes taking place in the body itself bring about new attitudes toward life and consequently toward religion, arid that it is a gradual process requiring time for its development. If so, this much is certain, viz. Paul’s conversion was not after that manner! He was changed suddenly; “in the wink of an eye” so to speak: and if conversion were only such changes as nature and time work it would be logical to doubt whether mature people could ever be converted at all, and would, therefore, result in rather a hopeless Gospel for those upon whom rested the weight of any considerable number of years. The Gospel is unique in that it is adapted to all times, to all conceivable human conditions, to all possible circumstances, to men without respect to color, race or residence, and equally adapted to people of all ages. The radical conversion, such as Paul experienced, is commonly known only to men of some advanced years. The child, in his simplicity of faith, may yield his heart to JESUS and offer his life and love without being conscious of any revolution whatever; but not so with the man of advanced years. His alignments with the world, his entanglements with the flesh, his alliances with the devil are too many! When they are broken it is like a discharge of dynamite in the rock quarry. There are dozens of points at which breaking and tearing and readjustment must take place; and while it may require some time for the sound to die away, and each misplaced stone to find its rest, the space of time is short! Regeneration, though permanent, is sudden and violent: and Paul will forever stand out as GOD’s answer to those who oppose emotional religion, and as an adequate reply to those who dispute sudden conversion. This conversion effected many new relations. Judaism had to be repudiated in large part; - its multiplied traditions, that were without Biblical basis, had to go; - its doctrine of “salvation by works” was flung forever into the discard; - its performance of rituals and ceremonies were seen to be valueless. When Paul came to write his Epistle to the Hebrews he tells the world, and especially the church of GOD, why he parted company from Judaism forever, and accepted CHRIST and Christianity as the inspiration of life, the basis of hope and the motive of endeavor. Charles Edward Jefferson, writing on “The Character of Paul,” says:- “Paul at the age of thirty had brilliant prospects. Because of his ability and education and noble character, all doors were open to him. No one knows how high a place he might have won in the Jewish world had he never become a Christian. By saying that he had seen JESUS alive after the crucifixion, he put an end forever to all hope of earthly advancement. There was no room for him anywhere, either in Jerusalem or in Tarsus. Every avenue was blocked - every door was locked and barred. His own family cast him off. His old friends turned against him. His fellow students in Jerusalem gave him the cold shoulder.” Did Paul ever grieve these losses? Hear him while he writes to the Philippians:- “Finally, my brethren, rejoice in the Lord . . . “ We who are in CHRIST JESUS “have no confidence in the flesh. Though I might also have confidence in the flesh. If any other man thinketh that he. hath whereof he might trust in the flesh, I more: Circumcised the eighth day, of the stock of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, an Hebrew of the Hebrews; as touching the law, a Pharisee; Concerning zeal, persecuting the church; touching the righteousness which is in the law, blameless. But what things were gain to me, those I counted loss for Christ. Yea doubtless, and I count all things but loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord: for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and do count them but dung, that I may win Christ. “And be found in him, not having mine own righteousness, which is of the law, but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by faith. That I may know him, and the power of his resurrection, and the fellowship of his sufferings, being made conformable unto his death; If by any means I might attain unto the resurrection of the dead. “Not as though I had already attained, either were already perfect: but I follow after, if that I may apprehend that for which also I am apprehended of Christ Jesus. Brethren, I count not myself to have apprehended: but this one thing I do, forgetting those things which are behind, and reaching forth unto those things which are before, I press toward the mark for the prize of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus” (Php 3:1-14). The Peril of His People He saw that their hopes were falsely based. Dr. A. J. Frost, for ten years the dean of The Northwestern Bible School, and, for the same length of time, my efficient co-laborer in theological teaching, used to speak often of the ten “better things” (Hebrews 6:9) that the apostle Paul had found in CHRIST, and of which he spoke in comparison:- -“the better estate” (Hebrews 1:4), -“the better hope” (Hebrews 7:19), -“the better testament” (Hebrews 7:22), -“the better Mediator” (Hebrews 8:6), -“better covenant” (Hebrews 8:6), -“better promises” (Hebrews 8:6), -“better sacrifices” (Hebrews 9:23), -“better substance” (Hebrews 10:34), -“better country” (Hebrews 11:16), -“better resurrection’” (Hebrews 11:35), and he drew on Paul’s letter to his own people, for the proof of it all. To be able to turn people from falsehood to truth is to break the power of darkness and flood the soul with light. To be able to take them from trust in ceremonies to a living faith in CHRIST - Paul knew, from experience, what that means. Robert Murray McCheyne in his Memoirs, tells the story of 30,000 Spaniards who came from over the Pyrenees into France to escape the civil wars (poor Spain is still torn by the same). He says that some Geneva youths determined to take the opportunity to give each of them a Testament. The London Society provided them with ten thousand copies. They started to thoroughly distribute them; but Spanish priests immediately appeared and would not allow the boys to receive or keep a copy. Many of them were burned; they called it “a Plague.” But one youth bought and kept his Testament, read it, believed it, and found JESUS; and when his companions moved on, he stayed behind to learn more about CHRIST. And Robert Murray McCheyne said, “Was not this one precious soul worth all the expense and trouble a thousand times over?” I have just read Under His Wings, by R. W. Hambrook, of the U. S. Office of Education, Washington, D. C. Having finished an address before the New York Teacher’s Association at Syracuse, he took plane for Washington. The ice, forming from excessive cold, killed one engine and the plane crashed. For two days and nights the pilot and two co-pilots and Hambrook faced death from freezing. Two futile attempts were made to break through three feet of snow and find their way out. All available material was burned to keep warm. All window curtains and cloth of every kind was wrapped about them for warmth. Dozens of searching fliers failed to sight them. As hope dwindled and death threatened, Hambrook pleaded with the three men to accept CHRIST and was rewarded by seeing them surrender one after another. Finally help came. In recounting the incident, Hambrook said, “An $80,000 plane was destroyed, 9,000 gallons of gasoline was burned by us, thousands by searchers - the expense was enormous, but three men won to CHRIST! It was worth all the agony to families, and all the expense incurred!” That is something akin to Paul’s conception of soul value, and that is the explanation of his cry, “I could wish that I myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh.” He had been made conscious of their unsaved and sinful estate. In the effulgence of that light which shined round about him on the Damascus way, he saw himself as he was - a sinner in GOD’s sight. Seeing himself, he saw also every Israelite in the same condition. Would that a kindred awakening could come to the saved of this century; and to the membership of the professed evangelical churches of the land! Bishop James E. Freeman, when he was yet pastor in Minneapolis, said: “The modern complexity of church administration has brought the ministry to the breaking point. It has laid upon the shoulders of the church’s chosen leaders burdens too heavy to be borne. It has brought about a situation that has resulted in the impairment of the pastoral and prophetic offices. It has called for an outlay of time and money, the volume of which has mounted from year to year. It has put the church in competition with secular agencies and placed it at a disadvantage it can not readily overcome. It has shifted the emphasis from a concern for souls to a concern for bodies.” How true! Would that the Church could be aroused to soul-interest! He discovered the Saviour in their own Scriptures. Just as Peter, on the day of Pentecost, got a new conception of GOD’s Holy Word, and in the light of what he knew about JESUS, so preached that Word as to produce the conviction of thousands, so now his brother Paul, flinging the Hebrew traditions aside, not only began to feed his own soul with the Scriptures, seeing in them the revelation of the Saviour, but he sought a kindred knowledge for his fellow Jews. Dr. J. Wilbur Chapman, the model evangelist of more recent years, tells the story of a man in Chicago who was not regarded by his acquaintances as even bright, but who loved the Lord ardently, and who, in one of the missions had been pointed to CHRIST, and immediately became a student and interpreter of the Word of GOD. He wore out three Bibles in three years. A certain editor made up his mind that he would like to see and hear him, and going up to his poor room in a garret, he said to him, “Would you mind to read the Bible to me?” He replied joyfully, “O yes! Yes!” The editor in reporting it said, “I thought I had heard the Bible read. I thought I had read the Bible myself. But as this man read it, with tears flowing down his face and his voice trembling, I said to him, “Tell me, what is the secret of your power?” He hesitated, and then said, “I have seen JESUS!” That was the secret of Paul’s power; he had seen the Lord and when he saw, he was made to feel like Isaiah, “I am an unclean man”; as Peter did in His presence, “I am a sinner,” and to know that all his fellows were in kindred estate, under condemnation, under the death-sentence, doomed! But Paul also discovered their way of escape. CHRIST had said on one occasion, “I am the way.” It was that day, when, doubtless anticipating His own decease, on the cross, He sought to comfort His disciples by saying, “Let not your hearts be troubled, ye believe in God, believe also in me. In my Father’s house are many mansions; if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a Place for you. And if I go and prepare a Place for you, I will come again, and receive you unto myself; that where I am, there ye may be also. And whither I go ye know, and the way ye know. Thomas saith unto him, Lord, we know not whither thou goest,’ and how can we know the way? Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.” Sir Robert Anderson has a great book on The Way and, of course, it presents none other than CHRIST as the Way. “There is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.” On one occasion CHRIST said, “Search the scriptures for in them ye think ye have eternal life; and they are they which testify of me” (John 5:39). His Concern Was All-Consuming He yearned for their souls! He was indeed burdened for his people, Israel. Fifty years ago the plain farmer Christians, among whom I spent my boyhood, were accustomed to meet and greet one another, and then ask the question, “Brother, have you any burden for souls?” I fear the greatest weakness of the Church of GOD at this present moment is at that point; no burden for souls! Revivals are difficult to explain; but as near as we can discover their secret, I am persuaded that they are born out of “burden for souls.” That burden necessarily involves other things: 1. Belief in the soul’s immortality; 2. The acceptance of the Scripture teaching concerning the possibility of an eternal damnation; 3. A sense of individual responsibility for reaching the lost and unsaved. Richard Kill, the great predecessor of Charles Spurgeon, once said: “If there was but one soul unsaved in some far off land, so precious would that soul be in the sight of GOD that it would be worth while for every Christian in the world to make a personal journey to tell that single man the story of salvation.” If we believed that, urgent appeals for missions would never again be necessary; and if we believed that, the deadly indifference which now lies upon the church like a paralysis, would become impossible. Years ago Mr. Hanly, the Governor of Indiana, was an ardent Christian. Speaking at Washington, Ind., one day, he noticed in the very front row of the great crowd that had gathered, a little lad with rosy cheeks and big brown eyes, who was eagerly listening. Glancing at him, Hanly said, “Give that bright-eyed little chap down there, a chance. The saving of that one boy’s soul is more important than the election of a president, or the success of any political party.” Would that the politicians of this day were under that conviction. What a marvelous influence it would have on the question of the saloon, for instance, and on the question of social economy, and on the question of Church and State. Paul stood ready for any needful sacrifice. He affirmed his willingness to be lost himself if Israel could be saved; to go down to death and hell and endure the torments of the damned if they might be redeemed. Gipsy Smith tells this story of W. T. Stead, and it is a pleasure to repeat it. He said that Mr. Stead went with him down to Rhondda Valley to spend a Sunday with him in the mission he was holding at Pontyridd. At the close of the evening service, Mr. Stead went into the inquiry room, where two or three hundred men and women were, to watch the personal work, and as he sat there a young collier came up and spoke to him, and said, “Mr. Stead, I represent six of my chums who are at work now down in the pit. They have sent me to bring you a message. We had made up our minds to be infidels, and we thought we were. But we worshipped you, Mr. Stead. You have been our hero! We read everything of yours that we could get; and a few months ago we read one of your articles that knocked the infidelity out of us and made us give our hearts to GOD. My companions asked me to come and thank you for that article.” Mr. Stead was greatly moved. He gripped the young fellow’s hand and wept for very joy. And Gipsy Smith said, “Later, when we were alone, he said to me, ‘Smith, nothing in my life has given me such supreme joy as when that young collier gripped my hand and said that I had been the means of saving himself and his companions. I felt that I would like to quit the editor’s chair and become an evangelist!’” Paul devoted his life to one great endeavor. Paul’s record from the day of his conversion till the day when his head was severed by the hand of the axe-man, shows that he moves with one purpose and one only - to reach men, to bring men to CHRIST! That to him was the supreme purpose of life. It was the only occasion of living; and when he ascended into Heaven itself, he could imagine nothing that would surpass the joy of greeting his converts - “his joy; his crown!” Little wonder! What true Christian ever lived who could ask any reward equal to the reward of souls saved - their sins forgiven? When I was a lad I used to have the privilege occasionally of hearing John B. Gough, and I enjoyed one of the stories reported as told by him in Cooper Institute, New York. He said: “I have in my house a small handkerchief, not worth three cents to you, but you could not buy it from me. A woman brought it and gave it to my wife, and said, ‘I am very poor; I would give your husband a thousand pounds if I had it; but I brought this. I married with the fairest and brightest prospects before me; but my husband took to drinking, and everything went. The pianoforte my mother gave, and everything, was sold, until at last I found myself in a miserable room. My husband lay drunk in a corner, and my child, that was lying on my knee, was restless. I sang “The Light of other Days has Faded;’ and wet my handkerchief through with my tears. My husband; said she to my wife, ‘met Mr. Gough. He spoke a few words to him and gave him a grasp of the hand, and now for six years my husband has been to me all that a husband can be to a wife, and we are getting our household goods together again. I have brought your husband the very handkerchief I wet through that night with my tears, and I want him, when he is speaking, to remember that he has wiped away those tears from me, I trust in GOD, forever.’ “ “Ah;’ said Gough, “these are the trophies that make men glad!” May GOD grant us all some such precious trophies of faithful work done for CHRIST! ======================================================================== CHAPTER 53: 04.7. JESUS – THE SUPREME SOUL-WINNER ======================================================================== Jesus – The Supreme Soul-Winner “For the Son of man is come to seek and to save that which is lost” (Luke 19:10) IN PRESENTING this seventh subject of “New Testament Soul Winners” let it be clearly understood that while I am employing the theme “JESUS, the Supreme Soul Winner;” it is not my purpose to introduce comparison. He is, in all things, the incomparable One. On that very account He becomes a perfect Example in all matters of life and labor. It will be remembered that, on one occasion - when engaged in the menial service of washing His disciples’ feet - He said to them: “For I have given you an example, that ye should do as I have done to you” (John 13:15). And even in the matter of soul winning we have a kindred suggestion. Our text tells us His objective in coming to the world:- 1.. . . the Son of man is come to seek and to save that which is lost.” And to His disciples He said:- 2.. . . as my Father hath sent me, even so send I you” (John 20:21). There is all the difference, then, between the study of CHRIST as a Soul Winner and the study of the best of His disciples that exists between the perfect and the imperfect. As a perfect Example he standeth solitary and alone. We would do well, therefore, to study - His Definite Objective, - His Adroit Methods, and - His Degree of Success. His Definite Objective He saw men as sinners in GOD’s sight. He, Who knew what was in man, never suffered any delusion nor indulged in any false philosophies on that subject. He “came not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance” (Luke 5:32). He believed with the Psalmist concerning mankind - “They are all gone aside, they are all together become filthy: there is none that doeth good, no, not one” (Psalms 14:3). He held with Paul’s statement to the Romans:- “There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God” (Romans 3:11). The modernist educator has evolved from his own brain a theory which oftentimes finds echo in pulpits - supposed to be evangelical - to the effect that a man is not a sinner, but merely an animal, immature as yet in development, and consequently subject to mis-steps and mistakes. It is not so many years ago that a pulpit in this city declared that “the primary mission of organized Christianity is not the salvaging of derelict sinners but the training of young people so that they will never become derelicts.” On the other hand, Dr. W. N. Clarke in his “Outline of Christian Theology” - rankly modern as he was - admits “The Christian revelation uniformly addresses man as a sinful being. It represents the race as involved in moral evil, and the individual as transgressing the law that he ought to obey. The constant appeal of the Scriptures is an appeal against sin . . . ,” while Dr. J. B. Champion, conservative theologian, finds the secret of Paul’s power in his “exceedingly deep estimate of the sinfulness of sin.” He says: “No such arraignment of it can be found anywhere, as in the early part of Romans.” Paul refused to devitalize the Gospel by a shallow estimate even of his own sin. The only adequate explanation, or even justification, of JESUS CHRIST’s visit to our world existed in the circumstances of man’s sin. He considered the souls of men as both lost and doomed. Our text refers directly to that conviction. He came “to seek and to save that which is lost.” Perhaps no single chapter in the Sacred Book contains three such effective illustrations as Luke 15:1-32! That chapter opens with the statement:- “Then drew near unto him all the publicans and sinners for to hear him,” and the three parables spoken on that occasion in answer to the Pharisees’ charge - “ This man receiveth sinners, and eateth with them” - represented men as “lost” by reason of sin. - it was a “lost” sheep that the shepherd hunted; - it was the “lost” piece of money that the married woman diligently sought until she found it; - it was the “lost” prodigal that the Father received with joy. Robert F. Horton in “Teachings of JESUS” says: “Dark, defiled, demon-haunted spirit, black with venom and despair, you, the worst of men, you are a man, therefore the Son of Man does not despair of you. Rather, He has set His heart on saving you. He has come to seek and to save that which is lost.” Lost men are not always conscious of their condition; in fact, they are commonly unconscious of it, and, on that account, indifferent to danger. There is a story of an Indian evangelist who in his sermon was interrupted by a flippant youth who said:- “You talk to us about the burden of sin. I feel none. How heavy is it - ten, fifty or eighty pounds? What is its weight?” The preacher instantly replied:- “If you laid ten, fifty, eighty or one hundred pounds on a corpse, would it be conscious of the load?” “Certainly not,” said the youth. “A corpse is dead.” “Exactly so,” answered the minister. “That is why you are unconscious of the load of sin; you are ‘dead in trespasses and in sins.’ “ CHRIST came not to confer with the “found” but to seek the “lost.” He came not to improve the living but to “quicken the dead.” Concerning the saints it is written: “And you hath he quickened who were dead in trespasses and sins” (Ephesians 2:1). He came to provide and proffer salvation! Anticipating His appearance, Isaiah said:- “And it shall be said in that day, lo this is our God; we have waited for Him, and He will save us .. .” (Isaiah 25:9). Concerning His birth it was remarked:- “ . . . thou shalt call his name JESUS: for he shall save his people from their sins” (Matthew 1:21). And Luke, when he gave us the Book of the Acts, wrote of Him:- “Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name, under heaven, given among men, whereby we must be saved” (Acts 4:12). Robert Murray McCheyne, that matchless Scotch minister, who, like his Master, had finished a marvelous life at thirty-three, writing from Dundee, Scotland, to a friend who was in darkness, said:- “I have sinned more deeply than you. I have sinned against more light and more love, and yet I have found mercy; why may not you? Remember what James Covey said: ‘Tell poor sailors that none of them need to despair, since poor blaspheming Covey found mercy.’ “ “While we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.” Why? It was to save us; not to save good people; not to save angels, but sinners. Perhaps you will say, “But I am too bad a sinner.” Paul answers:- “I was the chief of sinners.” Yet he was saved by CHRIST; so CHRIST is willing and able to save you. If CHRIST came into this world to die to save sinners such as you, would it not be a frightful thing if you died without being saved by Him? What has the world done for you that you love it so much? 1. Did the world die for you? 2. Did the world blot out your sins or change your heart? 3. Will the world carry you to Heaven? No, no! Come and try the pleasures of CHRIST. I have not been at a dance or any worldly amusement for many years, and yet I believe I have had more pleasure in a single day than you have had all your life. “A day in thy courts is better than a thousand.” Holding this subject of saving men, as JESUS ever did, it is interesting to study- His Adroit Methods He called the willing ones to himself! I confess it has always been a marvel to me to read the story of CHRIST’s first disciples. They were fishermen; and professional fishermen are commonly tough. That Peter was given to profanity we know full well from his lapse into old habits in the high priest’s porch. How many other sins beset those fishermen we do not know, but can readily imagine that they were not few; and yet, on the testimony of John the Baptist, they believed, and at their first opportunity “they followed Him.” When Andrew went after Simon Peter, he needed only to say,-”We have found the Messias, which is, being interpreted, the Christ” (John 1:41). “And he brought him to Jesus.” Philip heard only the Master’s invitation “Follow me” and he responded, and shortly brought with him to the same discipleship Nathanael. We marvel at this! But I believe that we have a Scriptural and sufficient explanation of this early success in winning men from sin to Himself. There is a reference to it in the same chapter that records the decision of the first disciples. It was His Baptism, at the hands of John, at which time the Spirit of GOD descended from Heaven like a dove and abode upon Him. Who doubts that the presence of the HOLY GHOST in any life completes the powers of persuasion? And who questions that the very lack of His enduement often explains the dearth characterizing our endeavor, or even the lack of endeavour itself? Peter had been a disciple of JESUS for some time, but, so far as the record goes, had won no one to Him; but “when the day of Pentecost was fully come” he suddenly blossomed into a superb soul-winner. The reason is not far to seek; that day he spake in the power of the Spirit, and men buried their faces in the dust and cried: “What shall we do!” It was after Father Chiniquy had spent twenty-four hours in importunate prayer that his preaching brought over a thousand people to CHRIST,- the product of a single sermon! It was after Moody had surrendered himself “wholly unto the Lord” that he himself stood amazed at the result of the sermon in London! I have no patent on the way to secure power! I am loathe even to suggest seeking methods; but from a study of Scripture and the observation upon successful soul-winners, I am fully persuaded that no man will find easy the work of soulwinning until he is Spirit-endued. He convinced the skeptical by appeal to Scripture. Nicodemus was a ruler of the Jews. Fearing for his personal popularity he sought JESUS under the cover of darkness, and after having conceded that His miracles were the signs of His Divine commission, he questioned Him on the way of salvation. When JESUS answered him, saying,- “Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God,” and further added - “That which is born of the flesh is flesh: and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit,” He was appealing directly to the Jewish Scriptures, and using almost the exact language of Ezekiel 36:25 - “Then will I sprinkle clean water upon you, and ye shall be clean: from all your filthiness, and from all your idols, will I cleanse you. A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you: and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you an heart of flesh. And I will put my spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes, and ye shall keep my judgments, and do them.” In the Old Testament the promise might seem, by the context, to belong to Israel only; but in the New Testament statement of our Master, no such limitations were laid upon it. A kindred thing takes place in Acts 2:1-47 where Peter appeals to that same Old Testament Scripture to convince his own kith and kin that they had crucified CHRIST, and to reveal to them, in JESUS of Nazareth, a Saviour. Can mortal man improve upon the Master’s methods in this matter? Certainly not! Those evangelists who have taken classes to train in soul-winning, and have led them to commit to memory passages of Scripture with which to deal with every difficulty and doubt, have been wise masterbuilders. GOD’s Word never returns void. It accomplishes that which He pleases and prospers in the thing whereto He hath sent it (Isaiah 55:11). It is “the power of God unto salvation.” “Preach the word.” In other words, imitate your Master’s example! With that same Word He instructed the immoral sinner. In John 4 we have the record of the woman at the well. She was a Hollywoodite; she was a veritable Reno addict; she had had five husbands, and was illegally living with the sixth. Her pious question - “Where should men worship?” - deceived Him in nothing. He shortly made clear to her the fact that it was not a question of place, but of spirit, even as the Old Testament had taught, and that the CHRIST to come, prophesied in this same Scriptures, was now there and addressing her. “I that speak unto thee am He.” CHRIST knew full well that nothing produced in man such a sense of sin as to see the face of GOD. In Isaiah 6:1-13 we read the prophet’s statement:- “In the year that king Uzziah died I saw also the Lord sitting upon a throne, high and lifted up, and his train filled the temple” (Isaiah 6:1). “Then said I, Woe is me! for I am undone; because I am a man of unclean lips, and I dwell in the midst of a people of unclean lips: for mine eyes have seen the King, . . . “ (Isaiah 6:5). When Daniel had his vision of the Lord, there remained no strength in him, and his comeliness was turned into corruption (Daniel 10:8). Peter never appreciated his soul- stains as he did on that morning when, at the sea-side, the miracle of the fishes enclosed in the net convinced him that JESUS was GOD. Then it was that “he fell down at Jesus’ knees, saying, Depart from me, for I am a sinful man, O Lord” (Luke 5:8). To this good hour there is no way of driving men to a sense of sin comparable to the presentation of JESUS CHRIST, the sinless One! It is when they have seen Him that they are condemned; it is the sight of His face that brings contrition and confession. Here again our Lord’s method is the adequate example for all servants who would be soul-winners. But before I finish, let me speak briefly on- His Degree of Success Let us remark first- His success was not one hundred percent. There are people who, when they have sought to win others to CHRIST and failed, become discouraged and feel that there is something wrong with them, and often say, “We might just as well quit.” But a study of the life of CHRIST in His office as a Soul Winner tends to condemn this process of reasoning. He was not always successful, and yet His failures were not made an excuse for cessation of endeavor. Take the rich young ruler who came to his Master and said, “What shall I do to inherit eternal life?” JESUS failed with him; and while He grieved that ruler’s course, He ceased not from undertaking with others. On another occasion He went back to His own home and spent a Sabbath Day, teaching; but they refused His Word, and it is written,- “And he could there do no mighty work, save that he laid his hands upon a few sick folk, and healed them” (Mark 6:5). The statement concerning JESUS that He “was in all points tempted like as we are . . . “ (Hebrews 4:15) finds full illustration in the Divine record. The man who is easily discouraged and gives over the divinely-appointed task after a few, or even many, failures is not imitating his Master. A while ago I fell upon an article, and clipped it for my Scrap Book, rehearsing the failures that characterized Lincoln’s life; and they were not few. - When he first ran for the Legislature in Illinois he was badly beaten. - When he entered upon the business life, a worthless partner involved him and left him to hold the bag of multiplied debts. - The young woman to whom he was engaged died. - His first candidacy for Congress came to naught. - His application for a position in the U. S. Land Office was declined. - When he ran for the U. S. Senate he lost out. - When he became a candidate for the office of Vice President on the Republican ticket in 1856 he failed to secure the nomination. - When in 1858 he ran for the U. S. Senate his old foe, Stephen Douglas, won against him; and yet none of these defeats, these apparent failures, ended his endeavor. He plodded on with purposeful objectives until he held, and filled, in a way to make his name immortal, the highest position known to the mighty nation in which he was a citizen. There is much in the old line from the poet:- “If at first you don’t succeed, Try, try again.” CHRIST commonly convinced His man. His disciples were, many of them, won directly by Him. His converts were sufficient so that when He was ready to ascend, about five hundred of them were there to witness His going (1 Corinthians 15:6). It is true that CHRIST’s method was not that of direct appeal, but a representation instead. He won a few and commissioned them to win other fellows; and yet when the short period of time between His Baptism and consequent public ministry and His Ascension to the right hand of the Father is considered, the result is nothing short of amazing. It becomes all the more meaningful when we remember the opposition He faced, the prejudices that everywhere thwarted His endeavors, and the godlessness of the generation to which He belonged. This much is certain that He passed up all other professions and callings and committed Himself wholly to one - the saving of men! What a reproof to us all, and what a special rebuke to those who, notwithstanding their profession of loyalty to CHRIST, spend their whole time in other occupation! Dr. W. E. Biederwolf, in one of his volumes, tells of an old deacon he had known who was engaged in the sheep business. He would go through all sorts of the worst weather-storm and flood-to save a sheep. At every prayer meeting he would get up and talk about what he called “the precious cause” and “perishing immortal souls,” but that old deacon never cared for the soul of any man. He lived and died in the sheep business; he made money in it, and kept it. And all the while the great world of earnest, aspiring, yet doubting, faltering men were never helped one bit or brought one whit closer to GOD for his having lived in it! We fear there are more like the deacon than like our dear Lord. Finally, He made the miracle a medium of soul-access. He wrought many miracles, the records of which dot the New Testament pages. These are days when the self -styled intelligentsia deny the miracle - possibility; but you may be surprised if you read the New Testament afresh to find that Dr. Luke - who was at once a scholar and a physician - records more of these miracles than any other New Testament writer. Never once does he express a doubt of them. Dr. Howard A. Kelly, the great Christian surgeon and scientist - the most outstanding man of his profession in America - in an address to physicians in Philadelphia recently said:- “When my friends tell me they do not believe in the miracles, I reply that there is only one miracle I cannot believe in, and that is, that this Book was written by men without that Divine guidance from GOD’s HOLY SPIRIT.” It is this constant and eternal questioning of GOD’s power that has paralyzed the church, and it is the doubts that men entertain concerning CHRIST’s power to heal and CHRIST’s power to save that interferes alike with the health of men’s bodies and the redemption of men’s souls. Long since the golden-mouthed Chrysostom said to the skeptics of his day:- “Do ye desire, yourselves, even in your own days, to behold miracles? I will show you a miracle greater than any wrought before - not merely one dead man raised to life, not merely one blind man restored to sight; but so many nations scraping off the leprosy of sin, and cleansed by the washing of regeneration.” We pray, as individuals and as a church, for a revival; we ask GOD to grant us the salvation of the souls of acquaintances, friends and loved ones. His reply must ever be, “Only believe;” “All things are possible to him that believeth” (Mark 9:23). Yet “faith, if it hath not works, is dead” (James 2:17). My people know this to be my favorite hymn: Brightly beams our Father’s mercy From His lighthouse ever more; But to us He gives the keeping Of the lights along the shore. Dark the night of sin has settled, Loud the angry billows roar; Eager eyes are watching, longing, For the lights along the shore. Trim your feeble lamp, my brother! Some poor seaman, tempest-tossed, Trying now to make the harbor, In the darkness may be lost. CHORUS: Let the lower lights be burning! Send a gleam across the wave! Some poor fainting, struggling seaman You may rescue, you may save. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 54: 05.0.1. THE GOSPEL IN JONAH ======================================================================== THE GOSPEL IN JONAH OR SUNDAY NIGHTS IN SOUL WINNING BY WM. B. RILEY Pastor of the First Baptist Church, Minneapolis. Author of “The Greater Doctrines of Scripture,” “Modern Amusements vs. Church Membership,” “Modern Fads and Fanaticisms,” “The Seven Churches of Asia,” etc. CHRISTIAN ALLIANCE PUBLISHING CO. 692 Eighth Ave., New York, ======================================================================== CHAPTER 55: 05.0.2. DEDICATION ======================================================================== DEDICATION To The Faculty of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, in the Years 1885 to 1888 Whose instruction in the Word convinced me fully of its inspiration, and profoundly impressed me with its power to save. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 56: 05.1. JONAH AT SEA ======================================================================== JONAH AT SEA Jonah 1, Part One WE begin this evening, a series of four or five talks on the book of Jonah. My purpose in these discourses is threefold. First, to familiarise you with this book of the Bible. One of the weaknesses of present-day Bible study exists in the circumstance that so few people master even a single book of the sixty-six that go to make it up. In the next place I want to expose the absurdities contained in the Critics’ attacks upon this volume of Sacred Writ. And, finally, I hope to see the Holy Spirit reach men’s hearts with its messages, that souls may be saved. There is every reason to believe that this book wears its author’s name. The objections that have been urged against this opinion—three or four in number—are too flimsy for thoughtful people to give them any serious consideration. The objection that if Jonah was its author he would speak of himself in the first person instead of in the third, as Dr. Pusey has said, “belongs to the babyhood of criticism.” Since Caesar, Xenophen, Solomon, Moses, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Amos, Daniel, Haggai, John, Peter, and Paul, every one write of themselves in the third person, do the critics stand ready to part with Caesar’s Commentaries, Xenophen’s Anabasis, The Pentateuch, The Proverbs, The Psalms, The Prophecies, The Gospels, and The Epistle’s? Again, the objection that we hear nothing else of this prophet Jonah, and consequently may question whether such a one existed, is adequately answered by referring to 2 Kings 14:25, where we read of Jeroboam, who was then on the throne, that “he restored the border of Israel from the entering in of Hamuth unto the Sea of Arabah, according to the Word of the Lord, the God of Israel, which He spake by the hand of His servant Jonah, the son of Amittai, the prophet, which was of Gathhepher.” The claim of some that had Jonah been the author he would have dealt less severely with his own character, rounding off its rough corners and deftly concealing it defects, is a criticism born of the lack of appreciation of prophetic character. Moses never dreamed of shielding himself when it came to the making of the record of his mistakes. David in Psalms 51:1-19 paints his own sin in crimson colors, and instead of attempting to palliate his guilt, prays for pardon; while the Apostle Peter is supposed to have seen and consented to the faithful record of his own cowardly conduct. The truth is that if anybody else than Jonah had been the author of this book the Prophet would have fared better and the truth worse. The name Jonah signifies “a dove,” and when first given doubtless meant to his mother gentleness and love. But, in the process of time, it came to be more significant still, as this man mourned as the dove mourns, as he witnessed the wickedness of his own people—Israel. It may seem a strange circumstance that a man who was a prophet of Israel should receive an appointment to preach to the Gentiles of a great heathen city. But we must remember that from the beginning it was God’s custom to give to Israel’s Gentile neighbors an opportunity of salvation through the proclamation of His truth. To the Canaanites He preached by the character and faith of Abraham; to the Egyptians by the mouths of Joseph and Moses; to the Assyrians by Elisha; and to Nebuchadnezzar, Darius and Cyrus, and their respective kingdoms, by Daniel. If Israel had been either faithful students of divine providence or careful observers of the divine practice, they would have understood from the first what sounded so strangely in their ears when declared by the Apostle Peter, namely—”that God is no respector of persons, but in every nation he that feareth Him and worketh righteousness is accepted with Him” (Acts 10:34). There are four thoughts around which all the lessons of Jonah 1:1-17 may be arranged—Jonah’s commission; Jonah’s resignation; Jonah’s experience; and Jonah’s judgment. I. His Commission. “Now the word of the Lord came unto Jonah, the son of Amittai, saying, Arise, go to Nineveh, that great city, and cry against it, for their wickedness is come up before Me.” These verses compass his commission. It was from the Lord. “Now the word of the Lord came unto Jonah saying.’ There are those who question whether he ever receive direct communication fata God. But, to call that into question is to dethrone every prophet and apostle of Old and New Testament, for the one to think they all make in common is that of being commissioned by the Lord. To call that into question is to dethrone God himself, for what rational man could admit there was a God in heaven, of infinite wisdom and unlimited power, whose chief attribute was love, and at the same time deny that such a God would be interested in men and communicate to them His mind? And, I am among those who believe that God is speaking to men today; speaking to His prophets—preachers—by the small, still voice of the Spirit, and yet by a voice so distinct that they cannot misunderstand, commissioning them to cry aloud against wickedness and call men to repentance. I believe that He speaks to the unsaved so that they understand Him, and calls upon them to repent and return to the Lord that they might be saved. And I believe that it is the greatest wickedness on the part of the saved, and the greatest folly on the part of the sinner when either shuts his ears against that voice, and refuses to hear the commission, or respond to the call. This commission was definitely expressed. “Arise, go to Nineveh, that great city, and cry against it.” There is no uncertainty in the sound. There is no question as to the language. Men often talk about their perfect disposition to do the will of God if only they could know what it was. All such speeches charge God with unfaithfulness or indifference, and prove the men who make them to be insincere. “If any man is willing to do His will he shall know” is the statement of the Holy Word, and it has been a thousand times corroborated by sincere souls. When God called Moses, He made Himself so understood that Moses had no res; until he accepted the divinely-appointed ministry; when God called Samuel, He kept repeating it over and over until Samuel did understand; when God commissioned Peter to the Gentiles, even Peter’s Jewish prejudices could not obscure for him the will of his Lord; and when God convicted Saul, He distinctly questioned, “Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou Me?” And God, who is “the same yesterday and today and forever” has not changed His method. Every now and then I meet a man who tells me that the reason he is not a Christian is because God has not called him as yet, and I cannot help wondering what he has been doing with his ears that he has failed to hear the call to repentance, the call to faith, the call to obedience; and I cannot help fearing that he has been doing as a friend of mine in Chicago used to do. He was deaf in one ear, and when he laid down to sleep, he found it easy to shut out all disagreeable sounds by burying the good ear in the pillow and turning the bad one up. And the man who has never heard God calling him has unquestionably his deaf ear toward heaven, for God has made the ages ring with this sentence, “Look unto Me all ye ends of the earth and be ye saved; for I am God, and beside Me there is none else.” I dare say there are few here tonight who, if they had now to give an account of the deeds done in the body, could honestly excuse themselves for not having accepted Christ upon the ground that they had never had a call from God. And I mean that not a one who hears me shall ever be able again to give that excuse and be honest, for here is God’s word to you, “Come now, and let us reason together, and though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be white as snow, and though they be red like crimson, they shall become as wool.” The execution of this commission required courage. In order to appreciate how much courage, one must keep in mind some of the facts of this bit of history. It was 500 miles over mountains, through trackless forests, and across burning deserts to Nineveh; and there is no hint in the record that he was to have other means of transportation than to go on foot. The elements of air and water might smite him with disease; the wild beast might leap upon him from his place of hiding; the highway robbers might treat him as they did the man on his way to Jericho. And if he escaped all this, and after weeks of travel reached Nineveh, he then had to confront people who were the sworn enemies of his ration; whose Paganism was utterly opposed to the faith of Israel, and cry in the streets of that city, “yet forty days and Nineveh shall be overthrown,” exciting thereby the probable anger of men who were famed far and wide for their violence and bloodshed. The simple truth is that to be God’s at all requires courage. The weakness of the present-day Christianity comes partly in consequence of the denial of this fact. People have come to think that Christ requires us to give up nothing when we become His, and take nothing! On the contrary, Christ requires us to give up everything that can possibly militate against absolute obedience to His will, and take up the cross, His cross, the cross on which self is to be crucified. The most potent reason unconverted men have for rejecting Jesus is at this very point. They know what true Christianity means. They know that faithfulness to God will often transfix the flesh and the lusts thereof. They know that the Christianity of Jesus Christ will excite criticism, raise opposition, and imperil interests that are dear. And,’ in lack of courage, they refuse to respond to the call. Dr. Van Dyke is right in claiming, “it requires bravery to be truthful, generous, just, pure, kind, or loyal;” right in saying, “courage is essential to guard the best forces of the soul, and clear the wav of their action.” “Courage, the highest gift that scorns to bend To mean devices for a sordid end; Courage, an independent spark from heaven’s throne, By which the soul stands raised, triumphant, high, alone; The spring of all true acts is seated here, All falsehoods draw their sordid birth from fear.” II. His Resignation. “But Jonah rose up to flee into Tarshish, from the presence of the Lord; ;-.i went down and found a ship going to Tarshish. So he paid the fare thereof and went down into it, to go with unto Tarshish from the presence of the Lord.” In other words, Jonah resigned his office as prophet. Heretofore, he had been fulfilling that office as we saw by the reference to 2 Kings 14:25. But now God requires of him a difficult thing, and he prefers to resign rather than attempt it. That is the secret of a great many resignations. Jonah knew perfectly well that he could not get away from the presence of the Lord, for Jonah was familiar with the Psalm in which David had said, “whither shall I go from Thy Spirit, or whither shall I flee from Thy presence; if I take the wings of the morning and dwell in the uttermost parts of the sea, even there shall Thy hand lead me and Thy right hand shall hold me.” And Jonah knew it to be the truth. He fled therefore not so much from the presence of God as from the appointment of God. It meant a good deal to lay down the prophet’s office at that time. It was one of the most honored offices known to Israel. It means no less to lay down the prophet’s office at this time. The world has no office so honorable, and the Church none more so. It is easy to run back over the Old Testament times and show what a prominent part a prophet played in national as well as ecclesiastical history; but it is equally easy to run back over the immediate centuries of the past to show that preachers of the Gospel of the Son of God have exercised an equal, if not a greater power. Germany has no such debt to any other dead as she owes to Martin Luther, whose labors and opinions made possible her schools of learning and her improved religion. Italy will never sing sweetly enough to sound all the praises due Savonarola for his protest against political corruption and ecclesiastical crimes; while Switzerland is what she is, and caught to be far more and better, because John Calvin dwelt at Geneva. I have been going up and down the eastern coast this past summer from Maine to New York, and no man can go through the c:-a;c cities and regard their churches and schools without remembering that John Cotton, John Harvard, Roger Williams, Jonathan Edwards, Increase and Cotton Mather, had more to do with moulding new American thought and life, with making possible the universities and churches that are at once the pride and preservation of the people, than the men of all other employments and professions combined. And yet Jonah resigned this honorable office rather than keep it, and attempt a difficult task. He was afraid of the six hundred thousand heathen he had to face—fierce, terrible fellows they were. No wonder he feared them; and many a modern preacher has called attention to Jonah’s cowardice, and held him up to the public as weak, to resign himself the very first time he had to face three opponents. Jonah was a giant beside most of us. His worst cowardice was better than our best Courage, and yet he was not justified in being cowardly. No man is justified in fearing to attempt what God has commanded. The grand Martin Luther gave us the better illustration of a true prophet when he boldly professed himself willing to face all the devils of hell, if need be, and confidently believing that if he had God with him he would conquer. There was a sense in which Jonah sought to flee the divine presence. He knew, of course, as we all know, that was no place in the universe where God was not. In the abstract he would have consented to what God said by the mouth of Amos (Amos 9:2) as true, “He that fleeth of them shall not flee away, and be that escapeth of them shall not be delivered; though they dig into hell, thence shall My hand take them; though they climb up to heaven, thence will I bring them down; and though they hide themselves in the top of Carmel, I will search and take them out thence; and though they be hid in My sight in the bottom of the sea, thence will I command the serpent and he shall bite them.” And yet, all this truth to the contrary notwithstanding, Jonah did what every disobedience to do, tried to run away from God. And circumstances seemed to favor his endeavor, for when he went down to Joppa, he found a ship going to Tarshish. That is no sign he is doing right! The devil will always have a ship ready when a man wants to sail away from God. We want always to remember that it is far more important to know where a man is going and why he is going there, than it is that he should be getting on swiftly. It is related that Huxley used to tell how on one occasion when the British Science Association met in Dublin, he was late in reaching the city; and, fearing lest he might miss the opening address, he ran from his train to a jaunting-car, and jumping in cried to the driver, “Drive fast, I am in a hurry.” The Irish cabman slashed his horse with his whip and went spinning down the street. Presently Mr. Huxley noticed that he was not going toward the place of meeting, and calling out to the cabman, he said, “Driver, do you know where I want to go?” “No, yer honor, I don’t but I am driving fast as yer told me.” It may be a good deal easier at the outset to take ship for Tarshish than to walk to Nineveh. But, if the latter would leave you in His company, you are foolish if you set sail. You cannot pay the fare for any such privileges. Jonah thought he had paid the fare and the ship captain supposed the same, but they were both mistaken. There was more to be paid, as each of them soon realised. The most expensive sail that any man ever takes is when he sails away from God. I don’t care how smoothly it is when he first starts, nor bow cheaply he can commence his voyage, he will be rocked in a storm before he has finished it, and find himself a hopeless bankrupt, compelled to cast all his wares overboard, and forced to follow them by going overboard himself. Louis Albert Banks says, “Go ask the young man who has been tampering with strong drink until his nerves are unsteady, his mother’s or his wife’s heart is broken, his position lost, what the fare was from Joppa to Tarshish? Go ask the young man who was arrested last week for forgery and is lying in jail waiting for his trial, his good name blighted, his promising business career forever destroyed, his home draped in shame, his conscience burning with remorse, what the fare is from Joppa to Tarshish?” Twelve years ago when I was in New Albany, Ind., I conferred with, and helped him, in a little matter, to collect some of the statistics that Dr. J. W. Clokey wrought into that little book, “Dying at the Top.” Being interested in it, I came into possession of a volume, and was profoundly moved as I perused its pages. Nothing said in the volume stirred me more that his description of what the drink demon did for J. J. Talbot, at one time a minister of the Gospel, later a brilliant, but drinking lawyer, and eventually a dying drunkard. His love of drink separated him from his wife, caused that his children be taken from him, sent his old mother into her grave with a broken heart. And, just before he died, he said to Mr. Colfax, referring to all these losses of position as preacher, or honor as a lawyer, of love as a husband, of affection as a father, and of benediction as a son, and of respect as a citizen, and fellowship as a friend, “Now that the struggle is over, I can survey the field and measure the loss. I had position high and holy. . . I had business large and lucrative. . . I had money ample for all necessities…I had a home adorned with all that the most exquisite taste could suggest. I had children, beautiful—to me at least—as a dream of the morning. . . I had a wife whose charms of mind and person were such that to see her was to remember, and to know her was to love. . . I had a mother whose choicest delight was the refection that the lessons which she had taught at her knee had taken root in the heart of her youngest born. But the thunder-bolt reached me even there, and there it did its most cruel work. . . and while her boy raved in his wild delirium 2,000 miles away, the pitying angels pushed the golden gates ajar, and the mother of the drunkard entered into rest. And thus I stand a clergyman without a cure; a barrister without brief or business; a father without a child; a husband without wife; a son without a parent; a man scarcely a friend; a soul without a hope – all swallowed up in the maelstrom of drink.” Oh, young men, young women, if God is calling you tonight, and you know what He wants you to do, don’t sail away from Him. As you prize holiness here, as you hope for happiness hereafter, as you value the life of the soul itself, don’t sail away from Him; but in answer to His call, say as Samuel said, “Here am I;” and if He have duties that He is clearly defining for you, say as Isaiah said, “Lord, here am I, send me.” Now, I had expected to go over this first chapter with you tonight; but our time is gone, and there remains enough of it to engage us for another evening. So I beg the privilege of stopping here, promising to take up with you “his experience,” and “judgment,” next Sunday night. But, isn’t it a good place to stop? Isn’t a good place to ask what are you going to do with God’s call? You Christian people, what are you going to do with God’s call ? September has come; the work season of the church year has begun; the harvest is plenteous, the laborers are few. God needs prophets to speak to the impenitent, and God is as distinctly calling upon some of you as He ever called upon Jonah. What is your answer tonight? Is it a pledge of service, or a futile effort to flee from His presence? And you who have never named His name, He is speaking to you also. He is saying, “Repent for the kingdom of heaven is at hand;” He is saying, “Believe and thou shalt be saved;” He is saying. “Confess Me before men, and I will confess you before the Father and His holy angels.” He is saying, “Be baptized for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.” What is your answer tonight? There are but two answers possible. You must answer with Saul, “Lord what wilt Thou have me to do?” purposing as he purposed a perfect obedience to the divine will, or else you will answer as Jonah, by going away from God, and out to sea, and into the storm, and down to the darkness of the deep! ======================================================================== CHAPTER 57: 05.2. JONAH IN THE STORM ======================================================================== JONAH IN THE STORM Jonah 1:4-16. WHEN we parted from Jonah a week ago, he was standing at the office-window of a merchant vessel in the act of paying his fare to Tarshish. When we part from him tonight he will be overboard, in consequence of his disobedience. God had commissioned him to go due east from Gath-hepher, 500 miles, to preach in Nineveh. He decided to ship for Tarshish, a thousand miles in exactly the opposite direction, for the ancient Tarshish was in Spain, just about where Gibraltar is now. When a man starts to run away from God he can hardly expect smooth sailing, and so this vessel had little more than cleared the harbor before a stiff breeze was in her canvas. And the farther asea they went the stronger that gale became until, by and by, a hurricane was on, and even the old mariners were so filled with alarm that they betook themselves to prayer, and “cried every man unto his God.” And while they prayed, they wrought, tossing the wares into the sea hoping to lighten the ship, and thereby save it from being broken. When a storm at sea becomes so severe that the captain concludes there is no hope unless God shall interpose; and, going over the vessel, calls upon every passenger to betake himself to prayer, it is a euroclydon indeed. But, to that very condition Jonah’s ship shortly came. And the old ship-master must have been surprised indeed, as he went down into the sides of the ship, and stumbled on this man, fast asleep. It requires no special activity of the imagination to see that the sea-tried captain laying hold upon Jonah and shaking him, wondering whether he were drunk, or fallen in a faint from fear. Even over these centuries we can hear him say, “What meanest thou, O sleeper! don’t you know our condition? Arise call upon thy God, if so be He will hear us that we perish not.” You know what came after that—the casting of the lots, the coming out of Jonah’s offence, endeavor of the seamen to save both themselves and him, and the final assent to Jonah’s request to be cast into the sea; the calm that followed, the sacrifice and the vows. But I want us to go into this Scripture tonight to trace there Jonah’s experience and his judgment. I. His Experience. “But the Lord sent out a great wind into the sea, and there was a mighty tempest in the sea, so that the ship was like to be broken. Then the mariners were afraid and cried every man unto his god, and cast forth the wares that were in the ship to lighten it of them.” God’s storm follows every sinning sinner. If you ask me who are the men and women sailing life’s sea without chart or rudder, I should answer, “Those who are going on in their sin.” If you ask me, who are the men and women that must come into storms of sorrow, storms of suffering, storms of disease, and storms of death, that will whelm them, body and soul, I should answer, “Those who are going on in sin.” Years ago I knew a young man who began to tipple and talk loudly of being temperate in all things. He defended his right to take a drink, and boasted his ability to stop when he pleased. He is in the storms now—storms of financial stress, storms of physical debility, storms of social degradation, storms of domestic unhappiness, storms of spiritual decline. Years ago I knew a young woman who gave ear to Satanic whispers, and forsook the instruction of her youth, and already she has been cast overboard, and in a little time she will lay dead in the deep. And every young man and every young woman starting out tonight as they started, will find that God will send His storms of judgment after them. And, in the very hours in which they ought to be at rest, they will find themselves in the agony of moral earth-quake and mental whirlwind, “for he that soweth to the flesh, shall of the flesh reap corruption.” Again, every impenitent man is in danger of falling asleep. “But Jonah had gone down into the sides of the ship, and he lay and was fast asleep.” The critics have called attention to this statement and tried to make it the basis of an argument against the historicity of Jonah. They say a man who is running away from God would not likely be asleep, and still less likely sleep in such a storm as is here reported. But such a criticism marks the man who makes it as a superficial observer of life, and without familiarity with physiology. There is scarcely a touch in the book of Jonah so true to universal experience as this report of his sound slumbers. Whenever a man refuses to be obedient to God, if he be keenly sensitive to divine authority, mental restlessness will result, and sleep will go from his eyes. So long as he continues to debate against evident duty, the restlessness will remain. But, when once he had made up his mind upon a certain course, and sets about carrying it out, the question being settled, tired nature will react and deep slumbers will ensue. I have no doubt that Jonah had lost many nights’ sleep over this matter. But that was before he had decided definitely what he would do. But now that he has decided, the mind was making up for lost time by unnatural slumber. What a picture this of the mental stupor into which he who continues in his sin is sure to come. People often wonder why men, known to be sinners, known to be transgressors of every righteous law, seem nevertheless to be at peace, filled with no misgivings, entertaining no fears. But that is no marvel, it is natural. The mind is so constituted that when we first go wrong it cries out against the iniquity; but if we continue indefinitely in an evil course, it ceases its remonstrance and a moral stupor ensues, and a great many will die in that same stupor, will go down to the grave without ever being awakened to their true condition. Some time since, at Portland, Me., I was on “The Kentucky” of the North Atlantic Squadron. There were several hundred people on board, tramping here and there, and talking incessantly, and yet in one room through which we went, a half dozen sailors lay sound asleep. Nothing that we said disturbed them. Everything in the natural world has its counterpart in the spiritual. And, tonight, there are men whose souls sleep under the sound of the Gospel, and despite all cries of “Awake thou sleeper!” their spirits are undisturbed. It is reported that in the year 1775, the captain of a Greenland whaling vessel found himself, at night, surrounded by icebergs, and lay to until morning. When the day dawned he looked about and saw a ship near by. He hailed it, but no answer came. Getting into a boat with some of his crew he pushed toward this mysterious craft, and when he came on board found a man standing before the log-book. He saluted him, but no answer. He approached the man and found he was frozen to death. The log-book was dated 1762. Going over the vessel he found sailor after sailor frozen to death, some in the hammock, others in the cabin. For thirteen years these men who, to all outward appearances, had been at the post of duty, had been deaf to the shout of any vessel going that way. And oh, beloved, I believe tonight that there are all about us men whose bodies are at the post of secular duty, but whose souls are held by a slumber that will be broken by nothing short of the rising of God’s storm of judgment. When Aaron Burr was a student at Princeton, he was brought under special conviction of sin in connection with a series of meetings. He went into the country and stayed two weeks. When he returned he said the subject of religion was settled with him, and it was settled against the claims of the Gospel. From that time his soul was as dead. No matter how tender the preacher’s appeal, it never touched him, for his spiritual lethargy remained until the end was on, and that soul stood before God to be judged for deeds done in the body. And yet, God mercifully sends His messengers to sleeping souls. Jonah was not left undisturbed to perish in this storm. God has His minister in this shipmaster, and God treated Jonah as He treated Lot when Sodom was about to burn. You remember it is written of that ancient unworthy, “When the morning arose, then the angels hastened Lot, saying, Arise and take thy wife and two daughters which art here, lest thou be consumed in the iniquity of the city. And while he lingered the men laid hold upon his hand, and upon the hand of his wife, and upon the hand of his two daughters, the Lord being merciful unto him, and they brought him forth and set him without the city” (Genesis 19:15-16). It is often true that men do not appreciate the endeavors God’s agents make to save them. Mr. Moody asked a policeman, whom he passed on the street in Chicago one night, if he was a Christian. The question jarred on that policeman’s feelings just as the shipmaster’s shaking disturbed Jonah’s nerves. He doubled up his fist and threatened to knock Mr. Moody into the mud, but afterward he came to his senses and wondered whether this man was sent of God. One morning before daybreak he rapped at Mr. Moody’s door and when admitted into his room he said, “You, sir, aroused me to a sense of my sin, and now won’t you pray for me that I may be saved?” The ministry of the shipmaster is a ministry that men in sin dislike, and yet it is the very ministry for lack of which those same men are dying. Beloved, cannot we afford to be rebuffed occasionally by those who would prefer to sleep and sink than be wakened up to be saved, if in return for our rebuff we may see them roused to a sense of their danger and hear them call upon their God ? More than twenty years ago, I was walking a country road one cold winter night. In one corner of a rail fence I saw by the moonlight the form of a man; and, groins; up to him I found that he was drunk and insensible. Hurrying to my home I notified two older brothers, and we three went back to rouse him, if possible, and if not, to carry him into the house, where by the warm fire his chilled blood might circulate again. When we shook him he moaned, “Let me alone.” When we laid hold on him and lifted him up, he swore at us and feebly fought. But despite all that, we dragged him along and put him into the colored man’s cabin, and cared for him until he came to himself. He was an ignorant fellow, who knew little concerning the higher traits of character, but ever after the night in which we saved his life, he was our steadfast friend. I often think of Jesus’ dealing with the Gadarene. Don’t you remember how Mark tells that story? When the Gadarene saw Jesus approaching him he cried with a loud voice and said, “What have I to do with Thee, Jesus, Thou Son of the Most High God? I adjure Thee, by God, that Thou torment me not!” That is the speech of the soul that would remain in sin, the soul that does not want its spiritual stupor disturbed. And yet that same man, when once he is dispossessed of the devils, will be so devoted to Jesus Christ, that when others are praying Him to depart out of their coasts, this redeemed one will pray Him that he may be with Him. There are many people in the world who take pains to make friends of such of their fellows as will likely prove faithful throughout all time. But I can tell you how to make unto yourself friends whose affection will increase through all eternity. Accept the ministry of the shipmaster! Go about shaking up the sleeping! And every man that you bring to rise and call upon his God will live to praise your name. I believe the best friends I have ever had in this world have been the men and women, the boys and girls, Jesus Christ has privileged me to point to Him and baptise in His name. But, note further, to slumber in sin is not to keep it secret. “And they said, every one to his fellow, Come, let us cast lots that we may know for whose cause this evil is upon us. So they cast lots, and the lot fell upon Jonah.” It is always so! The one thing that cannot be covered up is crime. Sin of any sort is like a fire. It will find its way to the surface, and with a red tongue tell its own tale. Chas. Spurgeon illustrates this fact in one of his sermons. He says, “Beware of committing acts which it will be necessary to conceal. There is a singular poem by Hood, called ‘The Dream of Eugene Aram.’ A most remarkable piece it is indeed, illustrating the point on which I am now dwelling. Aram has murdered a man, cast his body into the river, ‘A sluggish water, black as ink, the depth was so extreme.’ The next morning he visited the scene of his guilt, “‘And sought the black, accursed pool, With a wild, misgiving eye; And he saw the dead in the river bed, For the faithless stream was dry.’ Next he covered the corpse with heaps of leaves, but a mighty wind swept through the wood and left the secret bare before the sun. “ ‘Then down I cast me on my face, And first began to weep, For I knew my secret then was one That earth refused to keep, Or land or sea, though it should be Ten thousand fathoms deep.’ ” Now we turn from Jonah’s experience to II. His Judgment. "Then said they unto him, what shall we do unto thee that the sea may be calm unto us? for the sea wrought and was tempestuous. And he said, Take me up and cast me forth into the sea, so shall the sea be calm unto you, for I know that for my sake this great tempest is upon you.” Jonah assented to the justice of his judgment. In some measure every sinner must do that. Men do not rebel against God without realising the wrong of it. Most men, I believe, do not expect to escape the storms which their sins invite. The iniquities in which they indulge are so passed upon by conscience, when roused by the conviction of the Holy Ghost, that they must say, as David said, “I acknowledge my transgressions and my sin is ever before me. Against Thee, and Thee only have I sinned and done this evil in Thy sight, that Thou mightest be justified when Thou speakest and clear when Thou judgest.” The sailors saw the necessity of this judgment. At first they hoped to escape it, and “the men rowed hard,” literally, “dug their oars into the deep,” to bring them to the land, but they could not, for the sea wrought and was tempestuous against them. “It is not possible for the innocent and guilty to go on together.” Unless the latter can be converted, divorcement is absolutely essential to the former. That profane associate of yours; that cigarette fiend you call a companion; that tippler with the intoxicating cup; that immodest maid whose companionship you have shared,—you are not safe, if you continue in association with these. So long as you are laboring to the utmost to bring them to a better life, God will not let you go down. But, failing in that endeavor, you must do one of two things, separate from them, or sink with them. The most effective emmissary that Satan has at work in Minneapolis tonight is an evil associate, and there is not a man or a woman starting out to sail life’s sea with such an one who is not in danger of the tempest and storm. I never see a young person part from an evil companion, but I want to cry, “Bravo!” and turn my ear heavenward to hear the shout of the glad angels who celebrate the soul’s victory. And, finally, God’s judgment seemed to be Jonah’s end. “So they took up Jonah and cast him forth into the sea, and the sea ceased from her raging. Then the men feared the Lord exceeding, and offered a sacrifice unto the Lord and made vows.” The disobedient goes overboard. The disobedient descends into the deep. The disobedient is regarded as dead, and all of this is a symbol of the actual experience of the soul that disobeys God, and dwells in sin. I do not know how many of you may have been present when an unpardoned man was passing away. I have seen the sinner die. I have seen the soul go down into the deep without God and without hope, self-condemned, and commiserated. It is not a pleasant sight. It is not an experience to be desired. It is a sight that makes angels weep. It is an experience that makes devils laugh. Hell’s happiness is heaven’s sorrow. And, when the soul goes overboard and is left to sink in the sea of sin, never to see the haven of rest, all good men should sob and all bad men shake with fear. I am not going to take up the story of the fish tonight. The last verse of this chapter really belongs with the chapter which follows, hence we will stop here to ask, "Are there any in this house tonight who are going away from God? Are there any in this house tonight after whom God has sent His storms of affliction and sorrows? Are there any here who have been slumbering in forgetfulness of judgment? Are there any here who have been roused up by some minister of good ? Are there any here whose sins have come up before them to condemn them, and compel them to consent to the justice of divine judgment? If so, let me implore you now to repent. Let me implore you to return to Him, away from whom you have been running, and let me whisper in your ears tonight the promise of my God that He will forgive you, and save you; for the Scripture saith, “Let the wicked forsake his way, and the unrighteous man his thoughts, and let him return unto the Lord, and He will have mercy upon him, and to our God for He will abundantly pardon.” I don’t care if even you are among the shipwrecked, there is yet salvation for you, if you will receive it. Dr. Talmage tells the story of a man who left his family in Massachusetts, and sailed from Boston to China to trade there. Upon the coast of China, in the midst of a night of storm, he made shipwreck. His body was washed upon the beach senseless—all his money gone. In the streets of Canton he had to beg to keep from starving, and he who had gone out as a captain was too proud to confess his accident to the friends at home, or return on a ship as a private sailor. But after two or three years of fruitless endeavor to regain his fortune, he choked down his pride and sailed for Boston. Arriving at that city he took train for his home in the center of the State. In the middle of the night, as he walked up to that cottage, in the bright moonlight, the old home looked to him like heaven. He tapped on the servant’s window and she let him in. He inquired where his wife and child were sleeping, and fearing the shock of arousing them he quietly bent over to kiss his child’s cheek, and a tear fell upon his wife’s face, and she asked “who is there?” And he answered, “Mary.” And she knew his voice. No angels’ hearts were ever happier than were those in this house, because they had receive the wrecked one back again. And yet there is one heart in heaven that will be happier still tonight if some of you who have gone away from God, and who have sinned against God, come home to Him, and ask forgiveness, and take His proffered pardon, and that is the heart of God’s Son, who died that you might live, and loves you with an everlasting love. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 58: 05.3. JONAH OVERBOARD ======================================================================== JONAH OVERBOARD Jonah 1:17, Jonah 2:1-9 WE come this evening to a further study of the Book of Jonah. You will remember our last discourse ended with Jonah 1:16, with Jonah overboard, and the sailors offering sacrifice unto the Lord and making vows. That seemed indeed to be the end of Jonah; but one of my professors used to say, “a man is immortal until his ministry is finished.” Whether that is always true, it will appear to have been the fact of this prophet’s existence, for although he is thrown into the midst of the sea and is swallowed up by a great fish, his history goes right on, and the belly of that fish, instead of being his grave, was converted into a closet of prayer. This is one of the points at which the critics stumble. They cannot quite believe that anything so improbable ever actually took place. If the text of this night could be cut out of the book of Jonah, the modern Jehoikims would be made more happy thereby, and would the more readily consent to the inspiration of the Minor Prophets. But this is the very part of the book which cannot be set aside. Upon these ten verses Jesus Christ has set the seal of His own acceptance. And to cut them out, is to call in question either His knowledge or His honesty. Personally I am not disposed to do either! To me this record contains no serious barrier to belief. My reason is no more offended by it than by many another historical incident of the Word of the Lord. I don’t see one feature in the whole narrative which ought to strain the faith of the man who admits that there is a God in heaven. The record is, “The Lord prepared a great fish to swallow up Jonah; and Jonah was in belly of the fish three days and three nights. Then Jonah prayed unto the Lord his God out of the fish’s belly. And he said, I called, by reason of mine affliction, unto the Lord, and he answered me; out of the belly of hell cried I, and Thou heardest my voice. For Thou didst cast me into the depth, in the heart of the seas, and the flood was round about me; all Thy waves and Thy billows passed over me. And I said, I am cast out from before Thine eyes; yet I will look again toward Thy holy temple. The waters compassed me about, even to the soul; the deep was round about me; the weeds were wrapped about my head. I went down to the bottoms of the mountains; the earth with her bars closed upon me forever: Yet hast Thou brought my life from the pit, O Lord, my God. When my soul fainted within me, I remembered the Lord. And my prayer came in unto Thee, into Thine holy temple. They that regard lying vanities forsake their own mercy. But I will sacrifice unto Thee with the voice of thanksgiving; I will pay that which I have vowed. Salvation is of the Lord” (R.V. Jonah 2:1-9). Three or four suggestions for our consideration. In the first place Jonah’s experience involves both I. The Natural and the Supernatural. “Now the Lord had prepared a great fish to swallow up Jonah”—Natural! There is not the least occasion to suppose a miracle here. The Mediterranean Sea has in it tonight many a white shark which could, and if he had a chance, would, swallow any man in this audience. The scholarly Pusey in his “Notes on the Book of Jonah,” cites from history a number of instances in confirmation of the naturalness of this episode. There are a half dozen instances on record where these sharks, which sometimes attain the enormous weight of 10,000 pounds, with an extreme length of 30 to 40 feet, have swallowed men. He also cites well-authenticated instances where this same specie of fish has been found, • one with a deer, absolutely whole, in the stomach; one with a large sea-calf, undigested; and one which had a full-grown horse. Mueller still further confirms the naturalness of this incident by saying, “In 1758, in stormy weather, a sailor fell overboard from a frigate in the Mediterranean. A shark was close by, which, as he was swimming and crying for help, took him in his wide throat, so that he forthwith disappeared. The captain had a gun, which stood on the deck, discharged at the fish, striking it so that he cast out the sailor, who was taken up alive. The wounded fish was harpooned and presented to the man who, by God’s providence, had been so wonderfully preserved. The sailor went around Europe exhibiting it at Farnconia, Erlangen, Nurnberg, and other places. It was 20 feet long and weighed 3,924 pounds when dried.” And yet people go up and down the country saying, “a whale cannot swallow a man.” Well, beloved, the record says, “a great fish.” ’ And naturalists know that the larger of these white sharks could at one gulp swallow a decent-sized family without effecting a sore throat. Natural! “And Jonah was in the belly of the fish three days and three nights”—supernatural! Personally I believe that this might have been accomplished by natural means, so far at least as the preservation of life is concerned. It is claimed that the fakirs of India have a custom of sealing up the lungs by turning the human tongue back into the epiglotis, thereby rendering the victim insensible, and leaving him in a comatose condition for weeks, out of which he is aroused at their pleasure. It is a fact of natural history that life can be sustained for some time in the belly of a fish, possibly because the gastric juices hermetically seal the body swallowed. But I am not so anxious to escape the miracle as to insist upon this as an explanation of Jonah’s remaining alive. In fact, I don’t believe it is the explanation. To me the admission of a miracle from God in preserving his life seems the more rational. It is one of the amazing features of modern thinking that so many men seem determined to deny the supernatural. Anything, any explanation, is regarded by a certain class of so-called thinkers as more satisfactory than an assent to the intervention of divinity. You have heard the story, perhaps, of the colored man, who had caught the spirit of modern criticism and was disposed to remove the miraculous element from the Word. He was preaching about the Israelites’ passage over the Red Sea, and the overthrow of Pharaoh and his host in the waters thereof. And, looking at his congregation, with a learned air, he said, “My bredern, der aint no use sposin a miracle heah. Dis can all be splained on natural grounds. You see, it was like this: It was about de middle ob de winter when dese Israelites was agittin out ob Egypt. And when dey come down to de sea, dey found it well frozed ober. And dey, bein’ afoot, all walked across on de ice. But when Pharo, with his great heaby charots tried to foller ’em, de ice wouldn’t hold ’em up, and so he and all his army broke thro and got drowned.” An old deacon of this colored church, not quite satisfied with this explanation on natural grounds, rose and said, “Hold on Elder, jes’ a minute dere! I have got one question I would jes’ like to ask ye! Ise been stud- in’ Gography, an’ de Gography do say, dat am de place ob de tropics, whar it don’t freeze ober; now will you splain dat?” To which the colored parson replied, “Yes, sah, dat’s all easy enough; you see dis all happened before dey made any gographies, and dere warn’t no tropics den.” We smile at the colored man’s irrational method of avoiding the miracle, but as I live I am not able to see wherein it is one whit less rational than the present-day critics’ endeavor to do the same. The man who has a mind so constituted that it can accept the Gospel record of Lazarus’ resurrection, a mind so constituted that it can believe Daniel’s report of how the three Hebrew children passed unhurt through the fiery furnace, and yet denies the possibility of Jonah’s divine preservation in the fish’s belly at the bottom of the deep, is not saved from the charge of faulty reasoning, because his skin is white and he speaks the lingo of the schools. The only man who need have trouble with this incident in the book of Jonah is the man who is unwilling to admit the claim of Scripture, “with God all things are possible.” And this supernatural experience was significantly symbolical. It had another meaning than that which then appeared. If as a judgment it looked backward to Jonah’s sin, as a symbol, it looked forward to Christ’s burial and resurrection. Doubtless that was the very reason God had prepared the fish to swallow Jonah up. He could as easily have gotten him ashore by means of a floating spar. He could have sent an angel to keep him afloat until another vessel came that way, He could have gone to him Himself, walking on the water, as He went to Peter and other disciples in an awful night of similar storm. But He let him go into the deep, and be swallowed up by this fish that He might prefigure His own descent in the earth and His escape therefrom by His resurrection. One day certain of the scribes and of the Pharisees said to Jesus, “Master, we would see a sign from Thee;” but He answered and said unto them that “an evil and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign, and there shall no sign be given to it, but the sign of the prophet Jonas; for as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale’s belly, so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.” And, when Paul came to write to the Corinthians touching the resurrection of Jesus Christ, He spoke of how He died for our sins, according to the Scriptures and how He rose the third day, according to the Scriptures. A disposition, therefore, to take Jonah from the sacred cannon, the present-day endeavor to cast discredit upon the record of the prophet’s experience in the deep, is the disposition and endeavor which, if it were successful, would leave the resurrection of Jesus Christ to be followed by an interrogation point. And then, as the apostle Paul says, “If Christ be not raised, your faith is in vain, ye are yet in your sins; then they also which are fallen asleep in Christ are perished.” God forbid! “If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men most miserable.” In the second place Jonah’s experience, as here narrated, illustrates II. God’s Purpose in Judgment. If He follows with affliction, it is for our reform. “Then Jonah prayed unto the Lord his God, out of the fish’s belly, and said, I cried by reason of my affliction unto the Lord, and He heard me.” Of course He did. Long before this time David had been subjected to severe judgment, a judgment sent upon him for his good, and he wrote what Jonah is now quoting, “In my distress I cried unto the Lord and He heard me” (Psalms 120:1). I believe, as I have often said, that the devil is responsible for our sufferings. He it was who led Jonah away from his Lord and landed him in the deep, but God in His great mercy makes even the plans of this archenemy to praise Him, and the very troubles into which Jonah’s sin led were overruled for his good, in that he saw how serious it was to run away from the heavenly Father. It was the devil who put it into the heart of the Prodigal son to say, “Father, give me the portion of goods that falleth to me.” It was the devil who deceived him into supposing that “riotous living” would lead to pleasure; and it was the devil who paid him off with pigs for his associates, and the sweet honey-suckle for his sustenance. But those very hardships proved to be a power in the hand of God in impressing the awfulness of his iniquity, the degradation of his station, and bringing him to a keen appreciation of the fellowships and the food in his father’s house. That is always the purpose of judgment so far as God has anything to do with it. His speech for the present-day sinner is exactly what it was 3,000 years ago, when by Ezekiel’s lips He said, “As I live, saith the Lord, I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but that the wicked turn from his way and live. Turn ye, turn ye, from your evil ways, for why will ye die, O house of Israel?” There are men here tonight to whom He is putting the same question! Jonah accepted his affliction with wisdom. There are two ways to meet judgment. The one is to declare it unjust and plunge into deeper sin; the other is to see as Jonah saw, that it is sent for our good, and turn back to God. Although he believed that God had cast him into the seas, so that the floods had compassed him about, and billows and waves had gone over him, still he said, “I will look again toward Thy holy temple.” When the waters came even to the soul, when the depth closed him round about, when the weeds wrapped his head—symbol of the graves clothes—when he went down to the bottoms of the mountains; when the earth with her bars were about him forever, when his soul fainted within him, he remembered the Lord, and his prayer made in the deep was heard in the holy temple. That is the way to meet affliction. The prodigal son gives us an example of what to do in the darkest hour. When the waves and billows of trouble were rolling over him he said, “I will arise and go to my father.” Blessed way to meet them! The man who so treats affliction will convert it into a friend. Manasseh at Jerusalem had forgotten God and gone after sin, but when he found himself in prison in Babylon, he turned again to God and was blessed in the turning. Charles Spurgeon says, “troubles are called weights, and a weight, you know, generally cloggeth and keepeth down to the earth, but by the use of the laws of mechanics you can make a weight lift you up.” And the man who knows how to take hold on God in the time of trouble will find his affliction a weight that can be made to lift him into the very presence of the Infinite One. Jonah did his utmost, also, toward reparation. He offered “the sacrifice of thanksgiving,” and pledged the fulfilment of his vows. That was all he could do under the circumstances. It was his best—his utmost. Had he been on land it would have been his business to have gone to Nineveh, and only such an action would have been acceptable, but, situated as he was he could only resolve, and God accepted the resolution as sufficient. It is high time that men who have sinned against God learn that in turning back to Him again, so far as lieth in them, they must put the past right. There are some acts that one cannot undo, and for such he must plead forgiveness. There are others that he can reverse, and in these reparation alone will suffice. A friend of mine about to die could gain no peace of mind whatever until she had sent for her stepmother and asked forgiveness for some things she had said to her. Dr. Louis Albert Banks tells the story of a lawyer of distinguished ability who went into the Music Hall of Cleveland, Ohio, to attend the Mills meeting there. As he listened to the truth, he was convicted of sin, and because he had been pushing a suit and had already won it in the lower courts, knowing that the principal witness on the winning side had falsified for a definite sum of money, the attorney had been promised a fee of $12, 000 on condition the suit was won in the highest court. He went out from this meeting to face the crisis of his life—$12, 000 on the one side for pleading a false issue, and defrauding the defendant. On the other side a clean conscience, if he restored the payments already received, and refused to further prosecute the suit. All night he wrestled like Jacob of old, but the next day he settled the question by determining to restore the ill-gotten money, and resign his office as attorney in the case. Then it was he realised God’s favor in forgiveness; then it was he said to the friends to whom he communicated it all, “Now let me go home to my wife. She will be so happy, for she is a Christian woman, and godliness means more to her than gain.” Zaccheus gave an excellent evidence of his conversion when he said, “If I have taken aught from any man by false accusation, I restore him fourfold.” But the concluding sentence of this night’s study contains a most important suggestion, namely, III. Salvation is of the Lord. Jonah had lost confidence in self. There has been a time when Jonah has felt some self-sufficiency, but a fish’s belly is a poor place to exercise any such sentiment. When Peter attempted to walk on the sea, and found himself suddenly sinking, his self-confident spirit departed and he cried, “Lord, save, or I perish.” But even his predicament had more of promise in it than Jonah’s position presents. He has gone down already. He is at the bottom of the deep. Except God interfere, he is dead. Except God save, there is absolutely no hope. Where could you find a better figure of the condition of the natural man who is “dead in trespasses and in sins,” and who can do nothing whatever to help or save himself? Charles Spurgeon says, “Last week I stood beside that window of Carisbrooke Castle, out of which King Charles, of unhappy and unrighteous memory, attempted to escape. I read in the guide book that everything was provided for his escape. His fellows had means at the bottom of the wall to enable him to fly across the country, and on the coast they had their boats lying ready to take him to another land. In fact, everything was ready for his escape, but here was the important circumstance. His friends had done all they could, he was to do the rest. But that doing the rest was just the point and brunt of the battle. It was to get out of the window out of which he was not able to escape by any means, so that all his friends did for him went for nothing so far as he was concerned. “So with the sinner, if God had provided every means of escape and only required him to get out of his dungeon, he would have remained there to all eternity. Why, is not the sinner by nature ‘dead in sin?’ The Spirit must quicken him. He is bound hand and foot, and fettered by transgression. The Spirit must cut his bands and then he will leap to liberty.” And Spurgeon is right. Salvation is not of our effort. Salvation is of the Lord, and to see that truth as Jonah saw it is the first essential. So long as a man is expecting to be saved in some other way he remains in his sins, for “there is none other name given under heaven among men whereby we must be saved.” Jonah had ceased from trusting to circumstances. There had been a time when he was in health and his feet on solid ground, and he felt he could do as he pleased, and somehow or other make it right with God at the end. But all of that is past now, for at the bottom of the deep a man does not so reason. It is only when he is in health and prosperity! After he is brought down low; after he is utterly buried, as it were, he wonders how he could ever so blunder as to imagine that sin could escape judgment, or that circumstances could be depended upon to effect a favorable issue of life. I appeal to those of you who are in health tonight, to those of you who are in prosperity, to make your calling and election sure. Circumstances now are favorable to your doing so, but who can tell what a day may bring forth. Tomorrow the end may be on, and it may be associated with such untold sufferings, such indescribable agony of body or mind, or both, that it would be a poor time to settle the great questions of the soul. A dying man may pray but all preparation for a death-bed repentance seems unwarranted when we remember Jesus’ words, “Not every man that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven, but he that doeth the will of My Father which is in heaven.” Jonah knew that God, and God alone, could save. Our text is authority for the claim, “Salvation is of the Lord.” A sea captain had seen the same truth in the time of storm. When the vessel rocked to the winds and was ready to go down, the shipmaster came to Jonah and said unto him, “What meanest thou, oh sleeper, arise, call upon thy God, if so be that God will think upon us that we perish not.” But there is something better than either the conduct of the shipmaster or that of Jonah, and that is to call upon God before the storm comes. I plead with those of you who have not made your peace with Him, to make it now. “Behold, now is the accepted time.” “Seek ye the Lord while He may be found; call ye upon Him while He is near.” Dr. Talmage tells the story about the ship “Rebecca Goddard,” which comes into our ports in midwinter. She was all scoured up and ready for the landing, when, coming almost into the harbor, an ice-floe came and pushed the ship out to sea, and it drifted about two or three days, and there was great suffering, and one was frozen dead at his post. They had been almost into the harbor, but they did not go in. And, many of you are here tonight who will either come in now, or else the ice-floe of indifference will push you out, and out, upon the seas of irreligion, until at last you will be going down without hope and without God. God help you now, to come! ======================================================================== CHAPTER 59: 05.4. JONAH’S GOSPEL ======================================================================== JONAH’S GOSPEL Jonah 2:10, John 3:1-10. PERMIT me a word of regret that the sickness to which I have been subjected interfered with our studies of the book of Jonah; and a word of gratitude that, under the blessing of God, I am able this evening to resume the same. The last we heard of Jonah was voiced in his wonderful speech made in the belly of the fish while in the bowels of the deep, “Salvation is of the Lord.” Whether Jonah anticipated that God was so soon to save him out of his perils we may not affirm, but the fact remains that the very next reading is, “And the Lord spake unto the fish and he vomited Jonah out on the dry land.” And I believe what is written. No matter how much of quibble a man might make concerning the unlikelihood of such a thing, I affirm my faith in the historicity of this text, “And the Lord spake unto the fish and it vomited out Jonah upon the dry land.” To be sure if a man is bent on criticism he could raise a number of question here. He could ask why a “great fish” came so near to the shore, since that is not the habit of these monsters; and he could ask how it happened that the fish there threw Jonah out on the dry land instead of in water over his head. But the sufficient answer is, “The Lord who prepared the fish to swallow up Jonah” was still in control of the monster when he “threw him up.” As one listens to the criticisms of this and other books of the Bible it gives occasion at least to think upon an illustration employed a while ago by Russell Conwell. He told the story of a man in Kentucky who lived in the region of the Mammoth Cave. Across the fields of this prosperous farmer there ran a beautiful stream. It quenched his thirst, irrigated his farm and turned his mill, but he was ill-content and decided to have a well dug hard by his door; and at once he was blasting, blasting, blasting, down, down, down and deeper still. At last he put in an overcharge of dynamite which blew the bottom out of the well, for it was a cavernous region, and all the water ran now into the depths below. In a little while the brook began to dry up, and it was found that it seiped through crevices in the rocks into this same bottomless well, and lo, the farm was ruined, its land parched, its mill was motionless, and its owner without water to slake his thirst. And Conwell saw in this a picture of those students of the Bible who, instead of drinking therefrom, having their lives irrigated thereby, and all the wheels of human energy turning under the power of the same, go at the Word with pick and dynamite, and dig after Hebrew and Greek roots, and blast in the hope of uncovering its origin, until they have lost the very blessing they once enjoyed. For my own part I am content with the stream of life I find flowing through this Word, and I want to show you that if you stop beside it, even in the book of Jonah, it prove the same life-giving fountain, rising from beneath the everlasting throne. Four truths in this third chapter are worthy of attention: I. Jonah is reappointed. “And the word of the Lord came unto Jonah the second time.” There is such a thing as a divine appointment to preach. In the Old Testament every prophet claimed that appointment. In the New Testament every preacher had his commission from Christ. Even the apostle Paul, entering into the ministry after Christ’s ascension, stoutly affirmed that he had seen the risen Christ and received from Him his commission to preach. This record of the Acts, he reaffirmed in his epistles to the churches, saying to the Romans, “I am Paul, a servant of Jesus Christ, called to be an apostle, separated unto the Gospel of God;” to the Corinthians, I am “Paul, called to be an apostle of Jesus Christ through the will of God;” to the Galatians, “Paul an apostle not of men, neither by man, but by Jesus Christ and God the Father,” and so on! Men who are to preach the Gospel today can only hope for success in the same by being sure that the Word of the Lord has come to them in a call to preach. And I believe with Pastor Stalker that “the soul-winner must be conscious that he is doing God’s work and that it is God’s message that he bears to men.” Unless a man has that conviction there will come to him trials that will take away his foundations; there will come to him such evidences of non-appreciation and ingratitude, and even malignant opposition as will raise in his mind the question, “Are men worth one’s devotion?” And unless he can fall back upon the plain command of God, unless he can find in his own heart an abiding conviction that he must do what he is doing, and say what he is saying, and that God can no more leave his labors unblessed than God Himself can lie, he is unfitted to preach. I have had people ask me why I entered the ministry, and my answer has been, “The Word of the Lord came unto me saying, Go and preach the preaching that I bid thee;” and in the midst of every temptation, and in the experience of every trial known these eighteen years past, the plain consciousness of a call from God has been to me at once foundation and inspiration—standing ground and secret of satisfaction. Our chapter also suggests that man’s indisposition to preach does not rid him of obligation. “And the Word of the Lord came unto Jonah the second time.” God had called Jonah before he ever shipped to Tarshish, but Jonah was unwilling and thought to make an end of the divine command by refusing obedience to the same! and Jonah is not alone in this. There are many men in the ministry who ought to be pleading law, practicing medicine, running a grocery, shaving the faces of their fellows, or plowing corn. They have put themselves in their places, or been put there by over-pious parents. It is quite impossible for one to believe that God has picked out all the preachers who are now filling pulpits. The old farmer had the right of it, whose ambitious boy reported to him that he was going to preach, and when the father asked why he thought he was called to preach, the young man pointed to Mark 16:15, “Go ye into all the world and preach the Gospel to every creature.” To which John Ploughman replied, “Oh, yes my boy, the Scripture do say, Preach the Gospel to every crittur; but they don’t say Every crittur shall preach the Gospel.” But while there are men in the ministry who ought to be in other professions, there are men out of the ministry, and I am persuaded not a few of them, who perfectly well know that God has called them to preach. But, like Jonah, they did not want to do it. They were ambitious for a higher station than the ministry might bring them, for more money than is promised in a ministerial salary, or for more worldly living than is consonant with one who is under command from the Lord. Twenty years ago, I sat on the porch of a country home and talked with a young man, who was on his vacation from college, about this call to the ministry. After we had retired he communicated to me his own conviction of a call to preach and his deliberate purpose not to do it. As I tried to show him the folly of fighting against God, he desperately replied, “God gives me no peace about this thing and sometimes I think if I don’t preach He will never permit me to enter heaven. But I am determined to practice law even though it results in sending my soul to perdition.” He has gone on in the practice of law. The last I heard of him he had lost his faith, drank, gambled, and in his dealing with men was generally regarded a rascal. And yet, I have an idea that if you could break through the walls of outer conduct, and sound the recesses of his heart, you would find that even now he is conscious of God’s command for him, and knows that he had never discharged the obligation. Oh, what folly when men so fight against God! Mr. Moody said, “If God should offer me whatever I willed, it would not take me a minute to say, ‘Lord, I don’t will any thing; but Thy will be done, for I know Thy will for me is best .’ ” Do you know that, my brother? Do you, my sister? Are you ready, tonight, to say, Oh, God, show me the way of life that I may walk in it? It is written to the eternal credit of Jonah, “So Jonah arose, and went into Nineveh according to the word of the Lord.” A second truth, Jonah preached II. Impending Judgment. “Now Nineveh was an exceeding great city of three days’ journey, and Jonah began to enter into the city a day’s journey; and he cried and said, Yet forty days and Nineveh shall be overthrown.” His message was not man-made. “He cried and said, Yet forty days and Nineveh shall be overthrown.” That was exactly what God had commissioned him to say. The only ministry that is true, is that of the preacher who is preaching according to the Word of the Lord; who is preaching the preaching that God has bidden him preach. A minister is a messenger. “As it is written in the prophets, ‘Behold, I will send My messenger before thy face.’ ” What is the business of a messenger? One came to my house the other night and brought a message. It was a sad message. It was a message that I would much have preferred not to hear. It contained the announcement of the death of one of my dearest friends, of one of the Lord’s most efficient servants. But I knew the messenger-boy was not responsible for the message. He had merely performed his part of medium in bringing it to me. He had changed it in nowise, but delivered it just as he received it; and that is the business of every minister. It is ours to carry to men what God has said. There are two ways of receiving this message, the one is to hold the messenger responsible for it, and if it does not suit you, behead him. That is the way Herodias did with John the Baptist, God’s messenger, who brought to her God’s Word regarding chastity. The other way to receive it is illustrated in the life of the old prophet Eli, who, you remember, called young Samuel into his presence and said, “Samuel, my son, what is the thing that the Lord hath said unto thee? I pray thee hide it not from me.” And when Samuel told him all that God had said regarding him, how he was going to come against the prophet in judgment, to perform against Eli all the things which had been spoken concerning his house, how God declared that when He began a judgment He would make an end, Eli answered, “It is the Lord.” That is the better way to treat God’s messenger. That is the better way to receive God’s message. The most unwelcome message may be the most needful one; and, if it comes from God, it is the most needful one. You have a right to quarrel with a minister who brings you a man-made Gospel, but you have no right to object to his message, however unwelcome it may be; however deeply it may wound your pride; however clearly it may uncover your evil purposes; however severely it may condemn your evil practices, if it is according to “the Word of the Lord.” In one of my former pastorates there was an exceptionally sweet woman whose husband owned and operated a saloon. Many a time she sat through an arraignment of the bad business, and the preacher sympathised with her unfortunate station, and sorrowed to speak the words that he knew must wound. But one day she gave indisputable proof of her Christianity. At the close of a sermon in which God’s woe to the man who put the bottle to his neighbor’s lips had been urged, she sought me out and said, “Pastor, you can hardly understand the shame I feel whenever this subject of the saloon is mentioned, but I want you to know that however much I may suffer, I would not have you change or curtail what God has said.” Jonah’s message gave no promise of mercy. “Yet forty days and Nineveh shall be overthrown.” There are those to whom a preacher has no right to present mercy. They are subjects for justice. They have so long rejected God; they have gone so deeply into iniquity that justice is the very Gospel to be preached to them. I have met men, ere now, who had been Gospel-hardened by hearing of God’s love and God’s grace. Universalism is the natural outcome of such one-sided preaching, and even the vilest sinner comes to feel that his conduct is no occasion of fear. The longer I live the more I am impressed with the necessity of presenting judgment. Since I came to this pulpit there have been two or three tragic instances of men listening to the Gospel of mercy in this very room, and going out feeling God is good and He will forbear yet a little, and, ere they dreamed it, death was doing its work and they were being dragged by his merciless hand before the Judge of all the earth; and as I have thought upon their going, unprepared, as some of them have been, I have felt that it was my business to preach judgment as well as mercy. I think there are some men who must come to Sinai and hear the thunderings and threatenings thereof before they will ever see the necessity of Calvary. At one time when Mr. Moody was holding a meeting in New York he found in the inquiry room a personal worker pleading with a sceptic, and as Mr. Moody stopped and listened to the proud defiance of this man, and read in his face the evident pleasure he was getting from the argument, Moody said to the worker, “If that is the way he feels, don’t waste your time on him. There is no hope for him.” Instantly the sceptic was alarmed and said, “Do you really think there is no hope for me?” “None whatever,” said Moody, “while you feel that way.” The man went to his room, fell down upon his knees and began to plead with God, and ere morning dawned the light of an everlasting day had broken in upon his darkened heart. III. Nineveh Repents in Sackcloth. “So the people of Nineveh believed God and proclaimed a fast, and put on sackcloth, from the greatest of them even to the least of them.” The whole city was convicted of sin. We have long talked of pentecost, and supposed it to have occurred at Jerusalem ten days after our Lord’s ascension; and we have long held up Peter as the peerless evangelist. But the pentecost of Acts the second chapter fades to insignificance before the pentecost of Jonah third chapter, and the result of Peter’s preaching that day small indeed when compared with the consequences of this day’s work on the part of this so-called minor prophet. 3,000 men convicted of sin, asking, “Men and brethren, what shall we do?” is a sight to astonish mortals, but 600,000 brought to sackcloth and ashes in a single day in consequence of the preaching of one man is a sight to astonish angels; and yet that is the record. “All Nineveh, from the least to the greatest.” It was a walled city sixty miles in circumference. Jonah could just about walk across it in a single day. One hundred and fifty stadia, or nineteen miles, was a day’s journey. One cannot read the words of Jonah in the original, “Od arbaim yom venineveh nehpacheth,” without being reminded of Daniel’s words, “Mene mene tekel upharsin.” And while Daniel’s words struck terror to the heart of the king this single sentence from Jonah alarmed the Ninevites from the greatest of them even unto the least of them. Repentance reached even to the throne. “For word came unto the king of Nineveh and he arose from his throne, and he laid his robe from him, and covered him with sackcloth and sat in ashes; and he caused it to be proclaimed and published through Nineveh by the degree of the king and his nobles, saying, Let neither man nor beast, herd nor flock taste anything, let them not feed nor drink waters, but let man and beast be covered with sackcloth and cry mightily unto God.” It is a great revival when it reaches even to the throne. There are a great many people in this country discussing the question, “How to reach the common people, how to reach the laboring men, how to reach the working girls.” That is not the difficult question. It is comparatively easy to reach these. A free church, a cordial reception, and a plain, pungent Gospel will answer that question for these classes. The hard question is, How to reach the self-constituted upper ten. When Mr. Moody began his work in this country the common people heard him gladly. It took twenty years, however, for him to get any hearing from the educated and wealthy. It was only after he became world-famed that they were interested in him, all of which makes one afraid that the interest was not spiritual but secular instead; the interest of standing alongside of and being associated with a man of a great name. If there is any one thing we need to pray for in this country it is a revival that shall reach up and bring to humility and repentance the proud, and the scholarly, and the kings of finance. And we ought to pray for such a revival for the souls of these are precious in the sight of our God, and their sins are the sins of Nineveh: fraud, violence, worldliness in every form. Oh, for a revival that might reach to the kings of finance, and to the queens of fashion. We are told that when Maud Ballington Booth lectured in one of the popular theatres of Paris, the fashionable habitues of the place went to hear her out of idle curiosity, and she reached their hearts and humbled them to their knees in penitence and prayer. Oh, that we might see it so in our day and in our land. The genuineness of this repentance is proven by reformation. The king’s degree was, “Let them turn every one from his evil way and from the violence that is in their hands.” Sardanapalus understood the God could not be deceived, that no repentance would be accepted of him, save that which reformed a life. Every now and then people come to me and say with reference to some one who has just confessed Christ, “Do you think he is converted?” “Do you believe she is saved?” It is not my business to answer that question. Wait a few weeks or months and the individuals themselves will answer that question. If the repentance is genuine, it will manifest itself in reformation. The sinful habits will be given up and the Spirit of God will get “right of way” in the heart, and “by their fruits ye shall know them.” IV. God Responds in Mercy. “And God saw their works, that they turned from their evil way, and God repented of the evil that He said that He would do unto them, and He did it not.” God is merciful in character. This heathen king seems to have understood that fact, for when he called upon his people to turn from their evil ways he added, “Who can tell if God will turn and repent, and turn away from His fierce anger that we perish not?” No man who knows anything of the mighty Jehovah can call in question the mercifulness of His character. Do you remember in Hugo’s “Les Miserables” what he makes the good priest to say? It was a note on the margin of one of Myriel’s books, “Oh, thou who art! Ecclesiastes names Thee Almighty; Maccabees names Thee Creator; the Epistle to the Ephesians names Thee Liberty; Baruch names Thee Immensity; the Psalms name Thee Wisdom and Truth; John names Thee Light; the book of Kings names Thee Lord; Exodus calls Thee Providence; Leviticus, Holiness; Esdras, Justice; creation calls Thee God; man names Thee Father; but Solomon names Thee Compassion, and that is the most beautiful of all Thy names.” And God is merciful in practice. Even in the preaching of judgment by Jonah His message was, “Yet forty days and Nineveh shall be overthrown.” Why this withholding of judgment for forty days? They were God’s days of grace. They were Nineveh’s opportunity for repentance. It was according to God’s practice. Go back if you will to that first time when the world was filled with sin in Genesis 6:1-22, to that time when the sons of God lusted after the daughters of men, and the Lord said, “My Spirit shall not always strive with man.” “Yet, yet!” This same little word “yet.” “Yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years.” God’s practice of mercy. Even Sodom had her chance of repentance and her preacher of righteousness. But Jesus Christ said of the cities of His time that they had enjoyed better opportunities still, and upon them rested the greater condemnation. And I must remind many of you tonight of my God’s provision for your repentance. Nineveh never heard but one prophet. To how many of God’s prophets have you been privileged to listen? Nineveh was privileged only a single warning, how many hundreds have you known already? Nineveh was proffered forty days in which to get right. Some of you have already wasted twenty, thirty and even forty years. And yet you feel your lives to be wrong before God. My friend, in the day of judgment what shall you answer for having refused His grace, for having closed your ears to His warning, for having let the time set for repentance pass unimproved ? It is penitence and penitence only that puts one in the way of salvation. Sardanapalus, the king, understood that, and you understand it. Go over to Luke 15:1-32 and read the parable of the prodigal son, and I don’t care who you are, you will find your picture there. If you are just starting out to enjoy the world by indulging in its wickedness, you are portrayed by the words, “Father, give me the portion that falleth unto me.” If you have been some time in the swirl of iniquity, “wasting your substance with riot-out living,” you are pictured there; if you have “spent all” and are “in want;” if you have come even to “hunger;” if you have gone into the basest employment and unto swinish associations, still you may see yourself in that marvelous parable ; and, if tonight you realise your situation; if, like that younger son, you have come to yourself and are thinking upon God’s great bounty; if in your heart you are saying, “I will arise and go to my Father and will say unto Him, Father, I have sinned against heaven and before Thee and am no more worthy to be called Thy son,” still you have only to look into this text to see the reflection of your own face; and, if there are those here tonight who have the good sense and the courage to resist Satan, and in true purpose turn back to God, then that parable contains a picture precious above any known to the galleries of earth, or ever imagined by the mind of man. It is the picture of the compassionate Father running to meet His unworthy child, falling upon his neck in the fulness of His affection, His heart overflowing in kisses. And, oh, that is the picture I would have you to see tonight—God standing ready to receive every repentant one. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 60: 05.5. JONAH’S GOURD ======================================================================== JONAH’S GOURD Jonah 4:1-11. THE discourse of a week ago saw Jonah triumphant. In a single day, through preaching the preaching that God had bidden him, he had sent all Nineveh to sackcloth and ashes. The revival had reached even to the throne and Sardanapalus, the king, realised his sin and the sin of his people, and proclaimed a fast in consequence. That was a mighty conquest; and we would expect the man who wrought it to walk upon the mountains, to be dwelling in spirit in the heavenlies. But Jonah disappoints all such expectations. In the first verse of this fourth chapter we find the hero of that greatest of all pentecosts displeased and in the dumps. The preacher of mighty power of yesterday is the complaining dyspeptic of today. But, for my own part, I cannot join with those who have only words of condemnation for him; with those who regard this an uncalled-for fit of anger, who esteem it a sufficient reason for writing the prophet down as “small,” for finishing with him as unworthy of a place on the roll of God’s heroes. Do you remember in the “The Marble Fawn” how Hilda condemned Miriam for “having shared in an awful crime, and then having permitted herself to make the deed a topic of conversation with her friends,” to which Kenyon replied, “Ah, Hilda, * * * they are perhaps partners in what we must call awful guilt; and yet I will own to you, when I think of the original cause, the motive, the feeling, the sudden concurrence of circumstances thrusting them onward, the urgency of the moment, and the sublime unselfishness on either part, I know not well how to distinguish it from much that the world calls ‘heroism.’ ” Might we not render some such verdict as this, “Worthy of death but not unworthy of love?” And so when I think of the original cause of Jonah’s displeasure, of the motives and the feelings back of it, of the sudden change of circumstances, and of the urgency of the moment, as he saw things, I am not ready to write him down a coward, nor yet to call his behavior purely petulant, and his complaint mere peevishness. As Kenyon suggested, it is impossible to justify him, but not impossible to love and admire him. First of all let us think of I. The Occasions of His Displeasure. His prophecy would fail. He had said, “Yet forty days and Nineveh will be overthrown.” It is a strange streak in human nature that it would have all its predictions, good or bad, come to pass. Here is a woman, who, on the first meeting, becomes prejudiced against her sister, and whispers to some of her friends her opinion of the new acquaintance. In nine cases out of ten she will forever live in hope of seeing her predictions come to pass. Here is a man who takes a dislike to a business competitor and the whispering winds bring him a breath from somebody to the effect that this man is about to fail. He takes a few people into his confidence and says, “I prophesy there will be a collapse in that institution ere long,” and from the day he makes the prophecy, he hopes to see it come to pass, for men do not like their predictions to fail. So inwrought in fallen human nature is this disposition that even the churchman who predicts in advance of the pastor’s coming, that he will fail, sets himself to the task of bringing his own words to pass. It is easy enough for us to condemn the man for his conduct, but who of us is worthy to cast the first stone? Let us search our hearts and see before we say aught else against Jonah. Are we not, every one, involved in this same weakness of loving to see his prophecy come to pass, and being privileged to say, “I told you so?” Jonah’s disappointment is better justified than the average for the simple reason that he had said what God had told him to say, and he had perfect right to expect to see his prediction fulfilled. Possibly there is no man in the world who is so chagrined and sorrowed to learn that what he has said will not endure the test of times as the man who honestly believes that he is preaching the Word of the Lord. Again, Jonah expected now to see his own people perish. This very Nineveh was the capital of the country which, in the process of time would overcome and conquer Israel. Had Jonah’s prediction, “Yet forty days and Nineveh shall be overthrown,” been fulfilled, then he might have hoped to see Israel escape the Assyrian scourge. Long ago God had said of His own people and of their idolaters, “They have moved Me to jealousy with that which is not God; they have provoked Me to anger with their vanities, and I will move them to jealousy with those which are not a people, I will provoke them to anger with a foolish nation” (Deuteronomy 32:21). Jonah was familiar with this prediction and feared its fulfilment. To him it seemed serious business that Nineveh should be spared. He saw that it meant Israel overthrown. And we may believe that he loved Israel as Paul loved her. You remember the great apostle said, “I have great heaviness, and continual sorrow in my heart, for I could wish that myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh; who are Israelites; to whom pertaineth the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God, and the promises” (Romans 9:2-5). Think back a little and you, as a patriotic American, will come into sympathy with this prophet’s spirit. All through this land of ours, Christian men hailed with delight the news of the sinking of the Spanish fleet in the Manila harbor; and again the same joy took possession of us when we heard how the second fleet had been sunk at Santiago. We saw in it the overthrow of an enemy. We saw in it the falling of a power which must go down, or else our own people would suffer before their guns, and only a few, of even our Christian men, were great enough to join with Capt. Philip, the noble naval officer, in his splendid Christian speech, “Boys, don’t cheer, those poor fellows are dying.” We wanted to see them die! We wanted the Spanish power broken, and we called our feelings “patriotism.” The prophet Jonah had better reason to call his disappointment by the same name. And yet there is a vast deal called “Patriotism” by a poor employment of the term. The “Clarion” says: “The Loyalist patriot’s creed is, My country right or wrong, my party right or wrong.” But, though the preacher of the Gospel so define his patriotism, God will not regard it. her administration. When my country When my country is wrong, I do her an injury to indorse her methods and praise is wrong there is but one possible way to prove my patriotism, and that is to point out the error, and like these prophets of old, plead for reform. But when my country is wrong I must love her still, and like Jonah, I could not help feeling sadness, I could not escape heaviness of heart, if I saw her enemies preserved and increased in power, and knew that God would yet use them to humble my homeland to the dust. Jonah, in this displeasure, was voicing exactly what the apostle Paul uttered when he said, “Brethren, my heart’s desire and prayer to God for Israel is that they might be saved, for I bear them record that they have a zeal of God, but not according to knowledge; for they being ignorant of God’s righteousness, and going about to establish their own righteousness, had not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God” (Romans 10:1-3). In the next place let us consider II. Jonah’s Disposition to Die. And he prayed unto the Lord and said, “I pray Thee, O Lord, was not this my saying, when I was yet in my country? Therefore I fled before unto Tarshish, for I knew that Thou art a gracious God and merciful; slow to anger, and of great kindness, and repentest Thee of the evil. Therefore now, O Lord, take, I beseech Thee, my life from me, for it is better for me to die than to live.” This was a weak moment, not necessarily a weak man. A weak moment does not prove a weak man. On the contrary it would seem that almost all great men are peculiarly subject to weak moments. The very elements in them that push them to the very heights are liable to reaction, and a consequent falling to the depths. Take Elijah as an instance of this claim. In all the Old Testament history there is not a braver prophet. He does not hesitate to face the king and tell him his faults. In all of the Old Testament there is not a man of more marvelous faith. Regard the instance of Mount Carmel, the climax of man’s expectation from the Lord. Although alone, Elijah felt no fear in the face of 450 prophets of Baal. He knew his God to be true. He knew their God to be false. The test he put to them of fire coming down from above to consume the altar and the sacrifice, was a test which only the most trusting would have dared. The answer of God was so prompt, so complete, that Elijah must have been lifted to the heights of rejoicing; the overthrow of the prophets of Baal so sudden and terrible that one would imagine Elijah walking with head erect, and bearing about in his bosom a stout heart all his remaining days. But, alas for the disappointment! A day passes, a women utters her threat against Elijah’s life, and Elijah loses hope and heart, and is found under a juniper tree making Jonah’s request, “It is enough now, O Lord, take away my life, for I am not better than my fathers, let me die.” Do you say that Elijah was a weak man? No, this was a weak moment in the life of a man of might. Think of Peter, the apostle of pentecost, and see how he illustrates the same fact. Ready today to die with his Master, declaring in his enthusiasm, “Though all men should leave Thee, yet I will never.” Tomorrow filled with fear before the face of an insignificant maid, denying with cursing and swearing that he ever knew the Lord. Do you say Peter was a weak man? No! Peter was a man of might, but subject to weak moments! I doubt if there is a single name in American history more revered by the whole people than that of Abraham Lincoln. The people admire him because he was the very embodiment of political integrity and of conscientious courage; and yet John Gilmer Speed is responsible for the story that when Lincoln came to marry, January I, 1841, his heart failed him. He left the gowned bride heartbroken by his failure to put in appearance, and when his friends found him, they saw he was so overcome with melancholy as not to be responsible for his actions, and for twenty-two months he was utterly unable to muster the courage necessary to meet his love at the marriage altar, and only then, after having been assured by one of his most intimate friends, who had back of him a marriage experience of eight months, that the marriage estate was a more happy one than he had ever hoped to find it. Do you tell me that Abraham Lincoln was a weak man? No, but Abraham Lincoln had his weak points and his weak moments. One of the reasons why people often misjudge their fellows exists in the circumstance that they fail to discern between the moment and the man. It ought not to be forgotten either that the highest mountain peak must be followed by a valley, and that the highest human attainment is almost sure to be succeeded by a sense of weakness. After the great sculptor Thorwaldsen had realised his ideal in marble, his friends found him sitting with his head between his hands, sobbing as if his heart was broken. In answer to their inquiry concerning his trouble he said, “I have realised my ideal. I fear I shall never have another great thought.” But there was another secret in his sobs. That ideal had aroused every energy of body and mind, and upon that ideal he had wrought until every muscle and nerve was overworked, and when at last the chisel had given the finishing stroke, tired nature collapsed and despondency was the consequence. Everywhere there are people longing to die, ready almost to take away life, who need only the rest of a week, the recuperating benefits of proper slumber and food, to find themselves again and feel that life is worth the living. More and more I believe that a well-balanced mind will so clearly apprehend these things that self-destruction will seem to it at once foolish and sinful, and even the prayer put up by Elijah and voiced by Jonah, one that must come up before God as a proof that the man making it is in his weakest moment. The answer to this prayer was as divine as the petition was human. Oh, how human to be discouraged! How human to be displeased! How human to utter our complaints! How human to tell God what we want of Him! How divine to answer as God here answered, “Doest thou well to be angry?” How divine for the Creator of the Universe to come down to the level of His creature and reason with him; yea, even plead with him in love; yea, even provide him with a temporary respite from his troubles, and a refreshing shadow against the sun! And God did both. He reasoned with Jonah, “Doest thou well to be angry?” He regarded Jonah’s exhausted condition, his physical collapse, and his mental aberration. “And the Lord God prepared a gourd and made it to come up over Jonah that it might be a shadow over his head to deliver him from his grief.” Possibly we have never understood the full import of Jonah’s position here, and the full meaning of God’s grace in this vine. In this far northern climate we cannot imagine the sweltering heat of Assyria. A sojourner in that land speaking of their climate says of his experience in the early summer, “The spring was now fast passing away; the heat became daily greater; the corn was cut; and the plains and hills put on their summer clothing of dull parched yellow. The pasture is withered; the herbage faileth; the green grass is not.” He also makes reference to this vehement East wind by saying, “It was the season, too, of burning winds, which occasionally swept over the face of the country, driving, in their short-lived fury, everything before them. We all went below (ground) soon after the sun had risen, and remained there (in the tunnels) without again seeking the open air until it was far down in the western horizon.” It was from such a sun, and from such a wind that Jonah’s God-given gourd had shielded him. No wonder “he was exceedingly glad of the gourd.” And I dare say that every man here has had an experience of God’s favor right along with his being called to pass through the furnace. I hear people talk sometimes as if life was all clouded, and God never shoots their darkness through with one rift of the sun. I hear people talk sometimes as if life was utterly exhausted, and God never sends them a single grateful shade in which to recover strength. But I confess I don’t understand them! Nay, more—I don’t believe them! I have seen the shadows, but for me, at least, God has shot them every one through and through with some rays from the sun; and I have felt the scorching heat of the days that burned, but I am compelled to admit, nay rather I would gladly testify to the fact, that God has not forgotten His own; and when the flesh could endure no more, He has never failed to furnish rest and shade. And, tonight, I believe that the man who does not see it so, or the woman, does not understand God, and is blind to the very blessings that our heavenly Father is always bestowing upon His own. Won’t you stop now and think of all your complaining petitions, and then with the power of memory, compute all your blessings, and see if the latter are not as divine as the former are human; and, like Jonah of old, be “glad for the gourd?” I do not know in what experience God has provided for you this grateful shade, but I dare say He has provided it. There is your neighbor languishing upon a bed of sickness, but you are enjoying good health; is not that God’s gourd? There is your neighbor who has been reduced from plenty to poverty, and does not new know whether on Thanksgiving Day he shall be privileged to dine; but you fare sumptuously every day. Is not that God’s gourd? There is one of your children who has been to you a burning Assyrian sun, bringing you almost to the grave, but there is another who has been your pride and is at present your precious one; is not that God’s gourd? On the street you pass the friendless man, who is going from door to door seeking employment, or pleading for bread, but in that same street you are greeted by friends at every turn; are not these God’s gourd ? You who charge God with having forgotten you, count your blessings and be ashamed! Again, this is III. God’s Parable of Grace. First of all it evidenced His grace to Jonah. As we have seen, He was good to His own. In these days, when “the universal fatherhood of God” is preached from so many pulpits people are almost forgetting that God has any people He peculiarly calls His own. But whatever may be the theological philosophy of the present, I think a careful study of sacred Writ will show that God lays claim to certain people as His own children, and for all such He has particularly pledged His grace and favor. Those who, by the grace that is in Christ Jesus, He has adopted, because they have been willing to become His—these are always experiencing the fulfillment of His promises of blessing. When Henry M. Stanley was making his trip across Africa he came often to the very point of starvation. Once for nine days on the way to Iturn, it seemed every day as if death would come through sheer want. Once, when flying from Bumbire, he and his company endured great pangs of hunger. But a more severe experience awaited him when he went on his expedition to relieve Emin Pasha. The last banana had been devoured. Meat they had not tasted for days. The starving men were saying, “This time we die,” when Stanley answered, “It is said that the age of miracles is past, but why should it be so? Elijah was fed by ravens at the brook Cherith, but I suppose there is not a raven in all this forest; and yet we can pray.” And, while they plead there was a sound as if a large bird were whirring through the air. Suddenly it dropped in their midst, and the fox-terrier sprang instantly upon the prize, and held it as if in a vise of iron. “There, boys,” said Stanley, “the age of miracles is not past,” for the fat guinea-fowl God had sent in answer to the cry of His own. It was to Stanley what the gourd of old was to Jonah, the one thing needful in the awful hour. And, if you consider well, you will find God is always making that contribution to His own. Again, this gourd was a parable of God’s grace to the Gentiles. When the caterpillars had smitten it that it withered, and sweltering Jonah was sick and ready to die, God said to him, “Doest thou well to be angry for the gourd? And he said, I do well to be angry even unto death. Then said the Lord, Thou hast had pity on the gourd for the which thou hast not labored, neither madest it grow, which came up in a night and perished in a night. And should not I spare Nineveh, that great city?” The parable is this, “If you loved your gourd upon which you have expended neither time nor labor, how is it that you do not understand my love toward Nineveh, which I have planted, to which I have given hundreds of years of attention, and on which I have bestowed the labors of the everlasting God?” Herein is the ground of God’s grace toward all men. He has given His thought to them. He has expended His time upon them. He has poured out His love in their behalf, and He cannot endure to see them perish. Don’t you remember how Paul expresses this in Romans 5:8? “God commended His love toward us in that while we were yet sinners Christ died for us.” What an evidence of the divine affection! Dying for rebels against His grace! What proof of the goodness of the heart of God! “There’s a wideness in God’s mercy Like the wideness of the sea.” Henry Van Dyke, the lecturer in our Art and Literature Course, on Friday night last, says in one of his volumes, “It is narrated of the great novelist Thackery, that he was walking with a friend at evening, on the hills near Edinburg. The sun sank slowly to his rest, leaving a trail of glory behind him, and the solemn splendors of the sky deepened above the crowded tenements, the dark, foul, noisome streets, the pain, and misery, and want, of the old town. Thackery looked at it long in silence, and then, turning to his companion, with tears in his eyes, he said, “Calvary.” And, oh, my friends, I want you to see tonight that over all the sins of men God spreads the glorious canopy of His grace, and above the heads of them that rebel against Him He unrolls the crimson banner of His compassion; and Jew and Gentile are alike proffered His life-giving love. This grace is exercised also in justice. “Then said the Lord . . . Should not I spare Nineveh, that great city, wherein are more than six score thousand persons that cannot discern between their right hand and their left hand, and also much cattle ?” How often the guilty are shielded for the sake of the innocent, we may never know. Certain it is that God is ever sparing sinners solely because His calling them to judgment would involve their innocent lovers in suffering. Here, the one hundred and twenty thousand little children who had committed no iniquity against Him, and the dumb cattle, which must also die, if Nineveh be overthrown, moved the heart of God to mercy, and the most wicked men and women were thus shielded from that just judgment. I wonder how many there are here tonight who are safe because loved ones stand between them and an angry God; sons, whose father’s petitions are their preservation; daughters, whose mother’s prayers have prevailed to stay the stroke of judgment; brothers and sisters and friends between whom and an offended God, praying friends, brothers and sisters have intervened; parents, preserved alive and blest, for the sake of the babes? Oh, that you would be wise and make the hour, big with opportunity for you, blessed by repentance, and sweet through surrender. Oh, that the innocent ones who have been a shield against judgment might be privileged to share in the joy of your salvation! Quite a while ago the Chicago Inter Ocean told the story of two sweet-faced, white-haired women who went, with great bunches of beautiful flowers, into one of the hospitals of that city. They approached the bed whereon a young girl lay and requested the nurse to take the flowers and present them to the sick one, but the nurse glancing from the pale face to theirs said, “She is too far gone,” for the young woman seemed even then to be dying. But the elder lady reached over the sufferer and laid on her pillow a cluster of sweet-scented honey-suckles. Suddenly the dying girl opened her eyes, and then starting up, as if in a dream of some bright day of the past, she said, “See, mother, it is blooming full, the honey-suckle—that I—planted—by the— garden wall! I am—so tired—mother —I cannot pick—the blossoms now!” The elder woman started at the voice, looked a moment into the eyes to assure herself, and then clasping the dying girl to her arms, she said, “Oh, Margaret, my daughter, have I found you at last! Oh, Margaret, speak to me, to your mother once more.” The prayer was answered, and the girl who, three years before, had gone out from her home to the great city, to be taken by its temptations and swept down in the swirl of its sin, was so blessed with the consciousness that “mother has come,” made so happy with the sweet sense, “mother does not condemn, but loves me,” that a miracle of healing was wrought, and in time this wanderer went back again to beautiful life, and to the pure joys of the old loves and home. And yet no mother ever loved her prodigal child as God loves a prodigal soul. Tonight, to the most sinful, He comes with His Rose of Sharon, and bending over those who in their iniquity are ready to die, He says, “My child, have I found you at last? Let Me lay upon you the hand of healing, and oh, let Me, with My own loving hand, lead you home!” ======================================================================== CHAPTER 61: 06.00.1. THE PREACHER & HIS PREACHING ======================================================================== The Preacher & HIS PREACHING By W. B. RILEY, M. A. LL. D Pastor, First Baptist Churchy Minneapolis, Minnesota, 1897-1942 Pastor Emeritus, until his death, 1947 Author of Pastoral Problems; My Bible—An Apologetic; Sermons At Sunset: “The Bible of the Expositor and the Evangelist” (forty volumes), etc. SWORD OF THE LORD PUBLISHERS WHEATON, ILLINOIS Copyright, 1948, by SWORD OF THE LORD PUBLISHERS PRINTED IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ======================================================================== CHAPTER 62: 06.00.2. FOREWORD ======================================================================== FOREWORD THE FIELD of homiletics is like the woods pasture; treatises upon the subject stand like trees—a multitude in number, and in fair proximity. The man, therefore, who proposes to plant another in this increasing forest must defend his procedure. For more than forty years I have taught in connection with the Northwestern Schools (Bible Training School and Theological Seminary) the subject of homiletics, and have had opportunity, therefore, to consult the many authors who have written upon the same. On the whole, this field of study is as well provided by competent contributors as is the average department of a theological curriculum or better; and yet, I dare to add this additional volume. Among my reasons for so doing are the following: First of all, the average treatise on the subject seems to me to be lumbered. Homiletical writers, as a rule, are verbose men, and they wrap their thought in the too-ample folds of eloquence. Often many pages are given to a subject which would be better comprehended if stated in more terse terms. As a lad growing up in the South, my chief objection to walnuts, of which I was extremely fond, was in the fact that they had too much hull and case to be disposed of before you got to the kernel. I find the same reason for writing upon homiletics. If possible, I want to present kernels of truth without too much of verbiage to be removed, and with adequate illustrations! Still further, “The Preacher and His Preaching” are so intimately and inexorably related that to present the one apart from the other amounts to the divorcing of the man from his ministry; in other words, separation of self from expression—a baneful procedure. In this volume we are giving five chapters to the preacher and nine to his preaching. Certainly two fifths of one’s success, if not a much larger proportion, must rest with the preacher rather than with his preaching. Concerning preaching, its importance cannot be over-estimated! Christianity is conspicuously creedal. Jesus has been named as “the only teacher of perfect morality” while His philosophy of life is worthy the phrase, “The Light of the World.” This fact accounts for His committing His entire cause to apostles, and thereby making preaching the medium of salvation, both for the individual and for the nations. Hence Paul, the inspired apostle, writes to the Corinthians, saying, “It pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe” (1 Corinthians 1:21). For twenty centuries the church of Jesus Christ has depended upon and marked progress by THE PREACHING OF THE WORD. The future holds no prospect of either superiors or competitors to this office. It has been, and is destined to remain, the divine plan for the good of mankind. To make, therefore, effective ministers of the gospel is the climax of accomplishment in education! To that end this volume is dedicated. We trust it may become a companion-piece to Pastoral Problems—a volume now going into the fourth edition, and rapidly growing in favor as a textbook. THE AUTHOR Minneapolis, Minnesota December, 1947 ======================================================================== CHAPTER 63: 06.00.3. INTRODUCTION ======================================================================== INTRODUCTION IT HAS been my privilege for a period of years to serve as Assistant Professor, Associate Professor, and Co-Professor with the author of this book. Among other subjects “Homiletics” has always been taught in THE NORTHWESTERN SCHOOLS. I consider it a distinctive honor to be asked for a word of INTRODUCTION to these chapters. Dr. W. B. Riley is the author of more than eighty volumes and certainly needs no introduction among Bible-believing Christians on any of the six continents. The vital subject of this volume, The Preacher and His Preaching, well expresses the contents of the book, many chapters of which have been used in the classroom by the author and myself. As we have searched here and there through textbooks on the subject, again and again we have come back to the author’s material which has been enthusiastically received and profitably employed. As this volume goes forth, it is my prophecy that like the author’s book on Pastoral Problems it will go through many editions, because of its brevity of compass, its straightforward simplicity, and the practical suggestions that it offers the preacher for his preaching. Dr. Richard V. Clearwaters ======================================================================== CHAPTER 64: 06.01. CHAPTER 1: THE PREACHER AND HIS PREACHING ======================================================================== Chapter 1 THE PREACHER AND HIS PREACHING IN BEGINNING this series of lectures to theological students, I have chosen as an appropriate title for a volume on homiletics, The Preacher and His Preaching. It is my hope, and perhaps I should say my expectation, if life should be spared through the year, 1947, to publish these lectures in a textbook suitable for Bible training schools and theological seminaries. I am quite disposed to believe that “The Preacher and His Preaching” is God’s plan for this—the church age; that from the days of John the Baptist until now, and further until Christ shall come to conclude the present dispensation, preaching has been, and will continue to be, the divinely-appointed medium of winning men to Jesus Christ. As the Apostle Paul, writing to the Corinthians, said: “For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe” (1 Corinthians 1:21). We have had modern prophets suggest “a moratorium on preaching” of at least two years’ duration, arguing that it would be for the good of the nation; and another prophecy that “in ten years the custom of preaching would have been abandoned”; but neither suggestion was taken seriously, even! Time has already proven the inanity of both propositions. It still remains a fact, as was demonstrated in the days of John the Baptist and further illustrated in the ministry of the Master, that wherever a great preacher appears, great audiences gather. It is now pretty generally conceded that it is not the multiplication of priests, magnificence of rituals, attractions of music, semi-political or professedly scientific disquisitions that call men and women in crowds! It is, as always, by great preaching, and there is no indication of approaching change. In the judgment of this writer, therefore, the objective of the present-day Bible training school and theological seminary should not be the finished orator, nor the superb scholar, nor the social reformer, nor the religious specialist, nor the popular author, but the virile Gospel preacher instead. Turning now to the subject of our introductory chapter we will consider first THE PREACHER Here I am righteously solicitous to discuss briefly and Biblically only the greater essentials. The profession is so many-sided that it would be almost confusing to attempt a full presentation of all that should be found in the ideal. There are, however, certain absolutes. We select three for consideration. First, his profession should be a divine appointment. This subject we have discussed in Pastoral Problems, chapter one. Its importance is such, however, as to justify restatement and further emphasis. Paul, writing to Timothy, 2 Timothy 1:11, speaks of himself as “appointed a preacher, and an apostle, and a teacher of the Gentiles” He evidently believed that he was among ‘the gifts’ to the church made by his ascended Lord in the promise of ‘prophets, apostles, evangelists, pastors and teachers.’ It is a significant fact that Paul was so impressed with the importance of divine appointment to the office of preaching that he claimed that high honor in every Epistle penned by him. To the Romans he said, “Paul, a servant of Jesus Christ, called to be an apostle” (Romans 1:1). To the Corinthians he repeated, “Paul, called to be an apostle of Jesus Christ” (1 Corinthians 1:1). Even when he wrote the second Epistle to the same Corinthian people, he repeated his divine nomination, and so on to the end. This is attested by the study of the first verse of every Epistle bearing his name, with the exception of the Epistle to the Hebrews, where the authorship has long been in dispute. Among the few arguments to be found in the favor of those who doubt that Paul penned this Epistle would be the failure to introduce it with a claim of divine appointment to the ministry. It is indeed a question whether or not any man should ever occupy that high and holy office, except God set him in the same. It is not a profession to be chosen by mere human preference or occupied for personal pleasure or promotion. Ambassadors must have the backing of the throne! Second, his preparation should be steeped in prayer. Here we appeal to Pentecost in demonstration of our claim. The apostles, “Peter, and James, and John, and Andrew, Philip, and Thomas, Bartholomew, and Matthew, James the son of Alphaeus, and Simon Zelotes, and Judas the brother of James. These all continued with one accord in prayer and supplication” (Acts 1:13-14). But for the upper-room ten days that preceded Pentecost, it is extremely doubtful if Peter’s preaching and the testimonies of the others could ever have fruited in the three thousand converts. A good story is told concerning two colored preachers whose conversation (eaves-dropped) went after this manner: “Where am yo’ all preachin’ now, Brothah?” “Nowhere,” was the answer. “A fine preacher like yo’ is, too!” said the first. “That is just it,” retorted the second, “I’m a preachin’ preacher; and what the las’ congregation wanted was a prayin’ preacher, and that ain’t in my line. Seems like too much specialization these days!” It remains a fact, however, that specialization in prayer has always been the sine qua non of the gospel ministry. In his Yale lectures, R. F. Horton encouraged the students for the ministry to make the mountain top of prayer the place of constant visitations, and reminded them that no man could lead his people to that pinnacle of privilege who was not accustomed to go there himself and who had not made many footpaths up that hill. I have found in one of my scrapbooks the following statement: “Years of millennial glory have been lost by a prayer-less church. The coming of our Lord Jesus has been postponed by a prayerless church. Hell has enlarged herself in the presence of a prayerless church. We are raising up a prayerless set of saints.” If there is some truth in that indictment, and there is, the ministry cannot escape responsibility. “And it shall be, as with the people, so with the priest” (Isaiah 24:2). Third, his speech should be Holy Spirit empowered. The reservoir of hope for the ministry is in the Master’s promise, “Ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me” (Acts 1:8). It is quite customary for the opponents of complete education for the ministry to remind the scholarly ambitious of the day that Dwight L. Moody of America was never equalled as an evangelist by the proudest product of our American universities; that Charles Spurgeon of England was never surpassed as a pastor or pulpiteer by anyone of the Cambridge or Oxford valedictorians; that Campbell Morgan, as an expositor, outshone all the competitors of his day; and since not one of them ever had any university education, the implication is that higher learning too often ignores the need of the Holy Ghost. But it might be well to recall the fact that Savonarola stirred all Florence to repentance and moral revolution; Martin Luther shook the entire fabric of Catholicism; President Dwight of Yale downed the skeptics of his day; Phillips Brooks of Boston made for himself an international reputation as a marvelous expositor of Scripture and interpreter of Christianity: each and every one of them reached the highest learning, giving basis to the better claim that what the preacher needs is the power of the Spirit resting upon him, whether he be the unlearned fisherman—Peter, or Paul—the proudest product of Gamaliel’s school. Henry Ward Beecher, the Shakespeare of the American pulpit, once when speaking on “The Power of Humble Fidelity” said, “I have seen teachers and preachers whose distress of mind seemed to be that they were endowed with a royalty of talents which made it very difficult for them to know where to go. They were like big men-of-war that do not dare go into shallow channels for fear of running aground. On the other hand, I have known little, uncomely men, like Paul, who never thought about where they should bestow themselves, who took no great account of their talents, but who had warm hearts, and who were morning and evening by the roadside or in the car, or in the cottage of the poor, or in the resplendent mansion of the rich and who, wherever they were, were opening the fountain of true and divine benevolence.” If, in the explanation of this difference, one goes deep enough, he will discover that in the last analysis, it depends upon whether man is trusting in his own superiority or looking to the never-failing source of power—the Holy Spirit. We hear a good deal said these days about “tarry meetings.” The claim for them, at times, has come from questionable quarters, but the tarrying necessity will never pass! The preacher should never forget that “power belongeth unto God” (Psalms 62:11). HIS PREACHING All that has been said to date regarding the preacher prepares the way for the further subject of his preaching. On this theme, you will pardon me if I employ three somewhat inclusive statements. First, the Book should be his checking bank. Paul, writing to Timothy, enjoined upon his junior, “Preach the word,” (2 Timothy 4:2). The word of the Lord to Jonah in the far past has never needed changed expression. Concerning Nineveh He said, “Go unto Nineveh, that great city, and preach unto it the preaching that I hid thee” (Jonah 3:2). Harwood Pattison, who has what I regard the best book on homiletics published within seventy-five years, defines preaching as the “spoken communication of divine truth with a view to persuasion,” Mark his language, “communication of divine truth” When in the mountain of Galilee Christ gave his marching orders for the church, He said to his chosen disciples, “All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth. Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you” (Matthew 28:18-20). It may sound strange to this generation for me to remind it that William R. Harper was not always as remote from loyalty to the Bible as he became in his later years. I have in one of my scrapbooks a fine quotation from his pen to this effect, There is a lamentable ignorance of the Bible on the part of many ministers and of students preparing for the ministry. Theological seminaries founded for the purpose of training men in the knowledge of God, His Word, and His dealings with men, discuss deeply the question whether God is knowable, spend much time in deciding whether the Bible is, after all, the Word of God, and study minutely every heresy that has sprung up since Christianity was established, while God as manifested in His Word, and the Word as giving God’s idea to men, are ignored. Second, the preacher’s theme should be Christ and Him crucified. The decision of the learned apostle, as he exercises his ministry among the cultured Corinthians, becomes an example. Paul said, “For I determined not to know anything among you, save Jesus Christ, and him crucified” (1 Corinthians 2:2). When Philip went down to the city of Samaria, he had but one subject for his sermons, he “preached Christ unto them.” Dr. Theodore Cuyler of the Lafayette Avenue Church, Brooklyn, was at once a great pastor, a noble soul, and an efficient servant of Jesus Christ. When, at the end of thirty years he was unwillingly surrendering his loved work, delivering his last pastoral discourse on the joys of the Christian ministry, he said, Today I write the last page in the record of thirty bright, happy, Heaven-blessed years among you. . . . When my closing eyes shall look on that record for the last time, I hope to discover there only one name—the name that is above every name, the name of Him whose glory crowns this Easter morn with radiant splendor, the name of Jesus Christ. Blessed is that ministry which honors Him, ‘Whom God hath highly exalted and given a name which is above every name,’ the only One of Whom it could be said, “Neither is there salvation in any other, for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.” To me, Joseph Parker was a mighty minister of the gospel of Christ. Christian philosophy scintillated at his lips, and I resent any criticism of his professional career; and yet I can understand the report of that American who, when in London years ago, went to hear Parker in the morning and Spurgeon at night, and was reputed to have commented concerning the morning service, “Grand preaching, marvelous pulpit oratory,” but at the close of the evening sermon delivered by Mr. Spurgeon said, “what a wonderful Saviour is Jesus I” The ministry that brings a compliment to the minister will never equal the ministry that exalts the Christ. Third, his purpose should be complete persuasion. Let us not forget the Harwood Pattison definition of preaching: “The spoken communication of divine truth with a view to persuasion .” The objective of every sermon should be identical. Paul speaks of his ministry as “the ministry of reconciliation” and when he stood before Festus and pleaded the cause of Christ, Agrippa said unto Paul, “Almost thou persuadest me to be a Christian” In fact, that was his absolute intent! If the preacher’s sermon does not move to the objective of decision, as the arrow strikes straight for its intended mark, that minister’s preaching is in vain, and the oratory of politicians commonly employed for the express purpose of winning to an idea should surely shame him. It is said that when Demosthenes addressed the Athenians against the Macedonians, his audience arose crying, “Let us go fight Philip”; and that when Mark Antony indicted the murderers of Julius Caesar, he stirred his auditors to action; and when Wellington, rising in his stirrups, shot forth the thrilling command, “Let the whole line advance!” Napoleon’s opposition was doomed. So when the minister reaches the conclusion and acme of his appeal (and there should be one), his audiences ought to be emotionally moved to high decision; the Christian company to undertake more for Christ, and the unconverted crowd to instantly accept Him. But I have brought you thus far, omitting the most important point concerning the whole subject of the preacher and his preaching, namely, HIS PREPARATION Paul, writing to the Romans, raised the question, “How shall they preach except they be sent?” We propose a kindred interrogation, “How shall they preach except they be prepared?” We have already suggested the necessity of prayer in preparation for preaching, but there are other essentials that should be added. Let me mention three of them. The first of them is self preparation! No man is fitted for a pulpit ministration of the Word merely because he is physically in fine fettle and mentally equipped. Preaching demands body and mind, but still more, an attuned spirit. Walter Trine, the Christian Scientist, has a book entitled, In Tune With the Infinite. While dissenting from his general conception we willingly assent to the suggestion that no man can preach whose spirit is not in tune with the Holy One. To me, that is the explanation of what Joseph Parker, the great London Temple preacher, had in mind when asked concerning his remarkable prayers commonly uttered in connection with the Temple service. The question was, “Mr. Parker, do you prepare your prayers before you enter the pulpit?” It was a very natural question, because any man reading Joseph Parker’s pulpit prayers is profoundly impressed by the intensity of feeling that even cold print cannot deaden, the chastity of language in which they were commonly voiced, and, above all, the almost infinite variety that characterized his successive petitions. His answer was illuminating in the last degree. “No indeed! I prepare myself by prayer, rather than prepare the prayers. They are the spontaneous utterances of my heart as these are given by the Holy Ghost. I do not feel as if they were mine, and ofttimes I feel refreshed by what passes through my soul and by what is uttered by my lips, and sometimes I stop suddenly because no more has been given me to say.” A frequent visitor to the Temple, himself a minister, said, “I can listen to Parker’s sermons without a tear; but I cannot control my emotions when I follow him in his prayers.” Let it be understood, then, that no man is prepared to preach until by communion with the Father he has somehow come into tune with the Infinite. Second, study, not school, is the “sine qua non”! God forbid that I should say aught that would discourage education. I believe in it. That’s why I am giving my life to it. I believe in schools. That’s why I attended them and why I have established three of them. Both the teaching of Scripture and my observation have convinced me fully and, once for all, that the school is important because it is a place of study, provides opportunity for study; in fact, lays upon the student the demands of study. It is not the school, therefore, that makes the preacher. It is the study instead! That is how it happened that Mr. Moody could be America’s most outstanding preacher and never know aught of higher schools of learning. He was a student. That is how it came to pass that Mr. Spurgeon was, like Saul of old, head and shoulders above the preachers of his country and generation. He saw little of the schools. He knew much of study. That’s why it came to pass that Campbell Morgan, the non-schooled but the assiduous student, outshone his fellow ministers in pulpit ministrations, especially in Biblical exposition. I have a very dear friend, of my own age, who enjoys a national reputation as a Bible expositor. One day I asked him the question, “What college are you from?” He laughed, “None!” “What theological seminary?” “Never saw the inside of one!” “What high school?” “Never entered one.” “Where, then, were you trained?” His answer was, “In the College of Hard Knocks!” The truth was that he was self-trained by assiduous study. Nothing can take the place of it. Many a man has a sheepskin from college who is not a student and consequently, holds little or no prospect of eventual success. Many a student who has no diploma from any earthly school is on his way upward, and no man can tell to what heights he will eventually rise. If your work in school makes a student of you, one of the essential preparations for preaching will have been accomplished. If you leave school with no love of study, the background of the school will be of little value. Paul, writing to Timothy, said, “Study to show thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.” Third, the Spirit’s enduement is the secret of power. We have incidentally referred to this fact in the previous sentence of this communication, but we desire now to lay upon it special emphasis. Beyond question, one of the ways of impressing truth is by illustration, and a little while ago I happened upon a little booklet entitled The March of Faith, written by Lindley J. Baldwin. It was the story of a young African boy whose native name was Kaboo, but who, in the process of changes, came to be known as Samuel Morris. There seems every evidence that the story is true to the last letter; and, beyond all question, it is equally a divine work of grace and even more exciting and dramatic than was the conversion of the Apostle Paul. In fact, in many respects it parallels it, and in some, surpasses that outstanding historic incident. Kaboo was the son of a tribal chieftain, and, as is the custom among the tribes of Africa, his father was often involved in war, and when the loser, was compelled to pay a ransom. Three times over he fought other chieftains and three times he lost; and, in each instance, after he had brought to his successful opponent every material expression of wealth that his tribe owned, the conquerer demanded more, and the son was turned over as a hostage. In each instance he was mercilessly beaten with the view to compelling his father to put up more wealth and thereby soften his sufferings. In the third instance the cruel, drinking chieftain finally went to the point of burying Kaboo in an upright position, leaving only his head above ground that ants, in the big ant-hill near by, might slowly torment to death and carry away by bits, every particle of flesh. It was at that point that the Lord interposed. Suddenly a light above the brightness of the sun broke over the entire company, blinding his tormentors, and an audible voice was heard, telling Kaboo to quit the grave and flee. All heard the voice and saw the light, but they saw no man, save Kaboo. In spite of the weakened condition of the lad from beatings and loss of blood, he was filled with strength from every muscle, and though he had had nothing to eat for a day or two, he felt neither hunger nor weariness. Leaping out, he obeyed, fleeing with the speed of a deer before the astonished eyes of his persecutors. Running into the forest he shortly found that night was falling, and felt that he had no more safety among the beasts and serpents than he had enjoyed with these beastly men; but, strange to say, the same light that had lifted him from the living grave reappeared with the coming of darkness and illumined the path ahead of his feet. It was like the time when the children of Israel, leaving Egypt, had the Lord go before them by day in a pillar of cloud and by night in a pillar of fire, and for the same purpose, ‘to give him light.’ Thus directed and illumined to the point where neither man nor beast approached him, he kept his way through the forest until he suddenly came upon a village of a sort he had never dreamed. Strange white men were found there, and to his amazement they were kind, and from them he learned of one Stephen Merritt in New York City, a far-away place of which he had never heard before; but in his yearnings after the truth he decided to go to New York and sit at the feet of Stephen Merritt, and in order to learn from him, become his slave. After he was thrice rejected, a brutal sea captain, forced by the shortage of help, finally took him on; and though storms and enemies threatened the voyage many times and a number of the ship’s crew were killed in the process, Kaboo at last was put down in New York City. He saw a man passing, and having learned from white friends in Africa of Stephen Merritt, Kaboo asked the man if he knew him. He was one of the roustabouts that hang around missions, and he said, “Yes, I will take you to him,” which he did. Stephen Merritt proved afresh his wonderful Christian profession by taking this black ragged little boy into his home and found out shortly that wherever the boy went men were on their faces in penitence, crying to God for salvation. The colored meetings that he addressed were shaken as was the Jerusalem company on that day of Pentecost, and white people in great numbers repented at his word. The school that Stephen Merritt arranged for him to attend in Indiana, Taylor University, was on the verge of bankruptcy and door closing; but through the influence of this lad, money began to flow in, and upon his later and sudden death the flow continued until the school was recovered. It is the most remarkable story printed in America in a hundred years, and it is the finest illustration of the fact that neither natural ability, nor literary culture, nor university opportunity, compare in imparting power to the preacher as does the enduement of the Holy Ghost. I conclude this lecture, therefore, with the Master’s injunction, “Tarry ye . . . , until ye be endued with power from on high.” BIBLIOGRAPHY Garvie, A. E. The Preachers of the Church (New York: George H. Doran Co., 1926). Patton, C. S. Preparation and Delivery of Sermons (Chicago: Willett, Clark & Co., 1938). ======================================================================== CHAPTER 65: 06.02. CHAPTER 2: THE PROPOSED STANDARDIZATION OF THE MINISTRY ======================================================================== Chapter 2 THE PROPOSED STANDARDIZATION OF THE MINISTRY THE ADVANTAGES that accrue from standardization in many fields are confessedly great and important, and there are men—particularly in our “modern” ministry—who think that standards should be applied to the minister of the gospel. THE MODERNIST DEMAND! It is more than academic! Several of the larger denominations have in connection with their governing bodies—as, for instance, the General Assembly among Northern Presbyterians, and the Annual Conference of the Methodists, and others—legislated upon this subject requiring of the candidates for ordination an A. B. degree from a reputable college and at least two years or more from a seminary approved by the particular body involved. It turns out, however, in practical application that this academic requirement may be fully met (together with those associated virtues of health, morality, Christian experience, and conscious call, commonly expected), and yet ordaining councils hesitate, debate, and in certain instances refuse to proceed with the sacred task of approving for the ministry, only because modernism has not been satisfactorily voiced by the candidate. The modernist demand is a peculiar mold. The candidate should not only bring to the Presbytery an A. B. degree, together with a diploma from a first-class theological seminary, but, if he expect favor, that diploma should come from a college known to be liberal in its teachings, and from a theological seminary whose professors are more famed for the creation of doubts than for the defense of “the faith once delivered.” This demand amounts to regimentation. This word “regimentation” is in very constant, even popular use just now. It is a time of dictators, armies constituted of millions, and the regimentation of those who were formerly free citizens. Regimentation means “formation as into a regiment,” where the superior officer gives command and all the underlings must obey. We grant that such is the tendency of the times. We grant that the drift of the day is in that direction, but we also insist that neither the tendency nor the drift ever had, or ever can receive, divine approval; and since the minister is supposed to be God’s man, God’s mouthpiece, God’s representative, he is the one individual who should forever resent human regimentation. When Peter and John were taken from the prison in which they had been unjustly held, and commanded “not to speak at all nor teach in the name of Jesus,” “But Peter and John answered and said unto them, Whether it be right in the sight of God to hearken unto you more than unto God, judge ye” (Acts 4:18-19). A specious plea for regimentation is that it looks to the improvement of the office. The argument advanced is, “We would improve the profession, put into it stronger and better-equipped men.” But here some hard facts have to be faced, and among those faced is the increasing conviction with laymen that ministers of the first-grade are not as much in evidence today as they were a quarter or a half century ago. The skeptical schools that began some twenty-five to forty years ago to promise the “improved output” have signally failed to make good on their confident predictions; and the result is that when an outstanding pulpit is vacant, the anxious, even the alarming question is, “Where can the church find a man who is sufficient?” The Mark Matthews, the Clarence Dixon, the J. H. Jowett, the T. T. Eaton, the DeWitt Talmage, the L. W. Munhall, the John A. Broadus, the B. H. Carroll, the P. S. Henson, the George Lorimer, the Frank Gunsaulus, the Joseph Cook, the Bishop Brooks, the Dwight L. Moody, the Henry Ward Beecher, the Joseph Parker, the Charles Spurgeon of yesterday and the day before, are not so perfectly out-classed by this liberal school output as its propagandists would have the world believe! We grant you that the full height of a tree is never taken until after it has fallen; but we insist that any intelligent judge of ministerial ability and value would give the honors to these buried ambassadors of Christ almost infinitely above the self-advertised “social gospelers” of the present hour. But I turn from the modernist demand to THE MARKET DEMAND Here I make three statements and have little fear that anyone of them will be successfully disputed. That market demand is still unmet; it involves variety; and it resents the make of the mold. It is still unmet! Only a few years ago there was a great alarm spread across the continent, William R. Harper of the University of Chicago being its chief mouthpiece, over the “scarcity of ministers.” He provided abundant statistics to prove his contention. He culled these from colleges where young men reported and enrolled in the ministerial department, but by graduation time had decided against the divine calling. He never assigned the reasons for this change. He could hardly afford to admit that it was his own German-imported skepticism concerning the inspiration of the Scriptures and the deity of Christ that became a deadening influence and turned scores, yea, many hundreds of young men from ministerial purpose and plan. However, that very cry of shortage, together with the skeptical stamp being put upon the theological output, sufficed to stir believers to action; and the modern Bible training school was the immediate and is now the enormously growing answer. “When the enemy shall come in like a flood, the Spirit of the Lord shall lift up a standard against him” (Isaiah 59:19). The rise, growth, and success of the modern Bible training school is the most marked episode in American Christianity, characterizing the twentieth century. They have not only increased in number, in the accumulation of property, in popularity of student attendance, and the teaching ability of the professors who serve them, but they have also lifted their curriculum of study to the very level of the oldest seminaries themselves from a scholastic standpoint, and have produced a spiritual atmosphere conducive to real minister-making, such as the sociological seminar finds himself denied, and the result is ever increasing calls for their services. Northwestern, the institution over which I preside, in 1941 numbered 1233 students, 596 of whom were attempting full courses in the stiff curriculum of the Bible School, or the still higher one of the Theological Seminary, the others in night classes, and it graduated that year, 1941, 125 young men and women from the several branches. In 1946, it enrolled 729 in full courses and hundreds in night classes. And yet there were more calls for its output than we could provide, daily demands from the churches for Christian service that we could not promptly and adequately meet. The market demand involves variety. The churches are not writing in for men made in a mold. On the contrary, they break the mold by their very demands. For instance, a few days since a pulpit committee wrote to me saying, “Recommend to us a man who has an A. B. degree from a reputable college and who has had a complete theological training. We have two laymen on our committee and they will accept no man who does not bring the pass-key of college degree and seminary diploma.” In the same mail, from another section of the country equally distant (about 2000 miles in each case), came a second call saying, “We want a man who has himself been regenerated, a man who believes God’s Book to be His inspired Word, a man who can teach that Word effectively and whose daily life puts its precepts into practice, a man who preaches in the power of the Spirit; he must be a man who looks for the coming of our great God and Saviour Jesus Christ a second time without sin unto salvation.” Never a word about degrees or diplomas! The first church wanted a scholar; the second church wanted a Christian teacher. Fortunately, we were able to meet both. Churches resent attempted coercion in this matter. Those who propose to standardize the ministry forget that to get their candidates for office accepted, they would have to standardize the thinking of pulpit committees, church officers, and even democratic church bodies. That is a more difficult task, and up to the present, not even General Conferences, Annual Assemblies, or denominational Conventions have been able to accomplish the task. I come now to THE MASTER’S DEMAND I want to make three remarks concerning it. First, it was spiritual rather than cultural. Second, His college presented a cross-section of society. Third, His prescience calls for no twentieth century change. It was spiritual rather than cultural. Believing as I do that Christ was “God . . . manifest in the flesh” I hold that no school known to His time could impart information or new knowledge to Him; consequently, He must have known the essentials to a successful ministry. I take you to His selection: “Peter, and James, and John, and Andrew, Philip, and Thomas, Bartholomew, and Matthew, James the son of Alphaeus, and Simon Zelotes, and Judas the brother of James.” If there were one single man in this company who was an outstanding scholar, who brought a degree from the superior schools of His day (and, mark you, this was at the world’s peak of high education!), we do not know which, of these names represents it. That under His leadership they became students no one can question; and that as a result of His training certain ones of them became peculiarly effective preachers, history abundantly attests. We agree absolutely with Dr. I. E. Gates that “ignorance, whiskers, and a clerical garb” do not constitute ministerial adequacy. But, with the exception of the latter, those traits were possibly prominent in the early experiences of the chosen apostles. At the feet of Jesus the first would increasingly vanish; the second would indicate growing maturity; and as for the third, it never was and is not now an essential. Among liberal authors I have my favorites, just as I have among second-hand cars, and Dr. R. F. Horton of the Old World is one of them. I have quoted from him often and will doubtless have many occasions, in the days to come. He claims that preachers’ sermons are only fragments of men, and that many a man who has apparently failed to present truth so that people comprehend it, retrieves the situation because every one knows that the same man exhibits it. For instance, “He preaches the Atonement, and there is more than one fault of logic in his exposition, but he is so obviously at one with God Himself that the severest critic inclines to follow his way, if not to use his arguments.” In other words, the biggest thing in the ministry is the man; and the Master who “knew what was in man” made no mistake in His selection among men; nor was He shortsighted when He put the spiritual above the cultural. His college presented a scholastic cross-section. These chosen ones were not, as we have seen, among the most highly educated, neither did they belong to the “dummy” class. They reported no diplomas from famed institutions; they carried no earned or honorary degrees; but they proved marvelously effective in their presentation of truth, and some of them developed into authors whose books have lived and will be read by millions long after the most notable graduates of the Universities of Berlin, Glasgow, London, Oxford, Cambridge, New York, Chicago, Harvard and Yale each and every one has been forgotten. Who will criticize the Master’s selection for the ministry? I have said that Christ’s college presented a cultural cross-section. That does not at all indicate that no great scholars characterized the company. Luke, one of His early disciples, was evidently a man of culture, as the volumes emanating from his pen clearly indicate; and Saul of Tarsus, the outstanding scholar of his day, the proudest output from Gamaliel’s school, will forever remain an argument for an educated ministry. Under no circumstances would I refuse ordination to Peter, lest by so doing I should keep the church of God out of a nonschooled Moody, a non-degreed Spurgeon, another Campbell Morgan; but if Peter were in his youth and consulted me on the subject of college training, I would point him to the Apostle Paul and remind him of the fact that by receiving a kindred education to that which Paul enjoyed, he might, for thousands of years, influence readers as profoundly as have the Epistles of the outstanding apostle. In other words, our advice to every young man who sets his face toward the ministry is to get as thorough an education as he can secure. Our further advice would be, take it in a college that believes God and accepts without question the Bible as His inspired Word, and in a theological seminary that is spiritual in tone and supreme in Scripture exposition. But while ardently advocating that procedure, I would count myself nothing short of a bigoted upstart if I attempted to take from the hands of the ascended Lord the right to call into His ministry those of His own selection, or if I refused to lay hands upon one so manifestly chosen, because forsooth he brought not a diploma from an institution that neither worshipped God nor respected His Word. North Carolina is accused of having an unlearned Baptist ministry, yet it leads in baptisms. Now its college is enriched with millions. We wait to see whether the cause of Christ prospers under the new and broader culture. Finally, the prescience of Christ calls for no twentieth century change. Fifty years ago the man most discussed in America by Christian ministers and laymen alike was Dwight L. Moody. He was a product of no university, a graduate from no school! He was educated in the “College of Hard Knocks” and finished up in the theological seminary of a shoe store, and yet when God who ‘looketh not on the outward appearance, but on the heart,’ not for a college diploma but for a Christian experience and a passion for souls, was searching the land for a mouthpiece, his eye fell on Moody, and there He stopped, saying, “This is the man.” A standardized ministry? Yes, we believe in it, but we prefer the standards that are divine! You can find those for weights and measures in the Bureau of Standards at Washington; you will find those for the ministry in the Bible. When this infidel and blatant generation has made its transient mark on the shifting sands of time and has passed into the oblivion which is sometimes called “history, the standards of God will remain unchanged, unshaken and unharmed!” ======================================================================== CHAPTER 66: 06.03. CHAPTER 3: SOME SECRETS OF SUCCESS IN THE MINISTRY ======================================================================== Chapter 3 SOME SECRETS OF SUCCESS IN THE MINISTRY WE PURPOSELY refrain from starting this chapter with a text because we expect to emphasize not one, but three brief passages of Scripture in this discussion. STUDIOUS HABITS Of all the speakers whose personal record we have in New Testament teaching, Paul is easily the most prominent. It will not be a disappointment therefore, nor seem indeed incongruous, that we should quote him on each of these subjects. To Timothy he wrote (2 Timothy 2:15) “Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth” In this passage the Apostle touches upon one of the most prominent factors, if not the one of par excellence, in ministerial success—“study!” Studious habits are essentials in education! The truest education is not the mere compassing of a curriculum, not merely the completion of a prescribed course and the securing of a sheepskin! In fact, diplomas are sometimes egregious deceptions. The man who takes one without having learned how to study and having come to love the employment is, on his Commencement day, a subject of self-deception. We know not a few ministers who have an A. B. back of them, but whose brains are still quite impotent, and whose thinking processes are unoiled and unemployed. Better quit college at the commencement of the sophomore year a diligent student than walk proudly from the Commencement platform, diploma in hand, intellectually indolent and study-indisposed. The great Dr. Arnold is reputed to have been asked by a father why his boy should learn Latin. “When he has finished his education what good will it do him?” To this Dr. Arnold sagely replied, “It is not so much a question of what the lad will do with Latin, as it is what Latin will do with the lad.” Hogarth said, “Genius and labor are synonymous.” And Alexander Hamilton declared, “People give me credit for genius, but all the genius I have lies just in this—when I have a subject in hand I study it day and night. I explore it in all its bearings. My mind-becomes pervaded with it, and the effort which I make, people call genius, but it is only the fruit of labor and thought.” I was at an ordination not so many years ago when two men were set apart to the ministry. One of them had back of him five or six years of attendance upon college and theological seminary; the other had back of him an unfinished high school course. I voted heartily for the ordination of both and prophesied then that the latter youth would go far beyond the former, and history is rapidly demonstrating my expectation. The first had the school diploma; the second had the student habit. Better an industrious man with a pick by which he may dig deep into the side of the mountain holding the precious ore, than the fellow who has already secured a nice little nugget and is content with his acquisition. Student habits result in the accumulation of knowledge. Knowledge is power. Keeping that in mind, we should covet its acquisition. The average minister reads considerably; but while his mind may be a bit refreshed by the literary flow passing through it, he has no method of storing up nor husbanding his intellectual discoveries. At this point I want to pay tribute to Edward Judson of New York. There are few people who pass one in life’s journey and contribute to him such inestimable benefits. That may be done so casually that the giver himself is unconscious of having made a contribution. I am sure Edward Judson never dreamed what he was doing for me when, in his address to the students of the Louisville Theological Seminary in 1887, he gave us his method of acquiring and keeping sermonic material. It took the form of what he called “Todd’s Index Rerum” a plain book which had at the top of each page the letters of the alphabet, followed in their order by the vowels, as for instance, Aa, Ae, Ai, Ao, Au; Ba, Be, Bi, Bo, Bu, and so on to the end, or Za, Ze, etc. Few words can be spelled without a vowel. Under those initial letters can be put down a reference to any and every subject encountered in a life-time, or even conceivable to the human mind, together with the page of the book or magazine scrapbook in which that subject is discussed. That makes, therefore, a ready reference book that will catalogue one’s entire library, and with me, it accomplished another and eminently desirable custom, namely, that of creating scrapbooks. I have in my library above eighty scrapbooks, of one hundred to three hundred pages each, made up of incidents and articles clipped from newspapers and magazines through the last sixty years. John Foster published two large volumes of over twenty thousand illustrations. I could easily duplicate the number from these scrapbooks alone; in fact, I suspect that I could almost double it; and in this long period of years I have never prepared a sermon without the use of the Index Rerum, which as you can readily see, gives me, on short order, definite direction as to where and what my library contains on any subject. The human intellect is a marvelous mechanism in its ability to register and retain great knowledge; but it is far from being all-sufficient. It is necessary, therefore, to have the aid of catalogued thoughts, and it is almost infinitely important to know the content of the intellectual treasure-chest. In a long life-time I have scarcely lost a dollar bill; and in the few instances that I have, I have been able to recover the loss; but I have sustained heavy intellectual losses. When a man comes upon something in a magazine or a book that has real value, but fails to store it up in an intellectual treasure chest to which he carries the key, he is as prodigal with real riches as Bim Gump is with Australian profits. But, alas, nothing short of reading and study will keep that treasure chest so constantly replenished, that, draw upon it as often as you will, like Solomon’s tomb, its treasures are inexhaustible. Still further, study habits eventuate in versatility. I believe with one of the notable preachers of the past century, so far as the fundamentals of the faith are concerned, there is power in “Repeat!” “Repeat!” “Repeat!” To indoctrinate and establish people we have to add line upon line and precept upon precept; but, alas, when one repeats the same line over and over again to the same people, he becomes tiresome. In my boyhood one of the great local preachers in the Kentucky section where I lived was a converted rabbi. The rabbi was a peripatetic, never a pastor. He had a half dozen sermons and they were not so bad, but he repeated them so often that the county boys knew most of them by heart, so when the rabbi was preaching, some mischievous boy in the back seat would be preceding him by two or three lines, telling his neighbor kid what was coming next. In contrast to that conduct, I think of my great friend, the greatest preacher that the Southland has produced in a hundred years—Dr. B. H. Carroll of Texas. Once when we were in the West Texas Bible Conference we were in adjacent rooms, with only a door between, for ten days. For me it was an intellectual treat to have the fellowship and sit at the feet of that prince among preachers. He told me then what I could not have believed had I not had immutable evidence of the fact; namely, that for years he had averaged reading something like five hundred pages a day. He was the most rapid reader I have ever known, and yet was capable of intelligently discussing the entire content of a book that he had finished in less than sixty minutes. I speak from absolute knowledge in the matter, for these discussions involved contents of my own volumes which he had in less than an hour, previously read, and yet which he seemed to have intelligently compassed in that brief time. The result was that his every sermon was filled and garnished with material not before employed. His storehouse of knowledge seemed inexhaustible, and when you add to that fact an eloquent utterance, you produce a preacher of top sort, and such Carroll was. It will be recalled also that while he was pastor of the First Baptist Church of Waco for twenty years, he was always a professor or teacher; and of all college and theological seminary instructors no one known to our denomination was so insistent with his student-body that they give themselves to incessant study as was Carroll. He combined theory and practice and his opinions carried all the more weight with the student body, knowing as they had to know that he daily demonstrated, in his own intellectual life, what he was demanding of them. I come now to our second suggestion: STRONG CONVICTIONS Here again I take my cue from the Apostle Paul. In his first letter to the Corinthians (1 Corinthians 16:13) Paul, speaking of and to Timothy and Apollos, his juniors, as also to other Corinthian believers, said, “Watch ye, stand fast in the faith, quit you like men, be strong” If I were asked what is the ground of the average preacher’s weakness, I should answer in the words, “Lack of strength, particularly at the point of conviction, used as a synonym for courage.” Convictions determine the course of life itself. The smaller forms of life live by the law of least resistance. The insects that crawl the earth flee at the face of danger or make a circuit above or about any obstacle. The lower forms of human life follow a kindred custom. That is why the jungle paths of Africa were, when white men first went there, extremely narrow and crooked. It hadn’t occurred to them to cut a straight swath through the forest that confronted them, or even to remove a fallen tree or stone that impeded their course; they just passed around both, and by the loss, in distance, compelled themselves to waste far more time and energy by circumlocution than would have been required for conquest. I know preachers who adopt the insect and savage custom. The old Scotsman was their representative and voiced their philosophy when he said, “When you meet a difficulty, face it; and then pass around.” They tell me that the Germans some years ago invented a dam which would hold back a certain amount of water, but whenever the depth became so great and the current so strong as to endanger it, it would conveniently lift and let out enough so as to save itself. But bright as the Germans are, preachers long since beat them to it! I have known lots of them who have ways of their own of easing the pressure by compromise. It is our candid conviction, however, that such ministers, like the German dam, will never produce adequate reservoirs of power; and it is my further conviction that by the compromises made to ease pressure they degrade themselves in the opinions of both friends and foes. Better keep fellowship with your own convictions and conscience than with all professed friends, especially if the time comes when one must sacrifice the former in order to retain the latter. Strong convictions account for major undertakings. William Carey, our great prince of missionaries said, “Expect great things from God; attempt great things for God.” Mirabeau said, “ ‘Impossible’ is a blockhead of a word.” Lord Chatham, when told by a colleague that a certain thing was impossible, calmly replied, “Then I’ll trample upon impossibilities.” The thing the preacher should remember is the statement, “With God all things are possible” (Matthew 19:26), and its correlated concept, “All things are possible to him that believeth” (Mark 9:23). Strong convictions sustain tenacious purposes. The difficulty with most of us in the ministry is that when we think something good and propose it, to find we have an opponent in the form of a trustee or a deacon, we straightway desist and cover up our cowardice by announcing ourselves as “discreet” servants of the Lord. Fixity of purpose is a fine quality if it is controlled by sane judgment. An individual will naturally entertain an opinion upon practically every subject that comes up in church administration; but when it involves minor matters, why make a rupture issue? If major, why back down because there are opponents? It takes a long time and a tenacious purpose to put over big enterprises and may require officer-removals! There comes a time when, if a fellow won’t fish or cut bait, he should be put ashore. Tenacity alone will witness the end of great undertakings and will often bring victory after having endured many defeats. My moral is, if a thing is right and ought to be done, try to be fair to your opponents, and in controversy, even kind; but don’t capitulate, don’t back down; do it! COMPLETE SURRENDER Here again I appeal to Paul. Writing to the Romans, he said, “Yield yourselves unto God” (Romans 6:13). While this was written to the members of the church at Rome, certainly the first fellow in such a fellowship who should adopt it as a practice is the preacher, and especially the pastor who is supposed to be ‘an example to the flock in all things.’ Self-surrender is essential to victory over sin. The special temptations to which a preacher is subject are not a whit different from those that are common to human flesh. It seems to me that when the Apostle John wanted to sum up sin’s possibilities he was inspired to express them under the phrase, “The lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life” (1 John 2:16). Unquestionably, these are the vulnerable points of all flesh, but they are more than vulnerable points with the preacher—they are danger points, and the danger is so grave that nothing but a surrender to God’s will provides sufficient strength for resistance. “The lust of the flesh” is undoubtedly a clear reference to sexual passion. “The lust of the eyes” is probably God’s prescription against both lust and covetousness. “The pride of life” warns against egotism. And what three perils so beset preachers as do these? Take the first of them. How many fellow laborers of the years have fallen before it, have gone down not only with a crash; but like the great tree of the forest, uprooted by the storm, they have carried others with them, and even crushed some. “The lust of the eyes” has even wider reach! Covetousness is the word that properly expresses it; and that covetousness may take any one of a hundred forms for one to covet many things. However, men have come to think of the word in connection with cash returns, and apply it to the passion for silver and gold. Here also is the preacher in peril, not because of his greed oftentimes, but rather because of his disposition to run the race of life with the multitude. Other people about him have good houses, fine clothes, expensive cars, and so on; and ofttimes even the young minister, who ought like young lawyers and young doctors to take it hard for the first few years, will refuse, or at least fail, to endure as a good soldier. Many times there has come disgrace to the cause because some young preacher has, by borrowing from trusted friends, or leaving unpaid bills where credit had been accorded, finally found it necessary to flee the vicinity in order to escape legal procedure. Success, then, in the ministry demands such a surrender of the life to God that loyalty to His sacred precepts will become a daily and dependable practice; and that is perhaps the one and only adequate secret of victory over sin. Still further, the complete surrender of life assures spiritual complacency. It is too bad for a man not to be at peace with himself; and at the same time at peace with God. That can only come about when he has reached the point where he can say, as our blessed Saviour himself did say, “Father . . . , not my will but thine be done.” That can only come about when of the daily duties he can quote His Master still further, ‘Father, I come to do Thy will.’ To be consciously in the center of the divine will is the place of complacency, no matter what comes or goes, whether the day is stormy or filled with balmy sunshine. Some years ago a certain art institution is said to have offered a great prize for the best picture on the subject of peace. One artist painted a battlefield. The battle was over, the guns had ceased their firing, the dead were quiet, the wounded had been carried away, and the healthy, discharged soldiers were happily on their way home. But that picture was not judged worthy of the prize. Many more were studied and set aside, and finally the judges united upon the presentation of a robin that had built her nest among the boughs overhanging Niagara Falls; there, calmly brooding against the day when her young should come, she had no fears of the mighty cataract, nor was alarmed at the thundering noise. She sat there in complete content and perfect peace. Thus the soul of the man who is consciously at the center of God’s will; let the cataract roar, let the avalanche pour, let the dangers be ever so eminent—he can keep forever calm, and his spirit will be at peace. Dr. Henry Varley is reported to have said one day in Moody’s presence, “It remains to see what God could do with a perfectly surrendered life I” In reflecting upon the remark, Moody said, “If so, that life shall be mine.” The world knows the result! BIBLIOGRAPHY Watson, John (Ian Maclaren, pseud.) The Cure of Souls (New York: Dodd, Mead & Co., no date). Scarborough, Lee. With Christ After the Lost (Nashville, Tenn.: Sunday School Board of the Southern Baptist Convention, 1919). ======================================================================== CHAPTER 67: 06.04. CHAPTER 4: THE MINISTRY FOR OUR DAY ======================================================================== Chapter 4 THE MINISTRY FOR OUR DAY Scripture Reading—Titus 2:1-15 YOUNG MEN, consciously called to the ministry, are favored indeed if privileged years of preparation at the feet of a great teacher. Doubtless one reason why the twelve apostles became immortal was the circumstance that eleven of them were trained at the feet of the MASTER Himself; and Paul, though converted by a vision of the Risen One, became also His disciple, and, having felt the posthumous power of His personality, was made an apostle. Timothy and Titus were trained at Paul’s feet. Their teacher combined in himself many of the greater essentials to high instruction. He was, by nature, brilliant; by opportunity, cultured; by experience, Christian; by legal practice, an orator; and it was a superb privilege that Timothy and Titus enjoyed as favorite pupils of the famed Paul. His letters to these ardent students have been, to the ministry of twenty centuries, maps marking the way to success, and books of instruction on both professional behavior and possible attainment. Our theme is stated as “The Ministry For Our Day”; but it is my deliberate intention to make evident that the ministry for our day is the ministry for every century and every country ‘til He shall come! These high points I propose to phrase in three suggestions: Sound in Belief, Saintly in Behavior, and Seeing That Blessed Hope. SOUND IN BELIEF To Titus, Paul wrote, “Speak thou the things which become sound doctrine” (Titus 2:1). A Biblical belief is basal to the gospel ministry. That is why it seems inconceivable that any theological modernist should ever be spoken of as “a gospel minister.” Some years ago The Christian Century of Chicago (a confessedly modernist magazine, perhaps its perfect mouthpiece) said, “The God of the Fundamentalists is one God; the God of the Modernists is another. The Christ of the Fundamentalist is one Christ; the Christ of the Modernists, another. The Bible of the Fundamentalists is one Bible; the Bible of the Modernists is another.” Thereupon the Christian cartoonist, Pace, immediately drew a picture revealing this division, in the form of a cleft in the mountain, on one side of which unbridgeable chasm was written. “The faith once delivered to the saints; namely, the Bible as the Word of God; Christ as the Son of God,” and so on through the essential teachings of Scripture. On the other side of the chasm, “The Bible, containing something of the Word of God; Christ, the son of a carpenter; Evolution, the explanation of all nature, et cetera.” The man who adopts the former for himself and who teaches the same to his fellows is in line with Paul’s injunction to Titus, ‘Believing and speaking sound doctrine whereas the cleric who proclaims the second, is a renegade from the ‘faith once delivered,’ and he faces the public with a message which may rightly name itself Modernism, but which can lay no claim to either a divine origin, or, for its proclamation, to a divine commission. The Baptist magazine, The Watchman-Examiner, in its “Forum Department” carried in the issue of May 14, 1942, an article on ORDINATION from the pen of W. Everett Henry. When we commenced reading it, we supposed it would be the usual plea for an A. B., possibly an A.M., college degree, together with a diploma from a theological seminary that had celebrated its centennial, as essentials to “the laying on of the hands”! But, instead, we were treated to a pleasant surprise. It called for “an accurate knowledge of the contents of the Bible as a condition of ordination.” Certainly! Young men going forth to practice medicine are supposed to be made familiar with the science of materia medica. Young men entering the profession of the law are supposed to have studied jurisprudence for some years; and young men entering the ministry, whatever else they do not know, should be familiar with SCRIPTURE. That is why the Bible training schools of the country are rapidly outgrowing the theological seminaries; and that is why the churches of the country are accepting their output is such a large measure as to greatly disturb seminary centers. In my own case, though having my college degrees of A. B. and A.M. and a full course diploma from a noted seminary, I left both institutions with a better knowledge of geology than I had of Genesis, having given far more time to the dead languages than to “the living Word.” That experience accounts for the fact that for those who are graduating from Northwestern, my school, BIBLE study has been their major; and, while not neglecting cognate requirements, the emphasis for the daily task has been put at this pivotal point—Bible study! This age needs a knowledge of Scripture as badly as any previous century ever needed it; and its material, social, and spiritual salvation can look for help to no other source. If the principles enunciated and practices commended by sacred Scripture cannot cure society of its ills, in vain will be the preaching of all nostrum-substitutes. Christ said, “Ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free” And to all those who ask, “What is truth?” we answer, “Thy word is truth!” Little wonder, then, that Paul, writing to Timothy, placed his emphasis where he did: “Preach the word.” In sending forth each class of graduates, we bring no new advice; but for the sake of emphasis repeat the apostolic advice—“Preach the word.” It is a custom these days for school youngsters, in particular, to approach the last visitor who has been asked to address them in chapel, or on state occasion, and ask for his autograph and favorite text. Following my name I commonly put Romans 1:16, “I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ, for it is the power of God unto salvation to everyone that believeth” And as you go forth to proclaim this Word, let me remind you that you have God’s eternal promise: “As the rain cometh down, and the snow from heaven, and returneth not thither, but watereth the earth, and maketh it bring forth and bud, that it may give seed to the sower, and bread to the eater; So shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it” (Isaiah 55:10-11). But it is hardly sufficient for one to be sound in belief. The head may be well stocked with Scripture; and yet unless the heart, the seat of emotions and the director of wills, be also the habitation of God, the feet may stray. Consequently, Paul takes the second step and expects of the preacher SAINTHOOD IN BEHAVIOR The preacher by profession and position becomes a pattern. “In all things shewing thyself a pattern of good works” (Titus 2:7). The man who fails to be an example to his flock is, by just so much, unfitted for the gospel ministry. Possibly my personal reputation in America, as far as it has reached, rests largely on my long-continued defense of “Inspiration” and my well-known antipathy to “Skepticism”; and yet I must admit that false doctrines are not the sole cause of Christian deflection or church defeat. There is a heresy of conduct that is as deadly to the Christian profession as was ever departure from the truth. Fundamentalism has suffered much from some such! A preacher may proclaim always and eloquently the fundamentals; and yet if he live the life of the racketeer, if he be constantly guilty of falsehood in statement, if he is known to reek with lust, and by heart-anger, or smoking revolver, to have become a murderer, his proclamation of the truth will never atone for his iniquitous practices. Irrespective of any audiences gathered or honors bestowed, his ministry, instead of advancing the cause of Christ and influencing men God-ward, will detract from that course and widen the path to the pit; for when the heartblind lead the blind, both go into the ditch together. Horatius Bonar was one of those white souls whose professional precepts and saintly practices rendered him an ideal exponent of the gospel preached, and well did he write in verse these words: Thou must be true thyself, If thou the truth wouldst teach; Thy soul must overflow, if thou Another’s soul wouldst reach; It needs the overflow of heart To give the lips full speech. Think truly, and thy thoughts Shall the world’s famine feed; Speak truly, and each word of thine Shall be a fruitful seed; Live truly, and thy life shall be A great and noble creed. R. F. Horton, in his Yale lectures, truthfully said, “What the preacher is determines, in the end, the effect of what he preaches.” And again, “The preacher’s sermons are but fragments of himself.” One time, two friends of mine had an unusual experience in the close proximity of a few hours. To one, the first baby was born. Naturally, he was pleased and proud. Strangely (?) he confessed to me the very next day that the child was beautiful. The other brought his first book from the press. His face indicated a kindred pleasure; his exuberance, a cognate pride. The reason for this exhilaration, on the part of both, was not far to seek. The one had found, in flesh, a veritable part of himself; the other had beheld in a book his mental image as clearly as a mirror had ever reflected his face. That is exactly what Horton meant when he said, “The preacher’s sermons are only fragments of himself.” It is when his life is a pattern that his preaching is with power. The weight of one’s ministry is reflected in membership morals. Paul told Timothy that “sound doctrine” would result in “sober” old men, beautiful “old women,” “affectionate wives” and “successful mothers.” Yea, also, that even youth would be persuaded to sobriety, the gainsaying mantled with shame, and even hired servants would become conscientious and competent. Few men ever lived in a period or place more utterly obnoxious than did Savonarola. He himself spoke of “the whole world” as “in confusion”; he deplored the fact that “every virtue had gone; vice had ceased to blush; rapine and murder were practiced without protest.” The Medici were the undisputed dictators of the day. Lorenzo had established his despotism by the murder of his brother, and had satisfied the lower classes by his munificence and public works. Herrick says he was “cultured but corrupt; of exquisite tastes but profligate habits—writing a sonnet of praise to virtue in the morning and devoting his nights to debaucheries.” Into such an hour Savonarola found himself projected, and his very soul was overwhelmed by what he knew and saw. In anguish he began to speak, and the people found he had something to say. The throne of Lorenzo the despot shook as he said it; and Lorenzo himself, smitten by approaching death and fearing the eternal future, would have no other to counsel him on what to do. Although his son, Piero, equally vicious and less politic than his father, succeeded him in office, his station was unstable. The revolution was rising. Florentine blood boiled with indignation, and the only man who was equal to that hour was the calm monk who had dwelt “in the secret place of the most High” and “under the shadow of the Almighty .” So he was taken by the populace and pushed into the place of power, as the throng in Christ’s day sought to make Him king; and at once the righteous revolution was on. Ungodly gains ceased; deadly enemies embraced in love; sinful sports came to a sudden end; chastity took the place of incontinence; bonfires consumed obscene books; and, for a time, a hopeful people actually entertained the expectation that the millennium of righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Ghost was at hand. Who will say that the weight of a minister is not measured in the morals of the people who hear and follow him? But Paul is equally solicitous on another subject; namely, the unfailing fountain. We might sum up that idea in this sentence: The ground of all hope is in the grace of God. Titus 2:11 reads, “For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men.” For your own salvation trust nothing else! “By grace are ye saved.” For the good of society look to no other source! “For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men, Teaching us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly, in this present world” (Titus 2:11-12). For the salvation of cities and nations, be assured there is no other hope! The recent World War, with all its infamy and wickedness, is but the fiery reflection of man’s wisdom. And those ministers who have imagined it is college courses that would not only render them accomplished leaders, but also lift the world from the mire of sin to the mountain of holiness, would today be suffering from nerve shock, but for the stupidity that ever led to such expectation. The world’s one and only hope is GRACE, and the only preacher that can ever prescribe for its ills an effective panacea is that one who proclaims “the grace of God.” It was a wise preacher who said, “Though I have a scientific mind and a university degree in sociology and philosophy, and although I am an expert in social service and an authority on Browning, and though I use the language of the scientific laboratory so as to deceive the very elect into thinking I am a scholar, and have not a message of salvation and the love of Christ, I am a misfit in the pulpit and no preacher of the gospel.” But turning back to the text, we find another point of emphasis with the apostle— SEEING THAT BLESSED HOPE “Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ; Who gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity, and purify unto himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works. These things speak, and exhort, and rebuke with all authority. Let no man despise thee” (Titus 2:13-15). Here we have Paul’s profound conviction on the subject of pre-millennialism. To him, a man who is to be a good minister of the gospel must proclaim this truth. He should entertain it as his personal faith. “Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ.” How strange that few theological seminaries recognize this most central and cohesive of all Biblical doctrines! As the late and famous I. M. Haldeman of New York said, It is bound up with every fundamental doctrine: the resurrection from the dead, the transfiguration of the living, the judgment seat of Christ, the judgment of the living nations, the consequent judgment of the White Throne, the rewards of the righteous, and the punishment of the wicked. It is bound up with every sublime promise: the recognition of the dead, the overthrow of Satan, the deliverance of creation, the triumph of God and Christ, and the eternal felicity of the saints. In other words, it is a key—the loss of which leaves God’s treasure chest of truth locked. Let me congratulate you, young men and women, that your theological training has not done for you what mine did for me—deny you a knowledge of this great truth. Let me plead with you not only to retain what you have been taught these years by members of this faculty on this subject, but to add to that information by a personal study of the Scriptures upon this central subject. Quite often we come upon magazine articles in which the question is seriously discussed, “Are the ministers of today fit successors of those of yesterday?” and it is much mooted. Modernists in their egotism will answer, “YES! They are an improvement upon their predecessors”; but neither the response of the public nor the progress of our churches provide confirmation to the claim. England has no Spurgeon today; Joseph Parker’s pulpit never found a fit successor. The death of Dinsdale Young has left a vacancy that seems to wait in vain for an adequate occupant, so the pulpits of Henson, Lorimer, Truett, Matthews and Haldeman of America. The ardent advocates of a standardized ministry still insist that a candidate must bring at least an A. B. from the college, and a Th. B. from the Seminary, in order to receive the approval for ordination at the lips of sectional committeemen. William Law, in a striking address to the clergy, said, “How much then it is to be lamented that though all Scriptures assure us that the things of the Spirit are foolishness to the natural man, yet from one end of learned Christendom to the other nothing is thought of as true but that which every natural, selfish, proud, envious, false, vain-glorious worldly man can do.” A while ago one of our most notable editors, pleading for the university brand of a minister, reminded us that we “are living in an age of education and culture” and then said, “Yes, we know that God can use such men as Moody; but God makes only one such a man in a generation.” Curious, isn’t it, that God for a full century, with a veritable multitude of university products from whom to choose and upon whom to put the spirit of power, passed them all up in favor of an uneducated, fat, and awkward shoe clerk; and that in England, with its Cambridge and its Oxford and a thousand other centers of culture, He could not find among them the hand-tooled material that He could take to stir London and pack the metropolitan Tabernacle, but He must accept the high-school boy Spurgeon! Strange, isn’t it, that the outstanding Bible teacher of all England—Campbell Morgan—should also have come from the non-colleged classes, and, after being refused ordination by his Methodist inferiors, become the pride of cultured Congregationalism? Passing strange it is that when you turn your eyes to the continent of America, the standards of present-day ordination seem almost to be held in contempt by the ordination divine. Texas is the greatest state in the Union; the First Baptist Church of Dallas, the greatest church in the state; and the late Truett, a non-seminary product, was its greatest preacher. Broughton held the spotlight in Georgia, but ordination now would be declined him by those denominations that have a college and seminary mold from which the minister must come. In New York, in the Calvary Church, a high school and Bible school graduate—W. W. Ayer—calls the best and most constant crowd. In Chicago, the thousands throng to hear Ironside, who never brought a diploma from any school. In Fort Wayne, Indiana, by far the largest assemblies used to sit at the feet of a man who never enjoyed even the advantages of the grades, but who came out of a mountain shack to the sidewalks of Atlanta to hawk newspapers on the street and so keep his body and soul together—Hollifield. In the Ozarks, the Salvation Army convert, John Brown, looms as an outstanding preacher and educator of the age! Is this to inveigh against education? No! But it is to remind the opinionated among scholars and the advocates of fixed standards, that “God is still in His heavens” and His Son still holds the right of appointment to the office of ‘prophet, apostle, evangelist, pastor, and teacher’; and e’en though one be a product of the schools, as was Paul, he will never know the highest success in a pulpit except he see that blessed hope so fully and faithfully set forth in the Word of God, and appreciate it as the kingbolt in the bridge of truth. To preach this hope is to present a great purifying prophecy. It was the same Haldeman who sanely said, “It is bound up with every exhortation to high, to holy, and to practical Christian living. We are not to forsake the assembling of ourselves together as the manner of some is. On the Lord’s Day we are to break bread and drink the fruit of the vine, to show forth the Lord’s death till He come.” It is in view of this doctrine that we are to “love God” and to “love one another”; that we are to ‘walk worthy of our vocation’; and ‘Let our moderation be known to all men’; that we are to be “patient” and “longsuffering”; that we are to engage continually in “prayer and supplication”; that we are to live blamelessly before men and God. “In all the universe of God, there is nothing so impressive as the thought that you and I must give a personal account to Him ‘at His coming!’ Our conduct is to be correct and our lives are to be improved in view of this truth.” John in his great epistle tells us our final and full redemption in body, soul, and spirit awaits that hour “when he shall appear” for only then shall we be “like him” I read some time ago from the pen of one Dr. Miller of how a friend had taken a common earthen jar and filled it with attar of roses. It was not long until every particle of the substance of the jar seemed to be penetrated with rich perfume; and long afterwards, even when it was broken to bits, the fragments retained this fragrance. So it is that the blessed doctrine of the Lord’s Second Coming perfumes a life and gives to it purity, for He that “hath this hope in him purifieth himself, even as he is pure.” But, in order to meet the objection of some that this doctrine debilitates the Christian and tempts him to fold his arms and wait the blessed day when the return of the Lord shall right all wrongs, let us continue with the apostle and learn from this chapter that its last needful lesson—namely, that “looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ” is not only the promise of redemption from all iniquity and the purification of life, but also it pertains to “a peculiar people, zealous of good works” Young men and women going forth to witness, Proclaim this doctrine, then, as a stimulant to God’s service! It will be such. The greatest ministers that India, China, Africa, or the Isles have ever known have rendered their sacrificial service motivated by this “blessed hope”; and no man who is observing can doubt that, among other reasons, why Spurgeon and Dinsdale Young and Campbell Morgan of England; Scofield, Moody, Torrey, Pierson, Gordon, Dixon, Mark Matthews, Griffith-Thomas, James Gray, George Guille, L. W. Munhall, I. M. Haldeman, and others among the sainted Americans and a hundred living ones, are among the outstanding ministers of God, is due to the circumstance that all believed and proclaimed this blessed hope and saw the stimulating effect upon the services of men and women who were inspired by it. The young people should know a confession that Dr. Rainsford the radical, of New York City, made some year since. He spoke of his early ministry when he proclaimed with energy the doctrines of orthodoxy, and he said, “At that time, the incongruity of it all had not struck me.” Then he added, “Yet, so far as I know, I never influenced more people for good than in those green, unripe days when I was simply preaching the best I knew.” What a pity that he ever became sophisticated! I often say to young people in Northwestern schools, “Young people, I have sought, by my relation to you as president of your school, and through my associates—your professors—to give you the best intellectual training we could accomplish in the time you have elected to devote to study with us. When you have consulted me concerning further studies at college, I have uniformly favored it; but I solemnly declare to you that I would a thousand-fold rather send you forth knowing the contents of this sacred Book, the BIBLE, and proclaiming them in their simplicity of truth and expression, than to see you become Oxford University graduates every one, provided that in the process you went from your ‘green, unripe days’ of faith to sophisticated skepticism!” My city, my state, my country, my age need the ministry of sacred Scriptures. They are being destroyed today by the ministry of a godless science. It is a godless science that takes the third-grade child and teaches him that travesty of truth called “the early history of man”! It is a godless science that takes the university senior and steeps him in the geology of Evolution, rather than in a knowledge of the genesis of revelation. It is a godless science that invents the instruments of destruction and sets the homo sapiens (supposedly monkeys, in the finished form of cultured men), to war one with another, wrecking the world. Better, even, the unscholarly, proclaiming the great gospel of God, than the scientifically trained, preaching ‘another, which is no gospel’! The world is dying today and the world is dying in want of the WORD!! My counsel, then, to you, the children of my affection, the individuals through whom I hope to minister long after my physical tongue is stilled, is this—“Preach the WORD!” Live the Word! Carry the Word around the world! THE WORD is the world’s only hope! BIBLIOGRAPHY Miller, H. C. The New Psychology and the Preacher (New York: Boni & Liveright, 1924). Hutton, J. A. That the Ministry Be Not Blamed. 2nd ed. (New York: George H. Doran Co., 1921). ======================================================================== CHAPTER 68: 06.05. CHAPTER 5: THE PREACHER AND HIS PROFESSIONAL ETHICS ======================================================================== Chapter 5 THE PREACHER AND HIS PROFESSIONAL ETHICS WITH THIS lecture we conclude our planned discussion of the preacher. The chapters that shall follow will be devoted entirely to his preaching. In connection with this subject we are sure to touch again certain phases of the minister’s life presented in the preceding lectures, but only so far as those phases affect his professional ethics. There are certain features of this theme that might have been just as properly, if not with even better taste, presented in the companion volume, Pastoral Problems, but inasmuch as they are not adequately found there, we feel justified in presenting them here. Upon careful reflection we have decided to associate what we shall here say to the three phases of ministerial ethics: Personal Habits, Professional Conduct and Fraternal Relations. HIS PERSONAL HABITS The minister should respect his body as the temple of the Holy Ghost. Paul contended that this was true of every believer. Writing to the Corinthians (1 Corinthians 3:16-17) he said, “Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you? If any man defile the temple of God, him shall God destroy; for the temple of God is holy, which temple ye are.” It is commonly admitted that the minister should be clean in body, careful not to defile it; and that such cleanliness should compass both the physical and the spiritual, and should be found true in the lesser habits of life as well as the greater. We grew up in the South where, in our childhood days, it was not uncommon for the dominie to keep his demijohn, and the pastor to patronize his pipe. These questionable customs came about in consequence of certain local conditions. In the mountain regions, especially where an acre or two of com was often the major part of the year’s crop, that corn, converted into liquor, provided almost a year’s expense for a fair-sized family; and, in the wider clearings, tobacco raising was so much more profitable than any other employment of a few acres that the people who handled both continuously naturally patronized their own agricultural output. But the fact remained that the demijohn distempered ‘the soul and the spirit’ of the man who patronized it, and the pipe defiled his body. These were such evident results that when we entered the ministry we deliberately decided against both. We present not this argument as the sine qua non of any ministerial success, but as an illustration of our contention that the minister of all men should keep the temple of the Holy Ghost clean. If that is accepted as a fact concerning the physical temple, surely sexual immorality, in its grosser form, is still more to be eschewed by the man who would be a chosen vessel unto the Lord. The minister’s dress, also, is a matter of some importance. We do not contend that as an example to the flock he should become a fashion plate; but we do insist that slouchiness is non-spiritual, that neatness is next to godliness, and that to be so well clothed as neither to attract by gaudiness on the one side nor distract by untidiness on the other becomes the man who is a courier of the King. “In civilized society,” says Johnson, “external advantages make us more respected. A man with a good coat upon his back meets with a better reception than he who has a bad one.” When we look about us in nature and see what robes of beauty and glory God has put upon the grass of the field, the flowers and forest, and how every bird is clothed with the habiliments of the most exquisite taste, we know, at least, both His interest and pleasure in outward appearance. Remember the word of the Lord Jesus: “Consider the lilies of the field, how they grow; they toil not, neither do they spin: And yet I say unto you, That even Solomon in all his glory was not arrayed like one of these. Wherefore, if God so clothe the grass of the field, which to day is, and to morrow is cast into the oven, shall he not much more clothe you, O ye of little faith?” (Matthew 6:28-30). It is significant that following this speech, Christ said: “Seek ye first the kingdom of God and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you” (Matthew 6:33). We believe there is commonly some psychological connection between clothing and character. The minister’s deportment as a citizen should be exemplary! Matthew Arnold said, “Conduct is three fourths of life.” Chesterfield, who was a perfect example of his philosophy, said, “By manner only can you please, and consequently rise.” Understand me, I am not pleading for the preacher who fits perfectly into pink teas, or becomes a mere ornament for parlor occasions; but I am purposely advocating such deportment as makes the minister an acceptable member at social gatherings, a man whose opinions are respected by his fellow citizens, and a character whose physical, mental and moral customs wise parents will advise their children to copy. HIS PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT First in the pulpit ministration! We hold with other instructors upon this subject that promptness in pulpit arrival is a virtue. Only unexpected and uncontrollable circumstances should ever be offered as an excuse for starting a service fifteen minutes, yes, two minutes after the time appointed for its beginning. But the approach to the pulpit is almost as important as promptness in appearing. A man who saunters to the pulpit or enters it as if it were a matter of no moment as to when or how he came, does distinct discourtesy to the occasion. It is as John Watson in The Cure of Souls contends, a sacred obligation “to spare no pains that divine service be beautiful and reverent,” but it is equally obligatory to create the impression of importance. Arrival, at his desk, of the head of the mightiest corporation should not be even so much the signal for every subordinate clerk and secretary to be in his place and attentive for the day’s tasks as should the arrival of the preacher in the pulpit be the signal that sets every temple attendant at spiritual attention. John Watson reminded us that “the prophet is the man who rouses from ignoble sleep, fires imagination with lofty ideals and nerves the soul for costly sacrifices,” all with a view to victory. Such a task can only be undertaken by one who is alert, resolute and whose very approach to his task impresses the people with readiness for action. Every part of the sacred service demands one’s best. The announcement of the hymn, the reading of the morning lesson, the character of the prayer, what the English call “the intimations” (or announcements) for the day or week, the presentation of the offering—all these lead up to the matter of greatest moment: the message to come, and should be made in such manner as to quicken the interests of the most indifferent and satisfy the expectations of the most spiritual and intelligent. The preacher who thinks that only the sermon itself requires careful preparation is liable to doom what should have been the intended climax of the hour by erecting a rickety approach. The beauties of the best sermon may be obscured if the path leading to it is crooked and cluttered. Important, also, is pastoral visitation. Unquestionably, the time has come when there is much less made of this ministerial obligation than formerly, but that it can be neglected, without heavy losses, is not approved by either public opinion or pastoral experience. Among the many volumes perused in this preparation we have found no description of the true pastor which seemed more true and desirable than Ian Maclaren’s presentation of the pastor’s heart. We quote it verbatim to applaud its completeness. He says: His people are ever in the pastor’s heart. He claims identity with them in their joy and sorrow and endless vicissitudes of life. No friend is blessed with any good gift of God but he is also richer. No household suffers loss but he is poorer. If one stands amid great temptation, he is stronger; if one fails, he is weaker. When any one shows conspicuous grace, the pastor thanks God as for himself; when any one refuses His call, he is dismayed, counting himself less faithful. He waits eagerly to see whether one who groped in darkness has been visited by the light from on high, whether another, who seemed to have gone into a far country, has set his face towards the Father’s house. One family he watches with anxiety, because he does not know how they will bear a heavy stroke of adversity, and another with fear lest rapid success in this world may wean their hearts from God. He trembles for this merchant lest he fall below the rule of Christ and do things which are against conscience; he rejoices over another who has stood fast and refuses to soil his hands. He inquires on every hand about some young man of whom he expects great things; he plans how another may be kept from temptation. One thing he cannot do: criticize his people or make distinctions among them. Others, with no shepherd heart, may miss the hidden goodness; he searches for it as for fine gold. Others may judge people for faults and sins; he takes them for his own. Others may make people’s foibles the subject of their raillery; the pastor cannot, because he loves. Furthermore, in his service to society. On a previous page we have paid our respects to the pink tea preachers, but there are other than parlor ethics that enter into citizenship service, some of which prove a temptation and a snare. The lust for popularity is not confined to the laity, and the spiritual compromises that are often made in order to increase one’s social prestige are sometimes more than questionable. For instance, in Minneapolis, my beloved city, we are more than proud of our dozen to fifteen lakes within the city limits, as we are of our ten thousand bodies of limpid waters claimed for the state as a medium of publicity and a special feature of tourist vacation advertising. Minneapolis, therefore, decided years since to cash in on this commodity by what is called the annual “Aquatennial.” It is a celebration, the chief features of which are beautiful business floats, multiplied musical bands, semi-nude women, and many water sports. As a purely secular and city advertisement program, it is natural to an unregenerate world and not open to more criticism than commonly attends such mediums. But that the minister, whose sacred office should be exercised always in behalf of mental, moral, and spiritual uplift, should count himself happy in public approval, and gladly accept an invitation to sanctify the purely secular by being present at the point of largest gathering to recite a prayer for God’s blessing upon what he must know has multiplied features of divine offense, it becomes a serious question whether he is rendering a spiritual service to the public or employing his dulcet voice to induce contented sleep in sin! These are the same men who join the big secret orders and are elected to membership in the famed commercial organizations, and who are praised by the unconverted citizenry as “good fellows—men among men,” etc. However, when you visit their churches, you will find them non-spiritual; and when you take an inquiring soul to their “divine service,” you need hardly expect that the way of salvation will be presented or any opportunity of surrender to the Lordship of Christ will be offered. To them ecclesiasticism is only another phase of social opportunity, and John Watson’s book title, The Cure of Souls, is a meaningless selection. HIS FRATERNAL RELATIONS First, with his fellow citizens. It goes without saying that the preacher is to have friends. In fact, no profession should surpass, if it equals, that of the ministry in making a multitude of them. Intelligent observations convince those who make them that the ministry is an appreciated profession. Lawyers, doctors, scientists, men of business affairs—these all give the preacher special temptations. Popularity is not, in itself, a protection. It may, however, prove a temptation instead. In comparatively recent years we have known two somewhat widely-famed ministers, pastors of large flocks, who discovered in the circle of their friends a man of whom each made a chum. Social companions are essential to the success of the sacred office. Intimate chums often become a peril instead. In one of these instances the chum led the minister into secret drinking, lust indulgences, and final disgrace. He died suddenly, a sadly discredited representative of the most sacred of offices. In the other instance, people who were best informed on the intimate affairs of the pastor’s life believed that the preacher killed his chum in order to seal forever his lips against report of the preacher’s past conduct. Second, with his church members. Even when the fellowship is wholesome and confined to brother Christians, the preacher’s friendships should be rather extensive than too intensive. The sacred calling creates friends. It does not call for an over-ardent intimacy. In fact, while every pastor will at least discover in his official board certain sane counsellors with whom he will have real occasion for repeated conferences, it is not, however, best, in these instances, to have the public suspect his prejudiced preferences. This applies to his church members. Almost without exception the church roster holds the names of certain people, and even small social circles, which will have a sort of affinity for the preacher, and for whose companionship he finds in himself a ready response. But to yield to it and be repeatedly found in a certain companionship is to create the feeling of neglect on the part of the greater company. As the father of a family should strive to make his children feel that each is equally dear to the paternal heart, so the pastor of a church should practice a kindly fellowship for all. This is not to say that he can escape such special and preferred companions, but it is to plead that he shall not parade them. We cannot agree with Kagawa that “Love knows no creeds,” but we do advise that pastoral affection shall not over-estimate preferred companionships. Finally, with his fellow-ministers. Here we touch upon a point of supreme importance. The minister has often been charged, and with some degree of justification, with jealousy. It is not uncommon to hear preachers pick to pieces their equals and even attack their superiors. This is one of the ministerial weaknesses that has been long and publicly deplored. The temptation to this SIN (and such it is), also occurs when a retiring pastor remains resident and is, to the congregation, satisfactorily succeeded. In fact, so often has this incident occurred that both preachers and churches have come to feel that it is better for the ex-pastor not to remain in his former church fellowship. Unquestionably, this, like every other question, has two sides to it. In our own personal experience, through the long period of more than sixty years, we never had resident in our church membership an ex-pastor who was not our intimate friend and hearty helper. One naturally questions, therefore, whether the trouble is with the ex-pastor or with the occupant. Confidential study would doubtless prove it was sometimes the one and quite as often the other. At this point we have from politicians an example that preachers would do well to copy. We are told that when Mr. Jefferson was sent as ambassador to France, the French Minister, Count de Vergennes, remarked to Mr. Jefferson, “You come, as I understand it, Sir, to replace Dr. Franklin.” To that remark Jefferson graciously responded, “Nor Sir! I am here to succeed him. No man can replace him.” A deal of felicity on the part of preachers would prove as acceptable to the public as this answer of Jefferson was esteemed by the most polite court in Europe. But there is a still further point concerning which we shall say a word on the preacher’s ethics. Here we deal entirely with the pastoral incumbent. It concerns his attitude toward ex-pastors and also neighboring pastors, and involves the question of their kindly call or visitation in a church home. In the long pastorate in Minneapolis we have known of two or three instances where a call made, whether by request or with absolute justification, by an ex-pastor in some instances, and by a neighboring pastor in others, has been bitterly resented by the preacher in charge. He has argued that the parish in which he serves belongs to him and to him only, and that the entrance of any other preacher over the threshold of his homes is justly indictable. To say that such a spirit assumes the intolerance of Rome herself is to put it mildly. To be sure, we do not advocate or even look with complacency upon visits made with the view of sheep-stealing, or With any view whatever to secure a change of membership from one parish to another, or to win or hold the affection of former parishioners against the love and loyalty due to the new pulpit occupant. Too repeated returns for visits and conferences on the abandoned field raises a question as to whether the ex-pastor is not trying to serve and hold two congregations. That motive would ill become any courier for Christ. But to object to having a member call a loved ministerial friend, from within or without the fellowship of the church, to pray with the sick, to comfort in the hour of sorrow, to participate in a funeral service, or to perform the wedding of a son or daughter that perhaps had been baptized in a former day by him—resentment at such procedure would indicate that in the pastor’s mind these members are no longer free men and women permitted, therefore, to exercise personal judgment and preference, but are his vassals and can neither serve nor be served by other than himself. To such preachers we conclude this lecture by advising them to read afresh and prayerfully 1 Corinthians 13:1-13, the chapter which in my Thompson chain-reference Bible is headed, “All gifts, however excellent, are nothing without charity.” BIBLIOGRAPHY Farmer, H. H. The Servant of the Word (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1942). Cairns, Frank. The Prophet in the Heart (New York: Harper & Bros., 1935). ======================================================================== CHAPTER 69: 06.06. CHAPTER 6: THE GENESIS OF A SERMON ======================================================================== Chapter 6 THE GENESIS OF A SERMON IN OUR previous lectures we have dealt entirely with the preacher. We have sought to set before you (1) the divinity of his calling, (2) the menace of trying to form him according to a mold, (3) certain secrets of success, (4) the present-day demand, (5) the preacher and his professional ethics! Important as it is to have at once a clear and Biblically-correct idea of this high calling, our lectures, until now, have dealt with the profession entirely; but in all professional callings, the ministry included, practice must follow preparation, and we come now to homiletics proper and present for your consideration “The Genesis of a Sermon.” In this process there are three essential steps, namely, Decide the Sort, Prepare the Outline, and Complete the Work. DECIDE THE SORT! By this statement we mean, Determine the kind of sermon to be preached. As you know, there are many kinds of sermons; in fact, too many to mention them all. Sermons should be like people, each absolutely individual. Although there are billions of people in the world, twins are rare, and identicals are almost unknown. So it should be with sermons. Each should carry its individuality. But as the world’s populace is arranged—five recognized colors and the still larger number of nations—so sermons may be catalogued. For instance, we have the theme or subject sermon, the textual sermon, the expository sermon, etc. In the form of specials, the number multiplies—the funeral sermon, the ordination sermon, the anniversary sermon, the installation sermon, the revival sermon, sermons to children, etc., etc. In fact, special occasions may require special character for the sermon to be prepared. It is absolutely essential, therefore, for one, before he enters upon the process of preparation, yes, even before he selects his text or formulates his subject, to decide the sort of a sermon that is required. The occasion will aid your decision. There would be little kinship between a funeral discourse and the deliverance of a jubilee address, and there would be no close relationship between a college baccalaureate sermon and an ordination sermon. In other words, if one is going to build a structure, he must decide before he begins whether it is to be a cottage or a cathedral. The foundations to be laid will be different; material to be employed, different; the whole form, even to the finial, will be so different that nothing but failure and disaster could follow without pre-decision. So in sermonizing! The objective will influence the whole endeavor. To illustrate by example, in my volume, Revival Sermons, published by Fleming H. Revell, the second sermon discusses “Six Essentials in Soul Winning.” Its reading will reveal that in arrangement and in appeal it is intended absolutely to move Christian men and women to the overt act of soul-winning, to stir them to the point of ardent personal endeavor to win the unsaved. We here present the text and outline and recommend that you secure the volume and carefully study the sermon. Subject: SIX ESSENTIALS IN SOUL WINNING Outline: I.Get God’s Conception of the Soul’s Worth II.Consecrate Self to Soul-Winning III.Surrender to the Spirit’s Counsel IV.Employ the Sword of the Spirit—The Word V.In This Divinest of Work, Be Direct! VI.With Whatever Success Be Dissatisfied The same volume presents a sermon intended to bring the convicted to an open confession. You will find it on page 97. Subject: THE OPEN VERSUS THE SECRET DISCIPLE Text: Luke 12:8-9. Outline: I.A Reasonable Requirement II.An Essential Act III.An Absolute Demand The first of these sermons is addressed entirely to Christians; the second, to convicted sinners who have never openly confessed their Christ; then from the text to the final appeal the preparation is influenced by the objective. Having decided the sort of sermon, chosen the text, then PREPARE THE OUTLINE This is the next and most important step. An outline sustains to an intended sermon the same relation that the architect’s preliminary sketch sustains to the finished structure. In the building profession it is well understood that no great progress can be made until that preliminary sketch meets the approval of the investor. No intelligent man will put his money into a proposed structure that does not represent his desire, and no effective preacher will invest hours of study upon a discourse, the frame of which is offensive to both his tastes and his intent. In the judgment of your teacher the creation of a satisfactory outline requires at least as much time and thought as the rest of sermon completion, including writing or dictation, should demand. It is probably true that in building, where we have the most striking parallelism, the foundation can be laid and the frame of the entire building erected in shorter time than will be consumed in finishing processes; but it is absolutely certain that until the framework is a completed thing and is found satisfactory, the further expenditure of time and money is well nigh a waste of both. So with the sermon. Into it, then, should be put painstaking study. If at any point in the whole procedure the minister should f strive to be at his best, it is in the hours when making the outline. A full stomach affects sluggishly the intellect; and for many years on the mornings when I intended to create the outlines for the Sunday sermons, I purposely omitted breakfast and found my slight sacrifice requited a hundredfold. I am not setting this forth as a prescription to be slavishly followed by others (there are individual differences in the intellect as distinct as those in the features of the face), but I am reciting it to impress the theological student with the absolute importance of intellectual activity in the sermon planning. Owing to repeated absences from my office in evangelistic campaigns and Bible conference addresses, it was usual to arrive home on Saturday or even on an early Sunday morning train. Oftentimes three secretaries were called in order to complete a sermon in two to three hours, and if on Sunday, not later than ten-thirty o’clock. Having dictated a few pages to the one, I would take another for additional pages while the first was writing what had been given, and a third for still further dictation while the first and second were so engaged; making it possible for the first to be ready for another sitting when the third had received her portion of dictation. Under such circumstances I did not dare swallow one bite of breakfast, knowing the dulling effect of a full stomach upon intellectual endeavor. When an outline is finished, it should be a perfect frame. In looking upon the construction of homes and other building, it has always seemed to me that the workmen, when once the frame was up, could go about their task of completing the planned building with assurance. There are technical problems ahead of them, but from then on, it is a case of bringing material into its planned place. Whether the building, when finished, would be absolutely satisfactory would depend now solely upon the intelligence and energy with which each workman performed his part. If one of them is dull or unconcerned, and performs his task in a careless and slipshod manner, the finished building will show the defects. If, on the other hand, he is careful, conscientious and efficient, beauty and satisfaction will be the result. It is equally true in the preparation of a discourse. Having created the outline, COMPLETE THE WORK Study each division with a view of development. An outline is, of course, only the skeleton of a sermon. These bones must be covered with flesh, and into the finished product must be breathed the breath of life; consequently, the procedure is to go back now, and taking up each portion, develop it in its turn. Study carefully what you want to say by way of introduction and set it down. You have the main divisions with clearly defined subdivisions. Think them through in turn and jot down your own thought of what ought to be said under each. Having finished that process, return again and consider what scriptural proof-texts can be added to strengthen each assertion or claim, and jot those down under each main division and subdivision. The second step, search for the most fit of illustrations. There are some men whose style is so dramatic, or whose figures of speech are so individual and attractive, that they could get on with few illustrations. For instance, the sentences of O. P. Gifford scintillated and those of DeWitt Talmadge attracted by their dramatic phraseology. But the average man can better point what he has to say with an apt illustration than in any other conceivable way. There are people who oppose the use of illustrations; give them a deaf ear! The one thing that is most deadly to a sermon is to be “dry” Effective illustrations not only lubricate; they enlist, impress and convict—the very things you must do, or be set down as dull. Finally, make your last point an effective appeal. Harwood Pattison, in his Making of the Sermon, quotes Longfellow as saying, “A sermon is no sermon in which I cannot hear the heartbeat.” But even more than that is required. The preacher must not only communicate his own heartbeat to his audience, he must stir the heartbeats of his hearers to the point where they will act. Bishop Joyce once said to me, “Riley, I know when a man is preaching. It is when the chills run up and down my spine.” But perhaps a better expression of the same would be, “It is when my heart is so warmed by what has been said that I must go out and do what has been suggested.” That is the objective of preaching and is also the necessity of having the last point in a sermon profoundly effective. BIBLIOGRAPHY Broadus, John A. On the Preparation and Delivery of Sermons (New and Revised ed., New York: Harper & Bros., 1944). Pattison, T. Harwood Making of a Sermon (Philadelphia: American Baptist Publishing Society, 1898). ======================================================================== CHAPTER 70: 06.07. CHAPTER 7: THE SEVERAL FORMS OF SERMONS ======================================================================== Chapter 7 THE SEVERAL FORMS OF SERMONS SPEAKING HOMILETICALLY, there are several separate and rather distinct forms of sermons. Among them the three most marked and most commonly employed are: (1) The Theme Sermon, (2) The Textual Sermon, (3) The Expository Sermon, and then (4) Special Sermons. It is essential that students for the ministry should know the characteristics of each, and be able, both in preparation of the discourse and in conversation about sermons, to clearly distinguish. THE THEME SERMON In this case the theme is determined upon, wholly irrespective of Scriptures! This is true so far as its choice and its statements are concerned. Later one may find a text that will cover all or a part of the theme, or he may employ a number of texts in the theme’s discussion; but the theme or topic was first selected, and the fitting text and proof-texts are found later. For instance, when in 1918 or thereabout I reflected upon world conditions, I decided to discuss those conditions under the subject, “The Gospel for War Times.” Believing as I did, and still do, that the gospel prescribed for all conceivable human situations, I had no fears about finding a fit text, and so I meditated upon “The Gospel for War Times.” After deciding upon the topic or theme, I turned up to Matthew 24:14 : “This gospel of the kingdom shall he preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come,” and decided upon that to be a fit text; but instead of interpreting the text, I interpreted the theme under three heads: (1) This is a gospel that exalts the divine Christ versus human culture. (2) This gospel is a gospel of divine redemption versus human democracy. (3) This gospel is an appeal to sacrificial versus selfish living. Now, those three points were not necessarily born out of the text; they were born out of the topic. But they were also in perfect harmony with the text. Lest, however, some should get the idea that a topical sermon was only fitted to and produced by troubled times, let me give you a second sample, namely, “Six Essentials in Soul Winning.” Here, having decided upon my subject or theme, I sat down to contemplate its implications and deduced from the theme six appropriate suggestions: (1) Get God’s conception of a soul’s worth. (2) Consecrate yourselves to soul winning. (3) Surrender to the Holy Spirit’s guidance. (4) Employ the Sword of the Spirit—the Word. (5) In this divinest of work, be direct. (6)With whatever of success, be dissatisfied. That sermon, in full, will be found on page twenty, and following, of my volume, Revival Sermons, published by Fleming H. Revell. After having worked out these divisions to my satisfaction, I changed the title from “Some Essentials in Soul Winning” to “Six Essentials in Soul Winning,” and also attached the text, Proverbs 11:30, “He that winneth souls is wise.” You will see, therefore, that this was absolutely a case of a theme or topical sermon. It was not a treatment of the text, Proverbs 11:30, except incidentally; it was a study and Scriptural discussion of essentials in soul winning. THE TEXTUAL SERMON In the case of the textual sermon you find your text first. It may come to you as you read your Bible devotionally; it may be suggested to you by hearing it quoted from the pulpit; it may seem, as you read or meditate, to quit the Sacred Page, and “jump at you” as a living thing, requiring your reception and attention! But it is the text itself with all of its spiritual possibilities that makes the appeal and eventually determines the form and character of the sermon. You get your main divisions from an analysis of the text. In fact, your subdivisions ought also to be suggestions from the same selected Scripture, and commonly the amount of Scripture involved is not extensive. A sentence may suffice; a verse may meet your demands; or a few verses may be compassed within one discourse. To illustrate, one day I read Hebrews 11:1-40 and continued with Hebrews 12:1-2. Almost instantly these verses (Hebrews 12:1-2) laid hold upon my imagination and literally clamored for study and exposition. Such an experience the preacher would like always to have. It almost certainly means a pleasure in his study, an appeal to his emotions, and produces facility in expression. I, therefore, went to work on my text, Hebrews 12:1-2, and very shortly saw in it three very natural divisions: I.The Cloud of Witnesses II.The Besetting Sin III.The Sufficient Saviour and so I put down on my note page those three great and easily-found subjects. Then sitting before the first of these, “The Cloud of Witnesses,” I worked out three subdivisions: (1) It is a great cloud of witnesses—numberless. (2) It is a cloud of people who have passed this way once—saints, and (3) Among them there are great souls—Abel, Noah, etc. I deduced, therefore, my subdivisions from these reflections and passed on to the second division: “The Besetting Sin.” By referring to my Greek New Testament I found one word expressing “the sin which doth so easily beset us”— “euperistaton.” In my further contemplation I discovered that Paul was appealing to have that sin set aside, and also I noted that he suggested its forgetting. I was now at my third point: “The Sufficient Saviour.” Studying that language I saw again three things: (1) He was the Author and Finisher of our faith. (2) He was our Substitute for sin. (3) He was our High Priest at God’s right hand. Hence my sermon outline complete is this, to repeat for emphasis: OUR BESETTING SINS Text: Hebrews 12:1-2 Introduction I. The Cloud of Witnesses a.The cloud of witnesses is a multitude in number. b.This cloud of witnesses is sympathetic in interest. c.These witnesses were glorious in character. II. The Besetting Sin a.The apostle defines what this sin is. It is in a single Greek word, “euperistaton”—“The sin which doth so easily beset us.” b.The apostle asked to have such sin discarded—“Lay aside every weight and the sin which doth so easily beset us.” c.The apostle desires that, having discarded it, we disregard it—“Let us run with patience the race that is set before us.” III. The Sufficient Saviour a.He is the Author and Finisher of our faith—“Looking unto Jesus the author and finisher.” b.He is the Substitute for our sins—“Who . . . endured the cross, despising the shame.” c.He is our Great High Priest—“Is set down at the right hand of the throne of God.” This is a typical textual sermon and it will be found on page fifty, and following, of Revival Sermons. THE EXPOSITORY SERMON An expository sermon exists when one takes a section of Scripture, and, having studied it carefully, starts in to give an exposition of the same! If one would see and know good expository work, let him read the five books of “Notes on the Pentateuch” by C. H. Macintosh. I should call his works superb expository work, but that is in book-making. Sermon-making is slightly different, and may involve a whole book, a chapter, or only a part of a chapter. For instance, among my own works (and I prefer to take illustrations from them, both for your sakes in study and my own ease in teaching), I became interested in the book of Daniel, and started in to give a series of fourteen sermons on Daniel. Some of them were expository, others of them were textual; but for the most part they were expository, as will be found if you study the volume on Daniel in my series of forty volumes, “The Bible of the Expositor and the Evangelist.” Now Nebuchadnezzar’s dream, as interpreted by Daniel, makes an interesting expository production. Here is its outline, both as found in my volume on Daniel and as found also in a booklet of this sermon alone. A little study of Daniel 2:31-45 would suggest the title, DANIEL’S PROPHECY AND THE DOOM OF WORLD GOVERNMENTS. In preparation we produced the following outline: I. The Prophetic Scriptures a.Daniel interprets the four world-kingdoms of the dream. b.Daniel shows that we are now in the foot period. c.History demonstrates Daniel’s divine inspiration. II. The Perils of Science a.Science has been the word with which men have conjured. b.Science now threatens world-destruction. c.Further wars may well finish this age. III. The Plan of Salvation a.The interpretation of the stone b.The conquest of the world c.The enthronement of the Prince of Peace However, lest someone should decide that only prophecy was subject to such treatments, let me bring to you from the Psalms what I regard as an ideal form of expository work. Here, also, is involved a much more extensive Scripture territory, namely, Psalms 3:1-8, Psalms 4:1-8, Psalms 5:1-12. You will find this under Old Testament, Volume 9, in “The Bible of the Expositor and the Evangelist,” page 47 and following. Subject: HOUNDED YET HAPPY! I. The King’s Opponents (Psalms 3:1-8) a.They are a multitude in number. b.They are as impotent as plenteous. c.They suffice to drive the believer to divine protection. II. The King’s Protection (Psalms 4:1-8) a.He is the One that heareth prayer. b.He is the One that showeth good. III. The King’s Praise (Psalms 5:1-12) a.It opens the gates of the day to God. b.It turns the private closet into the temple of God c.It terminates in songs of praise and joy. Three chapters are brought under exposition here, whereas in Daniel only fifteen verses (Daniel 2:31-45) are involved, but both are expository. BIBLIOGRAPHY Ray, Jeff D. Expository Preaching (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan Publishing House, 1940). Meyer, F. B. Expository Preaching Plans and Methods (New York: George H. Doran Co., 1912). ======================================================================== CHAPTER 71: 06.08. CHAPTER 8: OTHER FORMS OF SERMONS ======================================================================== Chapter 8 OTHER FORMS OF SERMONS IN OUR last lecture, I sought to show the difference between the theme sermon, the text sermon and the expository sermon. These three constitute, of course, the major part of a pulpit ministry; and yet, they are by no means its “all in all.” SPECIAL SERMONS to meet special occasions will be common enough, and their proportion to the more regular pulpit work will be the exact measure of one’s popularity. If the general public clamor for your appearance here, there, and elsewhere, special sermons will occupy an ever-increasing demand on your ministry; and if their name is not “legion,” it is at least large. The order of their importance may be one thing and the calls for such deliverances may be quite another. There are some, however, that are sure to be demanded of every successful minister: 1.The Anniversary Sermon 2.The Baccalaureate Sermon 3.The Dedicatory Sermon 4.The Patriotic Sermon 5.The Ordination Sermon 6.The Funeral Sermon These are practically certain. In addition, you will have the sermon to children and youth; the sermon suited to special days like Christmas, Thanksgiving, etc.; sermons suited to the missionary minded; the sermon adapted to one sex only, men or women, meeting apart, etc. Accept this brief discussion of these as we have mentioned them. THE ANNIVERSARY SERMON There will be calls for this. The anniversary of one’s own pastorate as it comes around from year to year calls for a special sermon. For the forty-five years of my pastorate in Minneapolis I gave to the occasion ever-increasing thought and study. It came on the first Sunday of March of each year. I tried to make the sermon of that day a clarion call for ever-increasing endeavor on the part of my church people. I gave to it more study than the ordinary sermon and employed it as the exploitation of the yearly program and a consequent appeal for more aggressive undertakings. In order to give you a sample of such an address, I refer to the twenty-third anniversary sermon in “The Bible of the Expositor and the Evangelist,” Old Testament, Volume IV, page 159 and following: Text: “Forasmuch as the Lord hath blessed me hitherto” (Joshua 17:14). Subject: PROGRESS BY DIVINE PROVIDENCE! Outline: I. Review the Lord’s Plans. a.We must realize that leadership is with the Lord. b.We must recognize the appointments of His plans. c.It is ours to rehearse the special events of God’s intervention. II. Reason to the Lord’s Purposes. a.His past gives pledge of His purpose. b.His continuance is the ground of our confidence. c.His resources are the assurance of our successes. III. Respond to the Lord’s Appeals. a.The past is but a suggestion of God’s further plans. b.In enlarged enterprises He privileges us a part. c.His projects can only be discovered by prayer. I hope you will secure this volume and read this entire sermon. BACCALAUREATE SERMON This sermon commonly attends or immediately precedes the graduation of a class. The name comes from the circumstance that “Bachelor degrees are about to be conferred.” There is with the average preacher a tendency to make this sermon learned and scientific in a high degree. We are quite convinced of the wisdom of Dr. John A. Broadus when he argues that, “it does not necessarily require that one should be highly erudite or metaphysical. It is really desirable on such occasions to preach upon eminently evangelical topics.” In confirmation of this opinion, we illustrate by the impressions made in our college days from the visits of Dr. A. T. Pierson, who was then pastor in Indianapolis, and who upon one or more occasions was our baccalaureate preacher. He followed literally Broadus’s suggestion and expressed himself with such “force and freshness” as to interest every student and stir righteous ambition. However, we propose on this subject to cite to you two sermons in illustration of baccalaureate ideals. The first deals with the subject which is in its very nature somewhat academic and which gives to the student a real chance to think along lines harmonious with his class work and yet adapted to soul-stirring emotion. We cite Volume IX, Old Testament, in the forty-volume series of “The Bible of the Expositor and the Evangelist,” page 141 and following, “God’s Work, Words and Ways” (Psalms 19:1-14). However, if your sermon relates itself to the graduation class of a theological seminary, we call to your attention the chapters found in this series of lectures, “The Standardized Ministry,” “Some Secrets of Success in the Ministry,” etc. THE DEDICATORY SERMON This sermon would relate itself more often perhaps to the dedication of a new church building, or an important enlargement of the church building. Here, there comes a rare opportunity to discourse on the model church, and it would be a bit difficult to improve upon the divinely appointed and effected plan. Here, Acts 2:44-47 would constitute certainly an appropriate text. If you would be interested in sermonizing upon the subject, study “The Bible of the Expositor and the Evangelist,” New Testament, Volume VI, page 45 and following: Subject: By-Products of Pentecost Main divisions of outline: I. Regularity in Church Going II. Regularity in Church Giving III. Regularity in Gospelizing THE PATRIOTIC SERMON This deliverance is commonly looked for by the average audience around July Fourth, but it may be demanded at almost any time by local, state, or national conditions. When a community or city becomes morally rotten, or a state falls into the hands of some political clique or party which proposes to employ it for personal profit, or a nation becomes brutalized by its legalization of liquor or propagandized by some alien element that would overthrow its more just and proven practices, then the pulpit should not be silent. There will be pious old ladies and super-pious church members who will tearfully counsel their “beloved pastor” in the familiar tongue, “Brother; remember that it is your business to preach the gospel and leave the running of the nation alone.” But any intelligent study of the Old Testament will demonstrate that the statesmen of the day were the prophets of God, and apart from their deliverances, society would have produced even more Sodoms and Gomorrahs than history records, and Satan would have governed more nations than mentioned in the denunciations of the sixteen prophets whose books are contained in the Holy Bible. In the New Testament were it not for the deliverances of the apostles—Christ included—the Dark Ages of the last two thousand years would have been far darker still. Salt is a preservative against corruption, and light is an effective enemy of darkness, and while each and every believer should make a contribution to social salvation and to national enlightenment, it is quite evident that special obligation rests upon the preacher. Here again, in order to save you from ransacking through many libraries, and yet at the same time to point out to you an illustration, I dare to call attention to “The Bible of the Expositor and the Evangelist,” Volume IX, New Testament, page 163 and following. The sermon is “The Passion of a Christian Patriot;” the text is Romans 9:1-5; Romans 9:30-31; the occasion—Thanksgiving Day. That fact leads to the further statement that oftentimes we can make one occasion serve a dual purpose—the purpose of patriotism and of gratitude. THE ORDINATION SERMON This, for the popular preacher, will be a repeated appeal. Fortunately, there are still many men entering the ministry and the ordination of young men to this office is not to be lightly regarded. It matters not how often repeated, there will never be anything commonplace about a divine appointment to preach. God’s decisions and God’s commissions are not to be esteemed lightly, or treated with any but the highest and most holy consideration. Paul’s epistles to the two young men upon whom he bestowed so much of his time and teaching, Timothy and Titus, abound in texts suitable for such occasions, and we would refer you to careful study, yea, almost to committal to memory of these epistles. Be assured as you reflect upon them that they are sane and sacred, and you will find in them fit texts for all ordination occasions. THE FUNERAL SERMON Here you will pardon me a personal reference again, for while it would be easily possible for me to rummage through, or even recall from the writings of great men, samples such as I would gladly select and recommend and thereby give you greater variety of style perhaps, I could not bring so easily within your ready reach the illustration and outline of samples; and so I suggest this one as an outline that attracted more attention and brought more commendatory expression from the great congregation listening to it than almost any other funeral service of a lifetime. It involved the use of the Scripture, John’s Gospel, the 11th chapter, and the following outline: I. Jesus Could Have Come to His Sick Friend on Call, But He Didn’t! II. Jesus Could Have Kept Lazarus From Death, But He Didn’t! III. Jesus Could Have Left Lazarus in the Grave, But He Didn’t! It will not be difficult to see how an outline of this sort gives you a chance to explain, under the first, for instance, “Why God is not always subject to the call of men;” under the second head, “Why even death itself may become a desirable event;” and under the third head, “Why Christians can be profoundly comforted in the deepest bereavement.” The resurrection is sure! On this subject read the full chapter on funerals in the author’s Pastoral Problems. SERMONS TO CHILDREN Here we tread on important ground. The injunction of Scripture is “Remember now thy Creator in the days of thy youth.” The observation of men, and of ministers in particular, force the conclusion that we win children and youth to Christ, or we fail Christ Himself and further the defeat of the Church of God. Paul, writing to the Corinthians, said, “. . . not many wise men after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called” (1 Corinthians 1:26). If he were writing his epistle now, he might very appropriately add, “not many of the aged; not often even the more mature adults.” It is little wonder that child and youth evangelism has become the watchword of the age, and it is still less amazing that the wisest evangelist always wants an early decision day for children and youth in Sunday schools and young people’s organizations. He knows what ground produces the fruit of the Spirit; that in the springtime of life, as well as of seasons, you sow the word sanely. I cannot tell you, and if I did you would doubt my veracity, of the scores and hundreds of boys and girls that I have seen capitulate, come out for Christ, openly confess Him and unite themselves to the church of their choice by the use of Ecclesiastes 12:1. Time forbids, however, that I push this subject of other forms of sermons much further. The missionary appeal should have its special occasion, but it should also saturate the entire pulpit ministry. Sermons to the separate sexes have naturally declined in number in recent years. That is due to the fact that the modesty which characterized and, in the judgment of this writer, also encircled with great moral safety our mothers and sisters of yesterday, has been cast to the winds. The college and university of the present day, by its sinister introduction of psychoanalysis into schools, both separate and mixed, by its applause and patronage of the whole Freudist philosophy, has practically obliterated the reasons that once existed for a man’s plain talk to his brothers, or a woman’s deliverance to her sisters on questions that involved sexual subjects. That this modernistic procedure of unrestrained speech accounts in part for the moral degeneracy of the day, thoughtful men can hardly question. But there is at least one fact in its favor, namely, it ends the opportunity that formerly existed for extremists who dared for popularity to preach the prurient, and call crowds that came more out of curiosity than in the interest of soul-profit. So much on the consideration of other forms of sermons. We reserve for another lecture “The Sermon Series.” In connection with this I am asking you to read and study carefully Broadus’s Preparation and Delivery of Sermons, pages 303 to 314, inclusive. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 72: 06.09. CHAPTER 9: THE SOUL-WINNING SERMON ======================================================================== Chapter 9 THE SOUL-WINNING SERMON WE HAVE just studied “Special Forms of Sermons” but in their consideration we have left untouched the most essential of them all; namely, “The Soul-Winning Sermon,” We did this purposely, believing that its importance demanded an entire chapter. The privilege and obligation of a divinely commissioned gospel preacher is made clear by the language of the Lord Himself. With infinite wisdom and power as qualities of His deity, and perfect freedom to choose what life-calling He would, He turned from all conceivable occupations and selected, on His own will, this one; “The Son of man is come to seek and to save that which was lost” (Luke 19:10). Soul winning, then, was the occupation for which He quit Heaven and journeyed to earth. Later, concerning the responsibility and privilege of His disciples, He said, “As my Father hath sent me, even so send I you.” What minister could question, then, that however important other features of his office may be, its pinnacle of privilege and obligation is soul winning. That being true, the soul-winning sermon takes on a meaning and assumes an importance known to no other special delivery. Its creation involves the Choice of a Text, the Preparation of the Discourse, and the Objective of Decision. THE CHOICE OF A TEXT When one approaches a service devoted to soul winning, his necessary inquiry is, “What text shall I employ on this occasion?” The answer to that question is threefold: (1) The text chosen should be adapted to the objective, (2) It should clearly lend itself to enlightenment, (3) It is well if it contains encouragement. It should be adapted to the objective! A soul-winning sermon should start with a text that looks to salvation. For instance, when one is reading the book of Jonah and comes to his declaration in chapter two, verse nine, “Salvation is of the Lord,” he realizes at once that he has, in that statement, a good text from which to prepare a soul-winning sermon. Or if his reading is in John’s Gospel and he arrive at John 3:16, he instantly senses his opportunity to develop from that Scripture, “God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life,” a soul-winning sermon. These samples from Old and New Testament illustrate my meaning. There are scores, yea, hundreds, of such texts to be found in both sections of sacred Scripture. His daily devotional reading, if constantly engaged in, and carefully considered, will provide the preacher with more such texts than the time required for the preparation of sermons will ever make usable. There is, therefore, no poverty of soul-winning texts. Such a text should lend itself to enlightenment. The two Scriptures to which we have above referred signally illumine; so with a multitude of others equally appealing. For instance, Romans 10:8-11 is ideal in this respect. It reads, “But what saith it? The word is nigh thee, even in thy mouth, and in thy heart: that is, the word of faith, which we preach; “That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. “For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation. “For the Scripture saith, Whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed.” Here the varied steps to be taken are enumerated. The Word of God is to be regarded and that Word emphasizes each step in turn. It is God’s medium for conviction of sin; but since public confession of Christ is also required, the text makes that equally clear! Since faith in a risen Lord is the only basis on which a man convicted of sin will even desire Christ as Saviour; and since faith in Christ alone, as such, will lead him to an open confession, it is made plain that belief with the heart, not a mere head assent, is the divine demand, and even the reason is given, “For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.” This is a sample of scores of texts found in the Sacred Volume, each of which shows the way and reveals Christ as the only “name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved” (Acts 4:12). But as we have said, It is well if the text contains encouragement. Here, what a multitude! John 6:37 is a sample, “Him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out”! Matthew 11:28, “Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest,” is a passionate appeal of love as well as a divine encouragement of promise. Such encouraging Scriptures abound in the Holy Book and await the preacher’s employment. We reassert, therefore, the importance of the choice of a text when one sets himself to the task of soul winning. However, that choice is but a beginning. Important work remains to be accomplished; namely, THE PREPARATION OF THE SERMON Needless to say, It should involve painstaking! There are few large evening audiences in America. Undoubtedly a survey would show that attendance upon the morning services, if counted and compared with those present in the evening in the identically same sanctuaries, would be many times over greater at morning than at night. This is not due alone to either the indolence or indifference of Christian and non-Christian, resulting in their unwillingness to go to church but once a day. That is a potent feature of the fact, but not the lone feature by any means. Another deleterious element affecting the night service is at the point of sermon preparation. Not one preacher in ten gives the same time and thought in preparing for his evening service that he devotes to the service of the forenoon. In a long ministry I have talked with men on this subject many, many times, and I have found that not a few think they can get up a night sermon on short order, some of them reserving Saturday evening for the purpose, and others frankly confessing that they used “an hour or two Sunday afternoon.” Such men, if they secure an audience at all, commonly resort to picture shows and famous singers and musical programs and other accessories to call the evening crowd. The man whose pulpit deliverance is of such mental and spiritual moment as to call, year after year, crowds to hear him twice a day, is, almost without exception, unwearying and diligent in preparation of the second service. He esteems it no whit less important than the morning one. In fact, he may even regard it as above the forenoon in vital interest, since without salvation, as a beginning, no soul progress can be marked, and, in fact, the individual is left “dead in trespasses and sins.” To painstaking care, forceful argument should be added. There are preachers who think that argument is out of place in the pulpit. Such have not carefully studied either the ministry of Christ, the record in Acts, or the apostolic epistles. They are all saturated with argument; not only so, but if one will review Christian history, he will find the most outstanding evangelists, from the days of the Master Himself to the present moment, have been ministers who logically developed the authority of the Word, the deity of Christ, the doctrine of the blood atonement, the certainty of the resurrection, the evidences for the ascension and the Scriptural assurances of the Second Coming. To be sure, many of these men have been specialists in creating emotional effects and seeing them fruit in decisions, but others, equally successful, have been almost equally famed for their non-emotional but highly-argumentative deliverances. Mr. Spurgeon moved men in mighty multitudes and stirred them, but it was as much by sound reasoning as emotional appeal, or more. Dr. Reuben A. Torrey, whose round-the-world ministry has seldom been exceeded, was charged with preaching with a doubled-up fist, cold, logical, argumentative, convincing; and literally thousands of men, without a tear, were brought to accept his conclusions and confess his Christ, because he proved to their minds his claims for the Master and clearly demonstrated their guilty and lost condition, helpless and hopeless apart from Him. Christianity is a religion that has won its way for twenty centuries and moved into every nation on earth by making, successfully defending, and intellectually imposing its claims upon the minds of men. That is why it happens that again and again men trained in law schools have proven more successful preachers than those who went from theological seminary to pulpit. The soul-winning sermon should be embellished with illustrations. These may be drawn from almost every conceivable source: history, science, experience, observation, reading, nature— they all stand ready to contribute; and when an illustration illumines, makes more clear, more easy of comprehension the truth advocated, it becomes invaluable. John A. Broadus’s volume, On the Preparation and Delivery of Sermons, contains this justifiable remark, “Illustration is a psychological necessity.” Absolutely so! The man who can make a sermon interesting, engaging, convincing, without the use of illustration, is the rarest of ministers; and if one found such a specimen, he would discover that he indulged himself in pictorial speech, which, after all, would be only another form of this psychological requirement. But we pass from the preparation of the sermon to THE OBJECTIVE OF DECISION Decision is the sole objective of the soul-winning sermon. It may and should contain information. It may and should involve argument, logical deductions, etc., but these are the incidentals, not the fundamentals. The preacher, in quest of souls, must have one habit in common with the best-trained foxhound of the South. He must not permit himself to be taken off the trail by any cross-tracks. I have a banker friend in Plant City, Florida, Pat Moody, with whom I recently went fox hunting at four o’clock one lovely winter morning. It was not a fortunate outing for us, as the hounds hit no warm trail during the day; but I recently received a clipping from the Plant City newspaper to the effect that my friend had sold his favorite hound, Hi Doctor, last fall for $1250.00 and had just bought him back in this month of February, 1945, for $2000.00—the highest price ever paid for a hound in the United States. If you asked him the reason, he would tell you, not because the hound was a good-looking dog—he was that —but because of his ability to stay on the trail, and the singleness and swiftness with which he followed his quarry. Our Master appreciates the disciple who has a kindred quality in the quest for souls; to keep after and finally to get his man for Christ. That indeed is, or should be, the objective of the sermonizer as well as of the personal worker. That objective should motivate the whole service. From the time one arises to announce the opening hymn or utter the invocation prayer until the after-meeting is closed, the entire service, including the sermon, should move in one direction; namely, that of soul winning. More than once I have been in services where the opening songs and prayer had little or no relation to the soul-winning intent; and occasionally I have been in services where a good soul-winning sermon was preached, but a wretched choice of a hymn that had no decision in it and sometimes was even destitute of salvation-suggestion, was sung at the close. Such action is a decision killer. One reason Charlie Alexander became world-famed as a song leader and associate of Torrey and Chapman was due to his sense of fitness. He made his songs to harmonize absolutely with the content of sermon, and his closing hymns were always chosen with reference to fastening the nail that had been driven, by the minister, in a sure place. I find in my evangelistic work that I hardly dare to trust either the music leader or the pastor being assisted, to choose that last hymn. It should always be a decision-hymn, if soul winning is the objective of the service. It is not a question now of music; it is a question of decision, and the hymn can and, if properly selected, does aid in making it. If, on the other hand, it relates to some extraneous subject, it dissipates, in one verse, practically all that the preacher may have said and brings his endeavor to naught. However, the test of the soul-winning sermon is in the altar call. Here still more ministers fail than at the previously-named points. They seem to have never studied psychology or else to be utterly lacking in their knowledge of human nature and ignorant of the elements that enter into decision and produce action. If I have heard it once, I have heard it a hundred times, in audiences sometimes of thousands of people where a great soul-winning sermon has just been finished and where taking over the after-meeting the preacher—sometimes the same man who gave the efficient sermon—puts his invitation after this manner, “Is there ONE in this great audience who will lift a hand, or is there ONE in this crowd who will stand up for Christ and let it be known that you are deciding now and forever that you will be His very own?” My soul cringes under that non-expectant invitation. Instead of saying to the audience, “I am looking for a large number to give response,” as one has a right to where there is a large audience and many unconverted in it, it plainly asserts, “I am not expecting anything, but I am daring to hope that possibly one person may be willing.” It almost reminds one of the story of the Irish woman who said, “There is a difference between hope and expectation. I hope to meet Pat in Heaven, but I don’t expect to.” I believe that the spirit of expectation is a psychological influence that reaches the minds and souls of men. I think that a great auditorium is moved when the lone man, the minister, entertains and expresses that spirit of expectation; and I know that psychologically it is true that if he does not express it, their expectation is decreased to that extent, and if he does, it is accentuated. And what is expectation of results except another phrase or faith in God? I have an idea that on the day of Pentecost, when Peter preached his remarkable sermon, and the time of the aftermeeting came, he was not surprised at the response. There is no indication in the second chapter of Acts that Peter was amazed over the twenty-five hundred decisions made that day, and added to the five hundred professions already existing. It is all recorded as naturally as though it were a part of the planned program, and Peter had shown that he anticipated the time, reminding his audience that “the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call, And with many other words did he testify and exhort, saying, Save yourselves from this untoward generation” (Acts 2:39-40). I conclude this lecture, therefore, with this bit of emphasis —in an after-meeting dare to indulge expectancy. “According to your faith be it unto you” (Matthew 9:29). BIBLIOGRAPHY Truett, George W. A Quest for Souls (New York: Harper & Bros., 1928). Sanders, J. O. The Divine Art of Soul-winning (London: Pickering & Inglis, 1937). ======================================================================== CHAPTER 73: 06.10. CHAPTER 10: THE SERMON-SERIES ======================================================================== Chapter 10 THE SERMON-SERIES WE HAVE given our attention to the more ordinary forms of sermons: the theme, the topical, and the expository; to sermon specifics, and finally to the soul-winning sermon. Each of these in its turn is important, but beyond the value of any individual discourse stands the sermon-series. This fact will become increasingly clear as we consider its implications. As no individual can claim an interest equal to that which is found with the multiplication of men, so no single sermon can possibly include the values that may inhere in the sermon-series. On that account a considerable proportion, perhaps larger than we have ever imagined, of all the Christian discourses created come to us in the serial form. This fact both explains and accounts for its popular use. If one inquires why ministers veer to the series, the answer will be discoverable in the circumstance of willful choice, wonted advantages, and absolute demands. We might consider the subject, therefore, under the topics: Their Deliberate Employment, Their Decided Advantages, and Their Definite Requirement. THEIR DELIBERATE EMPLOYMENT The series of sermons comes as a mental demand. The minister is faced week by week with the necessity of one or two or even more original productions. His personal meditations, his devotional and secular readings, his observations upon the conduct of his fellows, or the course of nature—these all tend to bring to his thought subjects of such magnitude that no single discourse could possibly compass them. The result is a series, with a view to more complete and satisfactory consideration. For instance, I went as a young preacher to a pastorate, and learned upon my arrival that my predecessor had proved a liberal theologian, with strong Unitarian tendencies. Naturally, as a conservative, I wanted to save that people from the effects of such a theological philosophy. I knew full well that it could not be accomplished in any single discourse. Consequently, after a year in the pastorate, when I knew my position to be well-established and my doctrinal views to be respected, I announced a series on “The Greater Doctrines of Scripture.” In itself that sounds not only innocent enough, but eminently desirable as a study for any people, and in that series I spoke on “The Inspiration of Scripture; The Nature and Character of the True God; The Nature and Character of Satan; The Fall of Man; The Plan of Salvation; The Necessity of Repentance and Faith; The Constitution of the Church; The Number and Order of the Ordinances; The Final Estate of the Righteous and Wicked,” etc. In other words, the local and church conditions clearly demanded what could not be accomplished in a single discourse. There are scores of instances involving almost an innumerable number of circumstances which will clamor for kindred and extensive studies of subjects. To illustrate this statement and to show how remote those general themes may be, let me refer to my early experience in the Minneapolis pastorate. There my predecessor had been an orthodox man and such a course was not required; but I arrived in the city on a morning when a foul murder, with the purpose of financial gain, had been committed; and when a mayor of lax moral convictions had appointed a brother of similar sort chief of police, and the disregard of the law was the city’s disgrace. Once more I found myself convinced of the necessity of a series which was delivered under the general title, “Messages for the Metropolis,” twelve sermons, every one of which dealt with some phase of the city’s maladministration. The citing of these two instances, involving subjects so remote from one another, naturally suggests the multiplied series that a life ministry might demand, and adequately explains why they were decided upon, prepared and delivered. However, the series is not at all limited to the end of correction. It has equal occasion in the whole realm of teaching. All the greater topics that clamor for pulpit consideration are more effectually treated by a series than by a single discourse; and as for the minister himself, there are urgent reasons for its employment. For instance, the series simplifies the task of topic choosing. Task, did I say? Yes, for the young and inexperienced minister particularly; not only a task, but a veritable test of wits weekly. Dr. John A. Broadus, my great and capable teacher in homiletics, used to tell us that by Tuesday morning, at the latest, we should be selecting the text or topic for the next Sunday morning’s sermon; and that if two sermons a day were required, the Sunday night subject should be determined upon by Friday at the latest. If any man imagines that that is a problem of easy solution, he is either a layman with no obligation to discharge it, or a preacher of such indifference to his Sunday task as to be set for signal failure. If the delivery from the sacred desk is the solemn task our great preacher-forefathers believed it to be, of “standing between the living and the dead,” and by the single performance, contributing to the miracle of regeneration, then the choice of subject with its consequent task of preparing for public deliverances is one that might challenge the judgment of angels and archangels, much more that of mortal man. And to have to repeat that delicate and at times terribly difficult mental process twice a week is nothing short of staggering in its implications. The moment, however, a series is decided upon, mental endeavor is simplified. To sit down and analyze a great subject, assigning its various features to five or even ten statements will require a brief period of concentrated thought; but that task accomplished, the question of what next is answered for weeks, and the mental processes and resources are now left free to think not for them but on them instead. The result is instead of being wearied with interrogation, we are exhilarated by construction. The man who stands before several paths, knowing not which one to choose, is always in a distressing quandary; but the man who has a marked highway ahead of him is absolutely free to drive on. For instance, how much easier it was to the author to speak for seven weeks on “Seven New Testament Converts,” selected in advance of the first deliverance upon the subject, under the titles, (1) “Nicodemus or the Conversion of a Ruler,” (2) “The Sycharite or the Conversion of a Harlot,” (3) “Bartimaeus or the Conversion of a Blind Begger,” (4) “Simon or the Conversion of a Sorcerer,” (5) “The Eunuch or the Conversion of a State Treasurer,” (6) “Cornelius or the Conversion of a Roman Centurion,” (7) “Lydia or the Conversion of a Saleslady,” than it ever would have been to think up, with the arrival of seven successive Fridays, a suitable subject for the following Sunday nights. That’s why it was done that way! A man who can save himself the mental trial of reiterating debates conserves his mental strength and resources for constructive work. Furthermore, the series has an inherent advertising value. It requires little more space and costs but little more money to put into your newspaper the series of seven weeks that would be the charge for a single Sunday’s ad, and people reading it will have the interest of that particular topic that makes a personal appeal to them. To return to the series above-named, the mayor of the town might want to hear you on “Nicodemus or the Conversion of a Ruler.” Some poor fallen woman, seeing that you are speaking on “The Sycharite or the Conversion of a Harlot,” would be naturally attracted. A blind brother or sister would be especially interested in the salvation of Bartimaeus, and the spirit-medium ought at least to respond when the conversion of a sorcerer was considered. State treasurers, and even treasurers of lesser institutions, would pay a little more attention to the eunuch’s conversion than to the average theme, while a ranking military officer would feel a natural appeal to hear about the Roman centurion, and the woman from behind the counter of your department store might say, “I am going on the night he speaks on ‘Lydia, or the Conversion of a Saleslady,’ to hear what he has to say about us.” This leads naturally to, in fact it impinges upon, our second suggestion. THEIR DECIDED ADVANTAGES Here, however, we are not so much considering why the minister chooses them as we are the good results that come from having employed the series form. We have no expectation of compassing them all. They are almost like the demons of Gadarenes, a legion in number, but we do select certain and most manifest ones. The series renders possible the proper treatment of vital subjects. For instance, when my successor in office, Dr. Robert L. Moyer, wanted to get before his audience of the First Baptist Church his personal views of the great fundamentals of the Christian faith, he was too wise to attempt it in a single discourse. On the other hand, he announced that he would speak for many weeks on “The Apostle’s Creed,” and for not less than a dozen or fifteen Sundays he took up the successive sentences of that somewhat hoary and popularly-approved statement of faith. I knew a man who had a lecture on the books of the Bible, and he touched everything from Genesis to Revelation; and, as a bird’s-eye view, it was really interesting and capable. But it left you with the identical feeling that you have when you fly over a continent in an airplane—you have seen the ground, but you haven’t studied it; you have glanced at it, but you haven’t comprehended it. Such a discourse could never accomplish what sixty-six lectures on the books of the Bible could do. In fact, within the limitations of a single discourse, only the briefest books of the Bible can be brought within adequate comprehension. And when one has given to its greater books five, ten, and fifteen discourses, or as Spurgeon did on the Psalms, has produced volumes of hundreds of pages and hundreds of thousands of words, he still feels, and feels deeply, that his treatment of his subject was far from full, and a single discourse becomes but a tiny fragment by comparison. Great, vital subjects demand extended series. Harwood Pattison in his Making of a Sermon (page 7), speaking on the attempt to treat “all creation” in a single discourse, inveighs against attempting all from the Garden of Eden to New Jerusalem in one sermon, saying, “only by implication or indirectly can one treat the doctrines of Christianity, fall of man, redemption, the Holy Spirit, in a sermon.” Maclaren in Cure of Souls says, “If a preacher thinks it wise he may, in an hour, compass the circle of Christian doctrine, but it goes without saying that no subject will be more than touched.” The series also incites to and rewards special research. When one starts on a series of sermons, his daily reading and his literary research take on new meanings. Any page from a book, any article from a magazine, any illustration coming to him by way of eye or ear, may, and possibly will, fit in somewhere before this extended series is completed. All he has to do, therefore, is to make mental, or better yet, an index reference to the material that will merit his demands three or five weeks from now, when he reaches that phase of the subject to which this incident or illustration refers. It renders stored wealth accumulative; it amounts to what a bank deposit means to the business man; its value awaits the time of its need. That minister is poor indeed who lives as some indolent and irresponsible people live, using up entirely his daily accumulation; and that preacher is rich indeed who has an inexhaustible storehouse upon which he can draw at will, and an Index Rerum that will enable him to lay his hand upon his accumulated resources when his time of personal need, or for passing out public benefits, has arrived. I somewhat prize my library. It is not the greatest, nor is it the most valuable from the standpoint of volumes of the highest merit, but it has one feature that could scarcely be exceeded in all America: eighty-five scrapbooks, from one hundred to three hundred pages each, the depository of full sixty years of possible sermonic material; three-and-a-half shelves are needed to hold these volumes. To me, at least, they have more value than any dozen shelves found round about them. In fifty years never a sermon prepared and delivered without appeal to this reservoir, and in fifty years never a disappointment. In some instances after a quarter or half a century of waiting the time to arrive, the peculiar illustration or incident thus laid up, was needed; but what relief and joy when the hour arrived to find it waiting there! And yet again, The series of sermons contributes to education and publication. We have already spoken of its educational advantages. There is no mental training that equals the comparatively full treatment of vital subjects. That is why textbooks are written and why they must be employed. They all partake of the form of series of discourses or discussions on special subjects; but over and above this educational value is the book-result. People have often asked me the question, “How does it happen, Dr. Riley, that with the weight of the pastorate upon you and the responsibility of the schools over which you have presided so long a time, together with your extensive lecture and evangelistic engagements, you find time to prepare books for publication?” The answer is not difficult, and the seventy odd published volumes that have been brought from the press to date and a dozen waiting manuscripts are almost all series that have first been utilized in the pulpit, or in the classroom. It took, therefore, only a modicum of additional labor to whip them into shape for publication. They went from the pulpit or the classroom, by way of the press, to the public. Forty of them involved a series on the books of the Bible, and the rest of them, subjects or series chosen from time to time to meet what seemed to be special demands; and when finished and delivered, they were turned over to the press to be put into permanent form. There are instances, however, in which you discover your series after having accomplished it. The volumes on Revival Sermons and The Perennial Revival were not originally delivered as a series at all. They were separate and utterly independent sermons, preached in the natural course of a pastorate; but on the discovery of natural relationships, selected out and related in their final form. The Perennial Revival is exactly what one might have sat down and deliberately planned in advance. Each of the sixteen sermons would seem to have been created with a view to the whole. To such an extent is this true that some competent critics have said that “as a textbook on THE REVIVAL it holds no superior,” and it has already passed through four editions, and a fifth is now required. It has been adopted by not a few theological schools. The same general statement applies to the twelve sermons constituting Revival Sermons. There were but three of them prepared in a series; namely, “Presumptuous Sins,” “Our Besetting Sins,” and “The Unpardonable Sin.” However, they were assembled because of their logical relationship, and they have enjoyed even the high compliments of a theological opponent in magazine form, The Christian Century. It will be remembered, however, that the two volumes referred to as assembled in a series after their completion rather than conceived before any commitment was made, cost the author far more Tuesday morning debates and mental concern than would have been required had the subjects been selected at one time and stated in advance of preparation task. THEIR DEFINITE REQUIREMENT For many subjects there is no other way! It is the series or practically nothing. Who would think, for instance, of disposing of the great subject of prophecy with a single discourse? Or who would dare to attempt the greater doctrines of the Bible in a single discourse? Or who would imagine that he could set before his audiences Biblical evangelism in a single discourse, or make his people to be familiar with the books of the Bible in a single discourse, or interest them in the great Book of the Revelation with a single discourse? What professor in the university would attempt to set before you psychology, or philosophy, or sociology, or natural science, with one lecture? The utmost that can be done with some subjects within the limitations of an hour is merely an introduction. It is equally so with the great themes that are found in the varied portions (some of them running like a scarlet thread through the library) of the sixty-six books called the Bible. The series way is the only way. For the purpose of education, there is no equal. We have long understood that in education ‘line must be laid upon line, precept must be added to precept,’ statement must follow statement, facts must be assembled and logically related. We are told that “time and tide wait for no man,” but education is never a hurried process. It is a plodding; it is a repetition; it is addition; it is multiplication! It depends not upon the day, except to redeem it; not upon the hour, save as a segment. It counts upon a lifetime and demands a never-ending application. Upon the series the divine approval seems to rest. Go back into Christian history, and from the days when Christ indulged in a series—the parables—in teaching; then Paul employed a series of letters addressed to the churches; when Polycarp and Tertullian and the early church fathers indulged in a series of debates and delivered their souls in series of discourses, down to modern times when the Spurgeons, Parkers, Maclarens, Finneys, Torreys and Chapmans all enjoyed the favor of God upon the great series of sermons they preached, and the late I. M. Haldeman series on “The Second Coming” attracted annual audiences of sanctuary capacity and excited an international interest, and God’s favor has not failed this method of presenting truth. As the great old prophet Isaiah said, “Whom shall he teach knowledge? and whom shall he make to understand doctrine? them that are weaned from the milk and drawn from the breasts. “For precept must be upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little” (Isaiah 28:9-10). ======================================================================== CHAPTER 74: 06.11. CHAPTER 11: THE CONSTRUCTION OF A SERMON ======================================================================== Chapter 11 THE CONSTRUCTION OF A SERMON THE CONSTRUCTION of a sermon is certainly one of the most important labors of a minister’s life. We do not agree with Austin Phelps of Andover that it is practically the minister’s sole business: that he is to leave social functions, secular addresses, administration, state and national issues, and all other matters to other men and make a beaten path between the study and the pulpit. But sermonizing is so essential and so conspicuous a part of the minister’s vocation that we have never regretted the Phelps over-emphasis. If one asks what a sermon is, Phelps’ answer is excellent: “An oral address to the popular mind on religious truth contained in the Scriptures, and elaborately treated with a view to persuasion.” The construction of a sermon is not altogether unlike the building of a house. In some respects there are points of great similarity between the two. In each case there must be a preliminary sketch that should be satisfactory to the creator before further procedure is possible. That sketch we call in homiletics the outline; and, as in house building, so in construction, when the preliminary sketch is satisfactory one is ready for the more perfected plans, including its varied appointments. At every point house building and sermon construction require parallel procedures. Each involves parts, production, and appeal. ITS PARTS They are naturally constituted! Just as a house, if worthy the name of a home, is certain to have a living room, dining room, kitchen, bedrooms, halls and baths, so a discourse, worthy to be called a sermon, commonly claims an introduction, main divisions, subdivisions, and conclusion. The introduction should usually be brief—the main divisions not too few, and still important. Three is perhaps the most popular number now in ordinary use; but this is not arbitrary, since the sane and sufficient interpretation of the theme or passage involved will necessarily effect that number. As three is often adequate for main divisions, so it will be found that three subdivisions under each main will work out well—but here again the complete presentation of Scripture is a deciding factor. We present this very chapter as sample of the parts in harmonious outline. They should be carefully planned! Once in my youth we needed a new barn on our Kentucky farm. I volunteered to build it, and in due process of time the feat was accomplished; but it was built without plans of any kind, without even a lead-pencil sketch, and also without all the necessary carpenter’s tools. I confess it was never an occasion of pleasure or pride; and when I took my bride to Kentucky I was pleased to see that my attempt at building had been demolished and a new and well-planned one replaced it. I have often heard sermons that reminded me of that misdirected effort. They were neither stately nor attractive. Like my barn they seem to be bits of mental timber tacked together. It was evident they had never enjoyed a preliminary sketch, that they had never followed a blue print, and that both plans and specifications had been lacking. It is my candid judgment that the average sermon has cost the preacher entirely too little mental endeavor. Among the reasons that there are not more great preachers is the fact that there are so few painstaking students. Good preaching is only and ever the product of great study. They should be properly proportioned! Perhaps not one sermon in a hundred that is preached ever reaches the printed page; but of the better sermons, that proportion increases, and of the best it is greater still. Certainly when a sermon is to be given to the public in printed form it makes a far more pleasing impression on the mind, through the eye, if the statements constituting the outline are symmetrical. We think of one of the great preachers of the past century —our personal and esteemed friend also—whose failure in this very matter was most marked. When one studies his books of sermons and other volumes from his pen, he will often find utter disparity at this point. One main division may be stated in two words, while the next main division is voiced in two or three lines. So also with his subdivisions. The visual impression is most displeasing. With him no attempt was made either at proportion of parts, alliteration in statements, or symmetry of arrangement; but because he had a well-trained intellect, an unshaken faith in God and His Word, studious habits, and a forceful delivery, he was one of the leading ministers of his day—all of which goes to evidence the fact that preaching, in its highest form, is not fixed or determined by rules or regulations, but is, in its last analysis, a witness in the power of the Holy Ghost. However, it should be understood and admitted that the Spirit of God, while not limited to mechanical devices, is not necessarily aided by ignoring righteous rules. Observation has convinced us that great preachers are born rather than made. Recently two of the most notable of our Southland have gone to be with the Lord. I speak of George W. Truett, the university graduate whose silver tongue was the pride and blessing of the entire South, and of A. N. Hall of Oklahoma, the high school chap, who felt called from a business career to minister in the Word. I say without hesitation that Hall was easily the homiletician of his day. He had never studied the subject at the feet of any man; I doubt that he had ever read books on the theme, yet he was a past master in homiletics. It shows that homileticians are born rather than bred, but the best by birth can be improved by training. But we pass from the consideration of the sermon parts to ITS PRODUCTION Here we reach holy ground! Here we deal not alone with human endeavor, but also with divine influence. The great essentials in sermonizing involve both. It should start with the selection of a text or theme! (Maclaren, Cure of Souls, pages 8-12). Is that a matter of the minister’s mind only? We think not! Experience has taught us differently. It is here that he needs the help of the Holy Ghost. Happy is the preacher when such help has been consciously vouchsafed. I have chosen many a text of my own volition, and presented it with my best but unaided ability—never to my joy or even satisfaction. Then, thank God, I have had that other week in which the text was manifestly chosen for me; when I became conscious of a divine demand that it be presented to my people; and while “I was musing [in preparation] the fire burned; then spake I with my tongue.” Those have been the high moments of life; those have been the great hours when God’s people have been stirred and sinners have surrendered. I write as a man of long experience in the ministry, and if I had the ear of every theologian in the world (and he would receive advice), I should plead for prayer as he sought for a text, and for further prayer as he entered upon its study, and for a never failing solicitude that the Holy Spirit should continue to guide from the hour of choice of text to the last word of completed discourse so that he might be the ideal witness described in Acts 1:8, upon whom the power of the Holy Ghost rested in both production and delivery. It should proceed by extensive research! There are men who entertain a philosophy that if the Holy Ghost helps them, no endeavor on their part is needful. As a defense of their philosophy they often employ the last sentence in Psalms 81:10, “Open thy mouth wide, and I will fill it—,” a scripture that has no reference at all to preaching, but to the experience of Israel in the wilderness, when God sent them manna and quail to satisfy their hunger. Paul indulged in no such false or foolish interpretation. On the contrary, writing to another young minister of his day, he solemnly enjoined upon him “Study to shew thyself approved unto God . . .” (2 Timothy 2:15). The idea that one can impart information without first taking the pains to acquire it is both a mental and moral absurdity. The greatest preacher I ever knew was Dr. B. H. Carroll of Texas. He was also a most assiduous student. I sat at the feet of Dr. Henry Grattan Guinness after he had celebrated his eighty-third birthday, and when between services I visited with him in his hotel room, I found him uniformly with his face between the pages of a book; and when I came to read the production of his pen or listen to the eloquence of his tongue, I knew full well that he was drawing upon a reservoir of information which his studies had “filled to the brim,” and, like the disciples of Jesus at the marriage in Cana of Galilee, having filled the receptacle he could draw the rich wine of truth from the same, and so meet the needs of the people. When one thinks upon the sources of supply—history, biography, literature, science, observation, sacred Scripture, etc., he is compelled to assent that the poor preacher, like the average poor man, is poverty-stricken often as the result of indolence. It should receive most careful expression! At this point we favor written rather than extempore sermons. The extemporaneous preacher is too likely to voice himself in slovenly manner, employing any word that would approach his intent rather than the exact word that would voice his idea. A written sermon can be reviewed, weaknesses detected, best words selected, and phrases satisfactorily finished. An extemporaneous sermon is somewhat like the wind of which the Master spake, “but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth.” If a minister wants to increase his vocabulary and employ constantly the best word to express his thought, he is compelled to search among synonyms —a thing quite impossible with what is commonly called “free speech.” In my early ministry it was not unusual for me to spend from fifteen minutes to half an hour to finish satisfactorily a single sentence, and I have spent that amount of time searching for the right word. I am not pleading for sermon reading—as a rule that is a sleepy procedure for both the minister and the audience, and illustrates the widely spread story of the preacher who suggested to his hearers that “a little snuff might keep them awake”; whereupon an auditor replied, “Wouldn’t it be better to put the snuff into your sermon?” Snuff in a sermon is clarity of expression! The best of extemporaneous preachers are seldom book-authors. The power and popularity of the printed page has always been and will forever remain the reward of concise, clear, and competent expression. So firmly have I been convinced of this method of procedure that for eight years before I was provided a secretary, I wrote out every sermon, in full, with my own hand, though often suffering from writer’s cramp. ITS APPEAL Every sermon should have a direct objective! There should be a reason for its being preached, and a desirable end to be accomplished. The appearance in the pulpit is not a mere performance! The making of some sort of speech on Sunday is not necessarily a sacred obligation; but to meet the mental and moral demands of men’s souls— aye, that is a vocation worthy of angels. There is a story told of a missionary in China who, passing along the road, saw a native hacking away at a log. Stopping for friendly conversation he said, “John, what are you making?” Shaking his head, the Chinaman answered, “Dunno, maybe bedstead, maybe god.” Not a few ministers have had to wait until the sermon was finished to find out just what they had produced. Instead of moving as a bee does, straight from the flower to the hive, to put the stored sweetness where it would conserve the highest good, they wander as butterflies without other objective than physical exercise. The fundamental of preaching itself is the accomplishment of a direct and desirable objective. Each part should move to that end. A homily should have unity. The best auditors will demand that, and the poor ones, even though they may not be able to express the reason for their disappointment, will feel its lack. A great idea, well-lodged in the mind of the congregation, is more sure to effect life for good than a dozen disjointed suggestions could ever accomplish. Nature is orderly; so is grace when it is fully comprehended. A characteristic of Christ’s preaching is symmetry. Some one has said that the difference between an eloquent man and a very ordinary orator is both in choice of words and orderly arrangement; but to clothe them and organize them into an effective argument evidences genius and makes preaching great. Its final impact should be decision and action. In accomplishing this the minister must be able to visualize his audience while yet at his desk engaged in preparation. In the forty-five years of my pastorate in Minneapolis, I was as conscious of my congregation when dictating to my secretary in the study as I became when addressing them face to face. Many times I have been moved to tears in expression where my only audience was my secretary, and it was not altogether unusual for her to manifest the interest of bedimmed vision. Such is the seriousness of professional preaching. It has in common at least with the teacher the determination to impart truth, knowing that “truth makes men free!” It has in common with the attorney the securing of a verdict, knowing that apart from decision there can be no character; it has in common with the physician the patient’s help, knowing that soul-healing is the highest human accomplishment. Every sermon therefore should be considered a deliverance involving eternal destinies. That is why preaching is altogether the most important of human occupations. BIBLIOGRAPHY Pattison, T. Harwood Parts of the Sermon (Philadelphia: American Baptist Publishing Society, 1898). Broadus, John A. The Foundation of a Sermon (On the Preparation and Delivery of Sermons, new and revised edition; New York: Harper & Bros., 1944). ======================================================================== CHAPTER 75: 06.12. CHAPTER 12: THE SERMON ILLUSTRATION ======================================================================== Chapter 12 THE SERMON ILLUSTRATION THE ILLUSTRATION is so important an element in sermonizing as to deserve separate, and somewhat full, treatment. There are few men whose choice of words is so picturesque as to make possible effective speech apart from illustration. This being true, the accumulation or gathering of illustrations becomes a minister’s obligation, if not indeed a primary element in his preparation. On the method of gathering and arrangement, subject to call, of illustration, we refer the reader to our volume on Pastoral Problems and the chapter on “Conserving Material for Sermonizing.” However, in discussing this fundamental of sermonizing I propound three questions: (1) What is an Illustration? (2) What are its Sources? (3) What are its Uses? WHAT IS AN ILLUSTRATION? The illustration defined! It would be a bit difficult to bethink and state a better definition than is given in the volume On The Preparation and Delivery of Sermons by John A. Broadus, my own instructor in homiletics in the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. “To illustrate, according to etymology, is to throw light (or lustre) upon a subject.” Lucidity is an absolute necessity in preaching. When people say of a preacher that he is dull and uninteresting, they mean to say that his expressions are not luminous; and so, are not illuminating. There are rare men whose very choice of words is so succinct and yet adequate that illustration is not absolutely needful to their style. Among such I have already mentioned O. P. Gifford, the notable Baptist preacher of yesterday, as an example; and of the radio commentators of the day, Upton Close is another master of diction, whose sentences are of themselves sufficiently scintillating. However, since such speakers are exceptional, the use of illustrations is essential to the success of ninety-nine out of a hundred ministers. The illustration appreciated! The average audience, if it grows a bit listless under the sound of a sermon, is quickened in interest the moment an illustration is introduced; and, since there is no possibility of producing results in the minds and hearts of men apart from interest, the employment of the illustration is a prime element of success. As fox hunters thrill to the voice of hounds when by their louder and more rapid barking they indicate that the trail has become fresher and hotter, so an audience responds to a vivid illustration of truth with awakened interest. Its use, therefore, is not only in clarifying thought but in engaging attention. The illustration demanded! One of the finest sentences to be found in the Broadus volume is: “Illustration is a psychological necessity.” There are said to be exceptions to all rules, but we doubt that this statement admits of any exception. An observant writer says of Mr. Spurgeon’s tabernacle services that commonly dispensed with choir, quartettes, solos and other musical attraction, “the sacred program was not destitute of music on that account, since Mr. Spurgeon’s voice was in itself so charmingly musical as to provide a substitute.” So in those instances where ministers are popular without the employment of illustrations, we are persuaded that their words are so picturesque and their sentences so scintillating as to become substitutes. So the statement stands: “The illustration is a psychological necessity!” WHAT ARE THE SOURCES? Here we find a field that is practically illimitable. The utmost one can do, therefore, is to select and present certain sources of supreme importance. Among the many, five are of such magnitude that to ignore any one of them would appear unpardonable. Observation is a prolific source of illustration! In this matter our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ was a master. His parables were commonly the products of observation. When he wanted to show the fate of truth as dispensed to the public, he did it by the parable of the sower—an observation in agriculture (Matthew 13:3-9). When he wanted to convict men of barrenness in spirituality, he accomplished it by the parable of a fruitless fig tree, which after pruning, fertilizing and cultivating, if it still failed, was to be cut down. (Luke 13:6-9). Since the world is large and the ways of men varied and even devious, there is every existing opportunity of observation, deducing illustration from their conduct. A minister could do no better than to study and copy the Christ in the matter. History is an inexhaustible fountain! When I speak of history, I refer to both the secular and the sacred—the uninspired records of something like seven thousand years, and the inspired record known as the Bible, covering a kindred period. When one attempts to estimate interesting incidents of life, faithfully recorded in the realm of human behavior, he realizes we have employed the word “inexhaustible” with occasion. Thousands of orators through this period of millenniums have recalled these incidents and employed them to point truth, and yet have scarcely touched the surface of this unfathomable fountain. To give concrete instances, let me employ just a few effective illustrations drawn from history. First, from the secular world! I was present when, in the early nineties, the Baptist Young People’s Union of America was born. We were assembled in the Second Baptist Church, Chicago, for the purpose of formulating and projecting that movement. Henry Mabie, secretary of the Baptist Foreign Missionary Society, was our outstanding spokesman. He was depicting the end of the age as presented by prophecy. He took full note of the deepening darkness and consequent social, economic and even religious depressions; and then to remind his auditors that the darkest hour of night often precedes the approaching dawn, he drew the following incident from history. He said: “It was the battle of Sodowa, fought on July 3, 1861. That morning Von Moltke had saluted Prince William, saying, “ ‘This day, your highness, we’ll not only win this battle, but we will bring this inglorious war to a glorious end!’ “At noon however, the prospect was exactly the opposite. Prince Frederick Charles’ corps was withering under the hottest fire of the century, and his discouraged men were fast reeling to defeat. In the early afternoon the retreating forces heard a strange cry ringing through the ragged ranks. Stopping in their retreat to catch the words, they heard, thrice repeated, “ ‘The crown Prince has arrived with reinforcements! The crown Prince has arrived with reinforcements! The crown Prince has arrived with reinforcements!’ “That good news enheartened! Every man stopped in his tracks, faced the foe with fresh courage and hope; and before sundown, they swept the enemy to oblivion and the cry was ‘On to Vienna. The war is ended!’” Then, Dr. Mabie magnificently applied that history incident to the present discouraged state of the church, assuring them that shortly our crowned Prince will come from Heaven itself, with the reinforcement of saints and angels, and sweep the Adversary to oblivion. It thrilled the great audience! Second, turn now to sacred history, and see the Lord Jesus Himself draw upon its pages for illustration. When He wanted them to know the meaning of his own crucifixion and the healing power of the cross, He reminded them of the serpent in the wilderness which was lifted up when God’s people were dying from the venom in their veins, and He told them, as a look at that uplifted serpent was instant relief and perfect healing, so would the look of faith at the crucified Christ accomplish soul-delivery (See Numbers 21:8-9 and John 3:14-15). From these sources of secular and sacred history the minister may draw ad libitum. When it is remembered that biography is also history and that its personality makes the most potent of all appeals, the enormity of this fountain is felt! In fact, secular history is so abundant in instances of spiritual application that Christ Himself resorted to that source for illustration. Witness his call to repentance upon the part of all men by citing the case of the eighteen who were caught in the crumbling of the “Tower of Siloam.” “Think ye that they were sinners above all men that dwelt in Jerusalem? I tell you, Nay: but, except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish” (Luke 13:4-5). So the commonest event may point the most colossal truth. Science is an unlimited repository! When one remembers the multitudinous discoveries that have been made in this realm, it is but natural that every moral truth should find among them arrow-heads in abundance. If Antony of Padua pointed his lessons from the habits of animals; Whately his from zoology; and James Hamilton, from botany, it is also internationally-known that Harry Rimmer of our day has drawn upon the various departments of modern science for illustrations that have brought to his published works readers from many nations! As his many volumes abound in these, I will not attempt an enumeration! But I advise your reading his little booklet on “Flying Worms” in illustration of the new birth, or regeneration. The late A. J. Gordon of Boston, a notable Bible teacher of yesterday, has magnificently illustrated the metamorphosis that will be accomplished in our bodies when, by resurrection, they are changed from ‘vile bodies’ to ‘glorious bodies,’ by reminding us of the scientific truth that coal—the black sooty stuff that stains our fingers when lifted to the fires—and the diamond, the beautiful jewel with which the queens of earth bedeck themselves, are the same in substance. They are both carbon; but coal is carbon in humiliation, and the diamond is carbon in glory. What an apt figure, then, of the change to be wrought in the bodies of our humiliation, when, by the alchemy of God’s grace, in the resurrection, they are perfected “in glory.” Literature and art are prime contributors! Here again we enter a vast field. An adequate reason for broad reading on the preacher’s part is that he may become acquainted with this rich storehouse of material. No discovery of gold mine or even diamond field ever compared, in true riches, with what every minister has, subject to his call in the illustrative wealth of literature and art. If one desires, he may push himself back to the days of Josephus, Livy, Plato and others of the ancients; but, far this side of those worth? he will find marvelous wealth in the writings of Dickens, Hawthorne, Scott, Victor Hugo, George Eliot, Marie Corelli and others too numerous to mention, whose books abound in reports of conduct and descriptions of character that point moral and spiritual truth. Without attempting here to cite instances from each, suffice it to say that it would be difficult to surpass the truth that Christ died for me with any illustration that would exceed the words placed on the lips of Barabbas by Marie Corelli, or point the moral sufferings that must come to any minister who has indulged himself in secret sin that would surpass the description of the silent grief of Dimmesdale in Hawthorne’s Scarlet Letter; or the final judgment that will fall on ingratitude that is illustrated in the fate of Tito Melome, dying at the hands of his outraged foster father, as recorded in Beckford’s Vathek, or the character effect of admiring greatness and longing for its embodied appearance, as illustrated in the life of Ernest in Hawthorne’s “Great Stone Face.” But we desist, since there is no end to this wealth of illustration in literature. Art is almost equally prolific! What preacher, privileged a day in the Louvre of Paris, or in the great galleries of London or Florence, would not find himself freshly stocked by his studies of famous paintings and sculpture. Laocoon, caught in the coils of multiplied serpents, with heads ready to strike venom into his veins, is a wonderful illustration of what sin can do in strangling and poisoning life itself. I shall never forget the veritable thrill that came to my own soul when Gunsaulus of Chicago, addressing a brilliant company of men and women at the close of a great banquet, on occasion of the opening of the then new Chicago University said, “In the Memorial Chapel at Florence, Italy, I saw the last work of Michael Angelo. It was his attempt to reproduce, in stone, the person of Lorenzo the Magnificent. From toe to neck it was a finished work—and the form was worthy of the name, Magnificent; but just as he had entered upon bringing out the features of the face and giving shape to the head, the tools fell from the nerveless grasp, and he went to his bed, never to rise for work again. “As I looked at that unfinished form, perfect from toe to neck, but studied the unhewn block set for the creation of face and head, out of which there stared but the hideous spectre of intended features, I said in my secret soul, “ ‘This is the lesson I learn—that one may be magnificent in bodily form, but unless the higher mental and spiritual powers are enthroned, he remains but the burlesque of a man.’ ” The character depicted in the features of the twelve men who sat about the table with Christ at “The Last Supper” the famous painting by Leonardo da Vinci, have been appealed to again and again to illustrate the evidence of character in facial expression as found in the fidelity of John, the apostle nearest Jesus, and also that of Judas, the hypocrite and deceiver, while the sinner’s rejection of Jesus was never better illustrated than by the masterpiece where Christ is sadly knocking at a fast-closed door, overgrown with vines, indicating years of indifference. But we desist again, because here we are in an unlimited land. Imagination is a magic creator of illustration! At this point one can well forget the ancients and even men of medieval times. Our own day developed a master in this realm not exceeded in past centuries. I speak of Paul Rader —that strange, comet-like minister. He appeared suddenly; blazed brilliantly; was gone quickly. At his first opportunity, he packed First Baptist Church, Minneapolis. From that experience he went to be the pastor of the Moody Church, Chicago; thence to the presidency of the Christian Alliance, and finally to the business of tabernacle building. As an orator he was scarcely equalled, and his imagination, as a creator of illustrations of spiritual truth, knew no competitor. In his repeated visits to my pulpit in Minneapolis, I heard him scores of times and rarely a sermon that was not so adorned. These illustrations were often extensive, in some instances requiring as much as thirty minutes for their elaboration and application. We cite a single instance as a sample. He said, “I imagine myself the owner of a section of land, covered with timber; the great trees characterizing it have never been touched by edge of axe or teeth of saw. A newspaper reporter, learning of my possession, writes it up, paying tribute to the magnificence of my forest. A few nights later, after ten o’clock in the evening, I respond to the door bell, and am saluted by Herr Professor, from the forestry department of a great university. He introduces himself by saying, ‘Mr. Rader, I have just read the newspaper report of your magnificent timber possession, and I called to look your forest over.’ “I respond by saying, ‘Thank you; come around at ten in the morning, and I will show it to you.’ “Imagine my surprise at his response, ‘Thank you, but I shall be busy tomorrow; I should like to see it tonight, now that I am here.’ “ ‘Well,’ I answered, ‘you are welcome but how you can see it in the dark is a conundrum to me!’ “ ‘Oh sir, I have provided for all that—I have brought my pocket light with me!’ “Taking the little thing from his coat, he presses the bulb, shining it in my face, saying, ‘You see, sir, I am prepared to investigate it now.’ “ ‘Well, you are welcome, if you think you can see it in that light. It begins just back of the house here.’ “Whereupon the professor departed and walked until he bumped into a tree and logically concluded he had arrived. Taking out his pocket lamp, he shined it on the limbs overhead and made his first note upon the forest: ‘Lots of crooked rafters over-head!’ “Studying the tree into which he bumped, he pulled from it a piece of bark, rubbed it to pieces in the palm of his hand, and then made a second observation: ‘Too brittle for use as lumber!’ “Noting at his feet a limb tom from the tree by the passing storm of yesterday, he picked it up and excitedly recorded his third observation: ‘Green and growing without attachment to the ground, without roots.’ “As he threw it back to earth, he frightened a rabbit sitting near the base of the big tree, and as the creature jumped away, he got a glimpse of it from his little light, and recorded his fourth point: ‘Spontaneous life, springing right out of the ground!’ “As he shuffled his feet, he observed that he was walking on a carpet of leaves, and so recorded his fifth: ‘Lots of rubbish under foot.’ Smiling with satisfaction, he said, ‘I can make quite a book on these five chapters,’ and then departed to write a textbook on forestry.” “Now,” said Rader, “what’s the trouble with his investigation? Manifestly the small and insufficient light in which he pursued his studies. That forest can never be comprehended or properly interpreted until it is seen in the light of the sun—the great luminary that generated its seed, developed its great trees, and gave to it the growth of centuries.” “So,” said Rader, “the man who attempts to interpret the Bible in the candlelight of his own reason, instead of studying it in the light of the Holy Spirit, its Creator, is equally deficient!” Second only to Rader stands the Rev. James McGinlay as a master in this art! However, this word of caution to ministers! Don’t imagine because the geniuses of the profession can create and employ illustrations with powerful effect, that any novice or mediocrity can accomplish the same. The measure of success attained here is marked by individual ability, and the preacher of smaller proportions may find himself merely weighted by the attempt to go forth in Saul’s armor. Remember a sling and a stone in the hands of the lad were more effective than the iron encasement and hefty sword of Saul. Each minister must move within the realm of his individual competence. To imagine one’s self a Spurgeon when, like Pharaoh, he is “but a noise” is to become more nearly a laughing stock than a leader. WHAT ARE ITS SPECIAL USES? Surely among the major ends to be accomplished are these: To clarify and enforce thought. Beyond question, an illustration, if worthy of employment, not only lightens, but enlightens. By analogous reasoning it makes more plain the idea being set forth than would a mere statement of fact. In consequence, it gives edge to argument, and is, itself, commonly an explanation. To accept the suggestion of Broadus, it should not be the mere tying on of worn and faded flowers, but a beautiful blossoming of the subject under consideration. To attract and hold attention. Here we need add little more to what has already been stated. Beecher in his Yale lectures argued for the illustration as a method of introducing variety and accomplishing rest in the mind. By this he did not mean mental quiescence, but rather mental quickening. To persuade to action. The truth is that a sermon that does not eventuate in both decision and action is a signal failure. We are all familiar with the question addressed to the man who emerged from the church door at the close of the morning service, “Is the sermon done?” To which one sensibly replied, “No, the sermon is only delivered; it remains to be ‘done’!” On that very account the most effective of all illustrations used in sermonic discourse should be the final one. It should, by deliberate choice and emotional character, be exactly such as to send the hearers forth determined to enter upon the course prescribed by the preacher. Scores of times within the sixty-three years of my ministry have I put in literally hours searching for that last illustration, knowing full well that upon its employment might depend not only the power of the sermon but the destiny of immortal souls. BIBLIOGRAPHY Bryan, D. C. The Art of Illustrating Sermons (Nashville, Tenn.: Abingdon-Cokesbury Press, 1938). Webb, Aquilla. One Thousand and One Illustrations for Pulpit and Platform (New York: Harper & Bros., 1929). ======================================================================== CHAPTER 76: 06.13. CHAPTER 13: THE USE OF ALLITERATION ======================================================================== Chapter 13 THE USE OF ALLITERATION THE WORD alliteration means “The successive use or frequent recurrence of the same initial letter or sound at the beginning of two or more words,” according to the Standard Dictionary, which also cites as an example (from Motley, John of Barneveld, vol. i, ch. 1, pg. 34) this illustration, “The Spaniard poured out his wrath—calling his colleague, with neat alliteration, a poltroon, a pantaloon, and a pig.” Alliteration has played a prominent part in literature, particularly in poetry, and with that school to which Chaucer, Spenser, Swinburne, and others belonged. There are certain phrases, oft recurring in common speech, that have come out of this custom, such as “might and main,” “life and liberty,” “wrath and wickedness,” etc. That such a use of words should also take place in sermonizing is at once natural and desirable. I do not recall having deliberately decided, at any period in my professional life, to magnify alliteration, but the creation of this series on homiletics has brought vividly to my attention my own personal custom in the matter. This series itself is an illustration of the almost extreme degree to which I have adopted the alliterative method; and in a review of my publications I find that perhaps no feature of my personal book-publishing is more in evidence than the use of alliteration. Referring to this series, we find the following instances: Chapter One: I. “The Preacher,” II. “His Preaching,” III. “His Preparation.” Chapter Two: I. “The Modernist Demand,” II. “The Market Demand,” III. “The Master’s Demand.” Chapter Three: I. “Studious Habits,” II. “Strong Convictions,” III. “Complete Surrender.” Chapter Four: I. “Sound in Belief,” II. “Saintly in Behaviour,” III. “Seeing that Blessed Hope.” Chapters Five to Eight are Departures from the custom. But in Chapter Nine again we have: I. “Their Deliberate Employment,” II. “Their Decided Advantages,” III. “Their Definite Requirement.” While in Chapter Ten: I. “Parts,” II. “Production,” III. “Appeal,” constitute a return to the custom. And now in this Chapter Thirteen we feel led to alliterate: I.“Its Employment,” and II. “Its Purpose.” ITS EMPLOYMENT Concerning alliteration, notice certain facts! It was formerly popular! We have seen it to have been so concerning a distinguished school of poets; but it was also true of distinguished preachers, Dr. Chalmers being an outstanding instance. But he was not at all alone or even lonesome in the custom. Today Dr. Walter Maier, of Lutheran broadcast fame, employs it often and effectively, and my own great associate in teaching and successor in pulpit, Dr. Robert L. Moyer, in his book, The Psalm of Psalms, arranges the chapter headings after the following manner—“The Shepherd and the Supply,” “Restored Souls and Righteous Paths,” “Courage and Companionship,” etc. At a later point in this discussion we shall present its fuller defense, but we turn now to a relevant fact; namely, Of late it has been opposed. In previous chapters I have paid just tribute to two of the most outstanding homileticians of the United States; namely, John A. Broadus and T. Harwood Pattison. The first named was the notable Southern Baptist Theological Seminary professor in the latter half of the nineteenth century; and T. Harwood Pattison, a homiletician at least equally well regarded, and employed by the Rochester Theological Seminary, New York. At the feet of the first of these professors I am proud to have been a student for three years. My admiration for Harwood Pattison was such that as a young pastor in Chicago, I selected Pattison to give a series on homiletics in a Bible Conference I superintended for several summers at Pine Lake, near Laporte, Indiana, and was delighted with the scholarly and attractive presentation. When, however, I come now to review the books of these two personal favorites, I find, to my painful surprise, that neither of them approved the employment of alliteration. In fact, both spoke rather slightingly of the custom. The indexes to their volumes will show but a single reference to the subject, although I find by careful perusal it was named in other connections. In the Broadus volume we have a somewhat disparaging disposal of the subject. On page 273 of the revised volume On The Preparation and Delivery of Sermons, we read, Antithesis will frequently contribute to elegance, as well as to energy; but if used too freely, it tends to stiffness or to monotony. Alliteration was a leading peculiarity of Anglo-Saxon poetry and is still somewhat frequently employed in poetry and even in prose. Chalmers was very fond of it. In prose, especially in preaching, it should be used but rarely, and in an easy, unstudied fashion. Sentences are, of course, most elegant when smooth and flowing. But better harsh strength than smooth weakness. ... A constant succession of smooth and graceful sentences will inevitably become monotonous. As if in collaboration of thought, the Pattison volume indexes but a single reference. See page 80, The Making of the Sermon. Here alliteration is discredited again by the statement concerning the choice of words, about which the author appeals to his student orators “not to yield to the dictates of the fancy of accidental alliteration, or of mere prettiness of form.” Aside, however, from these references, which on their face seem a practical discrediting of the custom, there is no adequate argument against it presented by either. That necessarily leaves us free to pursue the subject with a view to discovering whether alliteration has real worth. As a patron of its employment, I propose its defense by presenting ITS PURPOSE To me there is a three-fold and most effective reason for alliteration in sermonizing. It can be fitted to sound interpretation. If we believed as the authors above referred to indicate, that “smooth and graceful sentences eventuate in monotony” or tend to misinterpret the meaning of Scripture, then alliteration would become a weakness indeed; but we have not found it to be so. For instance, in interpreting the text, Acts 1:8, “Ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth,” what better outline can one create than this: I.The Promise of Power “Ye shall receive power.” II.The Person of Power “After that the Holy Ghost is come upon you.” III. The Purpose of Power “Ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth.” Of the preachers of yesterday who were well known to my earlier ministry, few of them excited my admiration more than did Beecher and Brooks, but you search them in vain to find alliteration in either their main divisions or subdivisions. In fact, it is a rare thing to find that they utilize anything that one can think of, but subdivision. I recall no such outline from Brooks, and I can now think of but one approach to it from Beecher, and that occurs in his sermon, “The True Value of Morality,” where he makes the following divisions: First, Morality is in this grand sense founded upon external convenience, and not upon the requirements of things relating to a man’s whole nature. Secondly, It restrains the outplay of evil; but it does not attempt to purify and to cure the sources of evil. Thirdly, It permits heinous faults which impoverish character, and waste the heart of man. Fourthly, Morality aims to build up a man outwardly in his condition, but not inwardly in his character. Lastly, It leaves out, wholly, the world to come, and all the obligations which we owe to God, and all the relations which are established between the soul and the Saviour Jesus Christ. In studying such an outline it becomes inconceivable that alliteration be employed, but its absence from the Beecher sermons in no sense destroys either their popularity or effectiveness, all of which indicates that one faces a real problem when he attempts to find the sine qua non of sermonizing. However, there does exist in favor of alliteration certain indisputable advantages. Chief among these is aid to the preacher’s memory. This is the point of nervousness with the average preacher, and particularly with the young and inexperienced. If they eschew the manuscript, which custom I strongly favor, and speak freely either extempore or from memory, there is always a fear that the main points and even the subdivisions may not be retained; and in the emotional excitement of delivery they reach the place where the next point in the sermon becomes a mental blank. It has not been my privilege to hear in person Dr. Walter A. Maier of St. Louis, the representative of the Lutheran Laymen of America and also one of the most eloquent voices now addressing the nation by radio. I do not, therefore, know his custom of delivery, whether he reads or speaks freely, but in “listening in” I am profoundly, and, at the same time, delightfully impressed with his constant and marvelous employment of alliteration. Among the men of the day there is scarcely a more smooth preacher than Dr. Maier, and seldom one so effective; and alliteration plays a conspicuous part in his sermon preparation and delivery; If he speaks from memory, this alliterative custom would greatly aid. When a text is so interpreted that a glance at it would suggest the phraseology afore-determined, such fears are reduced to the minimum; and to refer to the instance already recited in this chapter of Acts 1:8, we find a perfect illustration of what I mean. How could any ordinary mind fail to recall those three phrases: The Promise of Power, the Person of Power, and the Purpose of Power? His glance at the text, together with the alliterative form, would certainly bring instantly the outline pre-determined. To cite another and equally effective use, let me refer to Revelation 22:12-13 and suggest the following main divisions: I.Christ’s Return “Behold, I come.” II.Christ’s Reward “My reward is with me, to give every man according as his work shall be.” III.Christ’s Reign “I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last.” It would be a timid memory indeed that feared to tackle an outline like that without notes. The alliteration itself simplifies the whole subject of memorizing outlines; and, as a rule, if the outline comes easily, the component parts of the sermon are strongly suggested. It is on that account that I have emphasized with my students in homiletics the importance of outline and also have advised alliteration when it fitted easily and effectually into sound interpretation. To be able to stand before an audience and deliver one’s soul for a full half hour, without hint of manuscript or even a scrap of notes, is not only a desirable accomplishment but becomes the most popular element in preaching. However, there are others than the pulpiteer to be considered in connection with every sermonic delivery and here again alliteration has its part to play, its contribution to make. The memory of the audience must be kept in mind. It is one thing to express well desirable thoughts; it is another and even higher thing to so voice them as to leave an indelible impression. The weakness of preaching is discoverable at this point; namely, in the amount of what was said carried away by the auditors. It is the most common of all occurrences to hear a man praise a sermon to which he has lately listened, and it is the most embarrassing of all questions to ask, “What were the main points in the discourse? What was the line of argument and upon what subjects was the minister speaking?” In nine cases out of ten your hearer is immediately nonplused and begins to apologetically explain that he doesn’t remember exactly the points made or the line of argument followed, but he did feel the inspiring impression of the speech. But when alliteration is used and succinct statements express main points, they stick; and the auditor can answer the questions above referred to, without embarrassment. For instance, on Acts 1:8, “Let me see; oh, yes, I remember now. He spoke first on the Promise of Power, second on the Person of Power, and third on the Purpose of Power.” If the man who has listened to you cannot rehearse at least some of what you said, he may yet have received profit from the soul-stirring excited by your words, but nothing like the same amount of intellectual and spiritual benefit as comes to one who retains in memory both the subject discussed and the arguments introduced in its development. A former and much prized co-laborer of mine in school work used to have a habit of listening delightedly to the compliments of those who told him how fine his sermon on such an occasion was; then he did what, to me, was almost always a delicate, if not doubtful thing, of saying, “And what was my subject on that occasion? What were the main points that impressed you?” I was present on several of these occasions when an instant flush covered the face of the questioned, and I always believed that it was as impolitic as that other question, in which certain people so often indulge themselves, “How do you do, Doctor; you know me, don’t you? You remember that I met you twenty-five years ago at the Music Hall in Philadelphia when you had your great Convention there. You can call my name, can’t you?” To answer this question I have done the most of the lying of a lifetime, but in recent years I decided deliberately to say, “No, I do not remember you,” which is always an embarrassment both to the man making the admission, and a still greater reflection upon the important person forgotten. It is equally so with sermons; consequently, so far as we can, we should produce in them features that will take a real hold upon memory itself, and create impressions that will not be too soon forgotten; and of all peculiarities of speech, there is no one that does this more effectively than the employment of alliteration. We leave, then, to the student or reader of this chapter the question of profit or loss in the employment of alliteration, but as for ourselves we are convinced that only in its abuse can be found a logical reason for rejection, while in its justifiable use there are advantages of supreme value. Perhaps a better example or even a more extensive one could not be found than is used in the Thompson New Chain Reference Bible, involving the story of the Prodigal Son in Luke 15:1-32. Thompson gives us seven steps downward and seven steps upward and states them as following, a superb instance of alliteration without straining an interpretation: Luke 15:22 The Prodigal Son Luke 15:12 Self Will Luke 15:13 Selfishness Luke 15:13 Separation Luke 15:13 Sensuality Luke 15:14 Spiritual Destitution Luke 15:15 Self Abasement Luke 15:16 Starvation Luke 15:23-24 Rejoicing Luke 15:22 Re-clothing Luke 15:20 Reconciliation Luke 15:20 Return Luke 15:19 Repentance Luke 15:18 Resolution Luke 15:17 Realization BIBLIOGRAPHY Crocker, L. G. Henry Ward Beecher’s Speaking Art (New York: Fleming H. Revell Co., 1937). ======================================================================== CHAPTER 77: 06.14. CHAPTER 14: THE DELIVERY OF A SERMON ======================================================================== Chapter 14 THE DELIVERY OF A SERMON IN PREVIOUS lectures we have spoken to you both on the preparation of sermons and the construction of a sermon; but when the sermon has been carefully prepared even to the last word, it remains only a manuscript. When it is fitly spoken, then, and only then, it becomes a discourse or sermon. Preparation, therefore, is important, but delivery no less so. A house may be completed to the last possible department, but until it is occupied it is not a home. So a sermon may be prepared meticulously, but it must be lodged in the hearts of the people to have value. You may have thoughts of the highest and most important character but, until they find expression, they are non-effective. I would say, therefore, that the effectual delivery of a sermon is no less important than its careful preparation. On this matter we must consider four points, each of which is too vital to be overlooked—THE METHOD, THE VOICE, THE GESTURES, and THE TERMINATION. THE METHOD It is commonly supposed that there are three methods of delivery: (1) Reading, (2) Recitation, and (3) Extemporary; but we add a fourth, Composite. Concerning the method of Reading: We do not favor it, and consider that it is without defense. However, it must not be forgotten that we do favor written sermons, and in our lecture on “The Construction of a Sermon” we have given the reasons. Some ministers imagine that if a sermon is to be written in full, then in order to retain the value of careful thinking and exact expression, one must read it. But not sol You have already received full value on those points in the very act of their practice. When you come to the delivery, it will be improved by your previous thought and verbal expression. Writing has much in its favor. Reading, from the pulpit, has little. On the contrary, there are serious objections to reading—the first of which is that it ties the eyes of the preacher too strictly to the manuscript. The psychological effect of preaching is, to no small extent, due to the preacher’s direct look at his audience in sermon delivery. Again, reading lacks the warmth of free delivery, and it is liable to fall into monotony of tone, and become somnolent. Still further, habitual reading makes a man afraid to undertake discourse without a manuscript, as some people are loathe to sing without both the words and notes before them; hence it unfits a man for sudden calls or important exigencies. There have been and still remain some effective preachers who read their sermons, but their number is limited; and such is the likelihood of failure that, for the average man, the risk is too great to be dared. The second method has been named Recitation, or repeating from memory the words of the manuscript. This method is rarely employed, and in our extensive acquaintance we have never known a pastor who remained for many years in one pulpit to use it. It can only be used, as a rule, by peripatetics. I heard recently a sermon that impressed me, at least, as being a perfect recitation. The language was so ornate and the quotations so well committed, and every sentence so perfectly polished, that it reminded one of the declamations of college days. The speaker was a college professor, and being connected with a school of importance and looked to as its chief advertiser, in all probability he would deliver that sermon fifty times in a year from as many different pulpits, and could afford, on that account, to commit it to memory, word for word. That process would be extremely burdensome for the pastor who is under the necessity of delivering two new sermons every week. The human memory, while a miracle of arrangement, is only in the rarest possible case competent to such a task. The evangelist may preach a sermon often enough for it to become a recitation; but he has this decided advantage—when he has mastered its last word, not by his first, but by his fortieth delivery, he has consequently reached a point where no mental effort is required to recall the exact phraseology. It comes by mere repetition; in other words, it amounts to an unconscious habit of intellect and so is freely spoken and makes no impression of declamation. The third method suggested, Extemporaneous, requires definition. The word itself would convey the impression that one was doing his thinking and his speech at the same time. In fact, we often hear it spoken of as “thinking on his feet,” vocalizing his thought; but, as a matter of fact, the average homiletician does not mean that at all. He means, as Dr. Broadus in his volume, The Preparation and Delivery of Sermons, contends, “careful mental preparation, even to the point of thinking through every idea and even mentally phrasing it; but leaving the exact language which shall be voiced until the hour and place of delivery.” There is very much to be said in favor of this method. It does habituate the minister to ready expression, and also gives him an opportunity to voice any new thought that should strike him, as he moves along in his discourse. It requires of him less time, pain, and preparation than writing or dictation. Its deficiencies we have already referred to in discussing the construction of a sermon. We may, therefore, pass the matter with brief remarks. It uniformly lacks in meticulous care of expression, such as characterizes writing or dictation. It leaves a man at the end of every sermon possessed only of what his memory retains; no manuscript deposit. It has little tendency to make for authorship. Consequently, the extemporaneous preacher may be the most popular of pulpit orators, but his memory will seldom be immortal. It cannot be truthfully written of him as of the man who writes or dictates, ‘though dead, he yet speaketh.’ Our fourth suggestion is named by some homileticians the Composite method. It consists of careful writing or dictating the entire manuscript to its last word. Then the author reads over what he has said from three to six or eight times before he appears in the pulpit, and when the hour of preaching comes, he leaves the manuscript behind, and trusts to memory. In our judgment, this is the model method! It has all the advantages that the reader has, without the disadvantage of reading. It has all the advantages of the extemporaneous speaker, without the disadvantages of the extemporaneous speech, and consequently it becomes the homiletician’s best path to popularity and permanence. Hybrid com has become the rage in Minnesota and other states. This composite method might be regarded as hybrid. On one side it has its apparent careful preparation; and on the other, free delivery: and its product is a sermonic full measure! Harwood Pattison, in The Making of a Sermon (pages 33-78), has an excellent treatise on this method. But the delivery of a sermon is not a matter of method only. It involves other points of equal import. Chief among those is THE VOICE Here men are not equally favored. Some by nature have a voice peculiarly adapted to public address; for instance, Chrysostom was called “The Golden-Mouthed.” Whitefield’s eloquence was ever the basis of complimentary remarks, and Charles Spurgeon’s tones were such that one author contends that is why his church could prosper with little music; they had music in abundance in the pastor’s tones. The human voice is one of God’s wonders. It is unlike anything known to bird or beast. The average animal is limited in range, and the average bird in note. The mocking bird has long been admired because he can imitate the sounds of his feathered fellows. Man’s peculiarity is that he can imitate any sound and is perfectly capable of producing notes unknown to the lower creation. This very fact, however, of variety in tone, while so wonderful, carries with it also certain perils. There are men who seem never to have passed through that stage of boy life that is called “change of voice,” which commonly comes with puberty. In other words, they carry into manhood the high key common to childhood, and it is a question whether that is a necessity or the result of indifference. I have in mind at the moment of this writing a young man, physically normal, preparing himself for the ministry, who, in public speech has yet a child-tone; but when he sings (being a musician), his voice is masculine—a clear indication that by an act of will power he could bring his speaking tones down and render them normal to his age. And I have in mind another man whose speaking voice is on too low a key, but who, when he sings, does so normally. I am fully convinced by the same act of will, he could, with practice, bring his voice up. We are not contending at all that one cannot be an effective minister in spite of these faults. Robert Hall was well-nigh matchless, yet he is reputed to have had a weak voice. My companion in labor forty years ago, Dr. A. J. Frost, had a deep, guttural voice, and yet he was an effective minister. What we are advocating is that one should attempt to cultivate normal tones, so that his delivery be not detracted from by a peculiarity of intonation. Modulation is quite essential! In the South where I grew up, a minister of fifty or sixty years ago, reaching the point of marked emotion in his address, would scream or howl at you. In the North where my lot was finally cast and most of my life has been spent, there is too great a tendency to modulation often approaching monotony. It would be an excellent thing, now that it is possible, for every minister to listen to his own voice as reproduced on a phonograph. He would be very much surprised, as I was, to discover that he never has heard his voice as other people hear it. The tones are not as he supposed they were at all. That is because his tones are carried to him largely by the bones and nerves of the mouth and head, whereas they reach others by the tympanum. William Jennings Bryan’s voice on the phonograph is perfectly natural to me as I listened to it; but it was not so to him, if I may judge by my own experience, and also by the testimony of physicians who understand the scientific reason for this apparent difference. Consequently the deficiencies of a voice would be more easily apprehended, possibly more readily corrected, if one heard himself as others hear him, just as one’s conduct is improved when one sees himself ‘as others see him.’ Beyond question, voice-exercise, like the exercise of the muscles, tends to strengthen. I once inquired of Homer Hammontree the explanation of Tennessee’s contribution to great singers. I cited the fact that Charlie Alexander, Homer Hammontree, Homer Rodeheaver, Charlie Butler, and others of our most famous singers had come out of the mountains of Tennessee; and I expressed the thought that possibly it was the mountain spring-water, or something of that sort, that had contributed to their musical tones. He laughingly said, “No, I have another, and I believe the correct explanation.” I said, “What is it?” He said, “It is hog-calling. Nearly every boy in the mountains has to call the hogs in for their feed, and it is a vocal exercise sufficiently regular and sufficiently extensive to strengthen the vocal chords, and I candidly believe that it has to do with the music for which Tennessee is famed.” In this connection it might be well to remember that in the Annual Hog-calling Contest held in Tennessee, it was reported in the public newspapers that where states corner on Tennessee, one man was reputed to have been heard in seven states. The explanation at which we smile is none the less scientifically suggestive! Vocal chords are unquestionably strengthened by constant exercise. I heard Caruso but once, and I watched the muscles in his throat and face, with fear that he would break a blood vessel; but I realized also the tremendous training through which those vocal chords had been put in order to make possible the marvelous and effective music. Such a strain on seldom-employed vocal chords would have meant a break in tone, and, possibly the bursting of blood vessels, but not so with those inured! The thing in which the musician surpasses is the thing in which the public speaker is compelled to be interested, because each of them has as his objective the conveying of thought in the most impressive manner. Inflection is close akin to modulation! Modulation looks to conscious control of the voice, while inflection is concerned with making it at once impressive, and yet restful. The peril of sermon-delivery is monotony. This occurs in consequence of two or three somewhat different things. One is an even tone. Scientifically it can be proved that if you are put in a strange place where there is a sound which has no variations, but is continuous, it will cause drowsiness and sleep. People often ask me how I manage to be well and sleep on trains as often as I do. To this I can answer, with utter truthfulness, “I sleep more soundly on a train than almost anywhere else. The motions and sounds of a train have in them little variety, and they lull me to sleep.” So does a monotonous preacher! But there is also another kind of monotony. It is the monotony of measured sentences —a declaration that requires a tone that rises and flies like quail for certain short distances, and then drops, to be followed by another of similar length and kindred termination! A speech made up after that manner is also inducive to drowsiness. It is a great thing to be able to whisper like a zephyr in one sentence and shake the mountains with thunderous tones in another; and the man who can do it, because the ideas expressed fit the method employed, is the orator about whom crowds gather! Remember, then, to study inflection: but even inflection, apart from pronunciation, will fail. Let no man imagine that he can mouth his words, and at the same time hold the interest of the audience. There is not more than one singer in a thousand, if so large a proportion, that is famously effective; and if they are studied, it will be discovered that here is the chief fault in both solo and choral work; namely, the lack of clear enunciation and pronunciation. The average song rendered by the average singer is a vocal exercise, and little more! There are not enough words pronounced clearly to convert the music into a message. At this point Carlton Booth of Providence, R. I., and his brother Clayton of Northwestern Schools, are among America’s most unique soloists and instructors, because they add to good tone practically perfect pronunciation and enunciation. The failure among preachers to enunciate and pronounce every syllable involved in a word is not so signal, but it is altogether too common. It is simply too bad when one has gone to the pains of preparing a discourse, well worthy of delivery, not to deliver it so as to impress its every word upon the mind and heart of the auditor. There is a further matter of first concern; namely, the reach of the voice. Where possible it should be to the last person present, e’en though he be a back-seat lover. Too many ministers disregard this matter and speak in the same tone whether in a small room with a hundred people or a large room with three thousand. Such is commonly fatal to desirable effects when the greater crowd is faced. If the speaker carefully and intelligently observes, he can very shortly tell whether everybody is getting what he says or not. To drum away for an hour, and have half a great audience hearing little or nothing, is worse than pathetic—it is pitiful and ruinous to one’s reputation. I never appear in a pulpit where a great audience must be addressed without studying carefully the reach of the first few sentences; and if I am not assured that it is to the remotest auditor, I lift the voice, both in tone and volume. ‘How shall they be saved except they hear?’ THE GESTURE It is no sine qua non! There are preachers who do not need the gesture, and there are other preachers who will need it in youth, but will not require it in advanced years. However, in both cases, these are the exceptions and not the rule. If a man’s ideas are sufficiently good, his phraseology adequately felicitous, the sparkle of his eyes and the shine of his face illuminating, he can preach an entire sermon and aside from his lips, be almost motionless, and yet profoundly influence and attract great audiences. Such is preaching at its best. There is not more than one man in a hundred, if so great a proportion, who is equal to the gestureless sermon! With the average preacher, gestures are profitably employed. The same thought that is expressed in words may be emphasized by a proper gesture. For instance, when one is declaiming and employs a phrase like “wide as the ocean,” a straight out reach of both arms and hands emphasizes the thought. When one speaks of God’s thoughts above ours, as “heaven is high above the earth,” an upward point is appropriate; or when one refers to the depths of the sea, to point a finger downward is both natural and effective. Recently I quoted the last words of the great and godly missionary, Cookman: “Hallelujah, I’m sweeping through the gates.” The language itself would almost be tame without a gesture; the sweeping of the hand upward to indicate his soul’s translation. There is such a thing, however, as monotony in gestures. Some people always employ the same ones; for instance, an uplifted finger to emphasize every point or a finger pointed straight out at the audience. That, as a monotonous tone, becomes a bore in the course of time. Gestures, when employed, should be like the striking of a hammer on the head of a nail. It should drive the thought in, and while it is commonly exercised almost unconsciously to the speaker, it is too bad when it creates another impression than that naturally meant by the words. Our friend Homer Rodeheaver illustrates that as it affects singing and time beats, by telling the story of the fellow who was leading the congregation on “When the Roll is Called up Yonder,” and on the final sentence, “I’ll be there,” ended on the downward beat! I heard recently a story of trouble between the rector and his choir. It had reached the stage where the choir solemnly filed into the loft, but when the time for singing came, they were as mute as oysters. Instantly the pastor, sensing their motive, stood up and announced the hymn for the moment, “Let Those Refuse to Sing, Who Never Knew our God,” with a gesture to the choir loft; and then, facing the audience with a sweep of his arm, said, “But children of the heavenly King may speak their joys abroad!” It is true, as an author contends, that there are certain thoughts expressed better by gestures than by words. For instance, the fingers on the closed lips is more effective than, “Don’t speak.” Toward a child, outstretched arms mean more than, “Come here,” and the finger pointed to the door better says, “Leave this room,” than language could express. So in preaching; one must study whether speech or action best voices it, and when the two should be combined. The gesture is a natural accompaniment of energy! Vehement speakers commonly employ gestures. What Billy Sunday lacked in homiletical training, he made up by personal action. There is a section of every audience that demands action. Children love it; youth commonly admire it; and even men and women of advanced years are kept on the qui vive by its employment. Too bad when the preacher becomes a mere actor. It is not best when he is no actor at all. There are times when one can afford to race about the pulpit; but there are only exceptional instances in which a point being presented justifies and even calls for such motion. To employ gesture as mere appeals to athletic fans and as a possible pew-filler is hardly becoming the dignity of the office. The author remembers the story told by the late Dr. P. S. Henson, long pastor of the First Baptist Church of Chicago. In his early life, he was pastor in Philadelphia. In his vicinity was a liberal Congregational church, the preacher of which, expatiating on geology on Sunday nights, attracted a crowd by calling attention to Nature’s variety of rocks and infinity of thought. The congregation at the Baptist Church was none too good, and one of the officers complained to Dr. Henson, and asked if he could not get up something “that would equal or surpass the geology survey.” Whereupon Dr. Henson said, “Yes, I can beat him at it! In my boyhood in Virginia I stood on my head for fifteen minutes at a time without wavering. According to modern conception, that is a sufficient length for a sermon. You do the advertising and inform the public that I will preach a sermon for fifteen minutes, standing on my head, and I will do the rest, and the place will be packed.” The officer was sensible enough to see the point, and said, “Oh, Dr. Henson, I’m off! Go on and preach the gospel, and if the people do not come in crowds, many will continue to come long after the geological show across the way has faded.” Certainly physical stunts in the pulpit should at least be kept to sacred uses, and should comport with their sacred purposes. THE TERMINATION The introduction to a sermon is important. Vastly more so is its termination! In previous chapters we have emphasized the idea that a sermon should end with the use of its most effective illustration, or the quotation from a fit poem and in a climax of interest. However, at this time I am speaking particularly of the way of terminating a sermon. It should not be dubious or long drawn out. Too often preachers, accustomed to excessive length of sermon, become concerned lest their audience should not stay with them all the way; and so they falsely encourage hope of continued interest by saying, “I come now to my last point,” which not infrequently tends to revive interest and excite expectation of a speedy end! But disappointment may await the lingering five minutes more, and the same preacher, with identically the same motive, says, “And now brethren, permit me a further remark . . . etc., etc.”! Those who think this will be the last one are somewhat amused when three minutes later the minister adds, “And in conclusion this thought. . . .” That ought to mean that the end is near—immediate; it often signifies only that it is imminent, likely to appear at any time, but possibly still remote. And there are instances where even after all these semi-promises, a preacher dares to say, “If you will but indulge me a few minutes more, I must get before you this idea,” by which time the audience has lost hope, and the preacher has also lost his audience. The termination of his sermon should be sudden; all the better if unexpected, without promise or even a hint that you are coming to the end; but always at the climax of interest. It is far better to have your audience mentally say, “Oh, I wish he had gone on!” and there are few compliments that exceed that received when people stream down to the front and say they could gladly have listened to you another half hour. When you are through, quit! Note: If one wishes to pursue the subject of delivery more fully, few men have so completely and sanely presented it as Dr. Harwood Pattison in his The Making of a Sermon. See pages 289-350. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 78: S. CHRISTIANITY VS. SOCIALISM ======================================================================== CHRISTIANITY VS. SOCIALISM By Dr. W. B. Riley, Pastor First Baptist Church, Minneapolis. “Ye that are strong ought to bear the infirmities of the weak.” If unrest is a sign of disease, then it must be admitted that there is something wrong with the present social order, and that that something relates itself to the economic question. The world is not wanting in material wealth. The very sky overhead, with its infinite stretch, is a sort of symbol of the riches beneath our feet and around about us. And yet we face a condition in which few are prospered, and the majority are poor. The exceptional man must practice strict economy; and the under-average man must, at times, know absolute want – a want that increases in proportion as he descends in the human scale. A spirit of protest against this condition is wide spread, and it has voiced itself in a multitude of forms; one of the most recent and popular of these is “socialism.” If the Standard Dictionary may be accepted in definition of this term. “Socialism is a theory of civic polity that aims to secure the reconstruction of society, increase of wealth and a more equal distribution of labor, through the public, collective ownership of land and capital, and through the public and collective management of all industries.” Its motto is “Everyone according to his deeds.” Its advocates maintain that they do not demand an absolute community of goods: nor that every individual be rewarded exactly alike: but that the sources of wealth be made public property, and each member of society permitted to share in it to the extent of his needs and his contribution to productivity. We are confident that few well-instructed socialists will raise any objection to this definition. It remains, therefore, to study the attitude of its leading advocates to this and its related questions. SOME DEFINITIONS We invite attention, first of all, to the socialistic creed, the conception of Christianity, and the evident contrast. The socialistic creed! – Let it be understood that socialism does not stand for a reform in our present economic conditions; nor does it lay any stress whatever upon the results of the regeneration of the individual; it insists, rather, upon that utter reconstruction of society, which shall take out of the hands of all professed owners, not alone their accumulated wealth but the sources and means of production, turning them over to “a true democracy” in the interests of establishing a state of society which shall be equitable and helpful, and shall make for human happiness. Prominent, says one, among the ten commandments all of socialism is this—“Look forward to the day when all men and women will be free citizens of one Fatherland, and live together as brothers and sisters in peace and righteousness.” This statement reveals the foundations of the socialistic faith, namely, that man, in his entire makeup, is almost wholly the product of environment, and that under conditions of fair temporal prosperity and fraternal treatment, he would be a good member of society and contribute his share to the ideal state. It is an emphasis upon the moral value of material forces, and the essential divinity of man. It is a plea for the idea that sin and selfishness, in their varied forms, are largely the result of the struggle for existence, the heinous effects of “man’s inhumanity to man.” In contrast to this, what is the concept of Christ? His forerunner, John the Baptist, came preaching no economic reconstruction; his remedy for the ills of the individual life scarcely touched its material side. John believed in correcting the moral center rather, and his call was to repentance.” The Christ, for whom he paved the way, employed exactly the same phrase “Repent ye,” and insisted that sin, and not poverty, was at the root of human ruin, telling men that except they all “repented” they should “all likewise perish.” If Christ had believed that poverty was the world’s curse, and that an abundance was essential to the development of the best that was in man, He would certainly have chosen that state for Himself as an example. Instead, as Dr. Haldeman, remarks, “He was born in a stable; He wore a robe that was the badge of poverty; there were times when He found difficulty in finding food; His disciples plucked the ears of corn by the wayside for Him; He had no certain dwelling place – of the foxes he said, “they have holes and the birds they have nests, but the Son of Man hath not where to lay His head.” When He died He was wrapped in offered linen, and when He was buried it was in a borrowed grave;” and never between the ox stall, where He opened His eyes to the light, and the cruel Calvary, where human hyenas closed them, did He proclaim a property standard as the basis of either personal holiness or collective happiness; or any certain measure of material success as essential to mental and moral progress. Nor did He ever, at any time or place, set these up as the true basis of the state, or the harbingers of a coming millennium. “Socialism” as we understand it, proposes to work from the outside, or from the standpoint of material comfort, in the interest of character. Christianity proposes exactly the opposite program; it corrects the inner man, believing that he will dominate his environment, change and improve the same in exact proportion as is spirit is reclaimed alike from sin and selfishness. The contrast between these theories is evident to both Christian and socialist, unless one be of that company of people who can adopt utterly opposing theories without any sense of contradiction. Mr. Robert Blatchford, editor of the “Clarion,” is easily one of the great socialist leaders of the old country. It has been claimed that his writings and his influence have made more converts to this propaganda than those of any living man; and yet Mr. Blatchford has a blunt way of speaking exactly what he thinks of, and he does not hesitate to say that as between Christianity and socialism there is a great gulf fixed. Here is a sample of his speech. “In such a world as this a man has no business reading his Bible, singing hymns, and attending divine worship. He has not time! All the strength and pluck and wit he possesses are needed in the work of real religion, and real salvation. The rest is all ‘dreams out of the ivory gate’ and ‘visions before midnight.’ Christianity degrades and restrains humanity with the shackles of original sin. Man is not born in sin; there is no such thing as sin!” These are days when we are being told that many Christian ministers are socialist. R. J. Campbell, of London, delights to have that title attached after his “Reverend” name. This same Mr. Blatchford flung the truth at Campbell when he said, “ You are the same kind of an atheist that I am, only you are still clinging to some forms and phrases of the Christian faith, whereas I repudiate the whole Christian program.” In order to particularize we call attention to certain special points in which this DIVERGENCE IS DISCERNIBLE When one thinks of “ Christianity vs. Socialism,” it presents to him a program of order vs. disorder; a program of personal merit vs. collective prosperity; a program of marriage vs. mating; and a program of Christianity vs. infidelity. We have remarked it is a program of order vs. social disorder. If one listened to every socialist speaker who appears in the street, he would imagine that there was not appoint of possible approval in the existing state. Yet in every state in this Union we have free man, – slavery is no more: free schools – education alike to the rich and the poor; free churches – places where people are invited to minge together and remember that the Lord is the Maker of them all; free presses – institutions of private gain, but in defense of the public welfare; free thought, the world has never seen a state in which a man could be infidel or Christian, ignorant or educated, patriot or anarchist, with the legal interference of any one, as he can in our land; free opportunities, evidenced in the circumstance that the poor lad of today is almost without exception the public favorite and the most prospered individual of to-morrow. It seems clear to some of us that the very individualism emphasized in this whole arrangement, inspires men to undertakings, spurs them to great endeavors, produces in them finer spirits, working out for them superior character to anything that could ever be accomplished by that collectivism, which, if it does not lose the individual in the mass, seeks by every power at its command to reduce him to the common level, while proposing to lift that level, at no point, except one of common material prosperity. Hence the second remark; it is a program of personal merit vs. collective prosperity. We cannot blame any man for seeking to save his wife and children from poverty, hardship and distress. The Christianity of Christ teaches that “he that provides not for his own” especially for “those of his own household, is worse than an infidel, and hath denied the faith.” But it would be foolish to suppose that the greatest injury that befalls an infant is poverty of birth, or hardship of breeding. All history is replete with illustrations of the Scripture “ It is good for a man that he bear the yoke in his youth” and the noblest names on the roll of immortal fame are often those that knew no personal, domestic or social comforts in the days of their childhood. It is a pathetic thing, we grant, to think of little Booker Washington under the lash of a white task master whose spirit was many dyes blacker than Booker’s skin, and of him, running away, determined to get an education and compelled at night to sleep under a boardwalk both to escape the arrest of the possible policeman, and dampness of falling dews. It is hard to think of the menial service he was compelled to render in order to keep himself in touch with an educational system: and yet if Booker does not regret it, but looks back upon it all thanking God for the very hardships that taught him how to be a good soldier, why does another feel the necessity of starting up to insist that Booker would have been a better man had he been born to some affluence, or at lead laid up in the lap o comparative ease. The most of us are familiar with the life of Abraham Lincoln. We know the pinching poverty the lad endured, and the inadequate house where he spent his childhood, and the long hours of work and the little pay which characterized his youth, and the poor opportunists of education provided in the days of the same. And yet who believes that Abraham Lincoln would have been as he was, the first of all Americans, had he found his lot cast in the lap of comparative fortune, and his education in a state that knew no slavery, and one whose inhabitants never felt the pinch of poverty, or knew the meaning of material hardship? Candidly, we believe the biggest fool of modern society is a man who has never learned “whatsoever state he is, therewith to be content” but whose partial success has incited him a selfish greed, and with the swagger of the newly rich, boasts that his babies shall never endure the hardships in which he was schooled. As the great Joseph Parker said, “Such men dismiss the only son to school in dainty clothing from head to foot, without a stain on his little hands, or a sign or that they never knew rough uses. They call him beautiful, and draw attention to his form an air and mein, and chuckle over his fair prospect.” But as Parker remarks, “Better had he been born in the work house,” since “ it is good for a man that he bear the yoke in his youth.” And they ought to know it, for you father, exchanged sweat for every mouthful of bread known to your boyhood, and yet how you enjoyed that bread. You had to run errands before breakfast, but you came back with a blessed an appetite, whereas your own pampered child comes late to breakfast, with no taste for his food, and you say he is ill, and call a Physician and exiete the sympathy of their neighbors, when it is your own nonsense. “A man’s life consisteth not in the abundance of the things which he possesseth,” but rather by the spirit which is in him, and as spirit is not refined always by first class conditions, but like the edge of the knife receives its best on the grinding stone. Any system that does not propose to test the individual and proved him, and then reward him according to his merit, will make neither will the collective nor for the individual good; and while we admit that there are material inequalities for which somebody will go to judgment, and there is unfair treatment of one’s fellows, for which God will call men into account; and while we believe that a great majority of modern governments have legislation in behalf of the rich against the poor, still we cannot join in the cry of those who would call society to a column level, for the very simple reason that we know that the variety in the nature and appetites and plans and purposes of man would destroy that level again, and throw up the same mountains of advantage for some, and valleys of disadvantage for others, before the day was down. Take Australia in illustration. It is one of the newer countries of the world; for a time the tide of population was toward it, as it is toward every new and rich land; but “socialism” obtained, and there came a time when the public offices were and its hands, and private enterprises were stamped out, for socialism prevailed. From the day in which this occurred in certain Provinces the immigration ceased, and more people left them than came in. Victoria, the province in which it had the most complete sway, gave up in one year 112, 500 inhabitants, and Western Australia, where the state took over one enterprise after another, saw leave it-capitalist and laboring man alike-to the extent of 130, 000 per annum. “The proof of the pudding is in the eating,” and it is unwise for the philosophy of today to forget the history that was made of this yesterday. Far more serious, still, is the philosophy of marriage vs. mating. These are days in which the street orators, certain affinity artists, and some great University professors are telling us that the Ten Commandments are out of date, and that the social codes of the past have no more sacredness or binding authority for the modern man than the customs of the anthropoid ape should have for his human educated descendant. But let it not be forgotten that in the judgment of the Founder of Christianity the moral codes of Scripture are binding, and none more so than the sacred tie of marriage. It was Jesus who reminded his auditors that God “are in the beginning made them male and female, and said, For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh” and it was Jesus who insisted that this relation could never be broken save for that single cause which, of itself, breaks the marriage tie. And from that day of Christ until now, Christianity has contended for the sanctity of marriage, the sanctity of a home, the sacredness of the family; and wherever it has obtained, these have been pillars of the state. Some socialist boldly take issue with Christ concerning the matter, and socialism itself, pushed to the legitimate ends of its own reasoning, must abrogate and he even repudiate, the marriage tie. Among infantile and savage races the struggle is not so much for existence as it is for personal prowess and the possession of coveted women. The latter are looked upon as just a positive prize as property, and certainly, with good occasion. It is not unnatural therefore, that the socialistic theory should propose a collectivism here also, and advocate free love, thereby making children the wards of the state, instead of sons and daughters of the home. And this it has done again and again. “The Prophetic news” prints the resolution adopted by the Socialistic Alliance and it reads after this manner: “The Socialistic Alliance declares itself atheist; demands the abolition of all worship, of marriage, of classes, and of the right of inheritance. Socialism is the only remedy for the ills of mankind.” Mr. H. G. Wells, noted socialist, speaking of marriage, says, “The socialist no more regards the institution of marriage as a permanent thing that he regards a state of industrial competition as permanent,” and he assigns his reason, “Socialism repudiates private ownership. Socialism in fact, is the state family; the old family of the private individual must banish before it, just as the old waterworks of private enterprise, or the old gas company.” The great Bebel confirms this position. Speaking as a socialist, he said, “Marriage must be abolished, like private property. Human beings must be in a position to act as freely in regard to the union of the sexes as in regard to any other instance; no one should have to give an account of himself, or herself; and no third person should have the slightest right to interfere. The reproduction of the race is a function that should be entirely under the hand of the community and perfectly free. Woman cannot emancipate herself, until she is free from the so-called parent, husband and children.” It may be said well of this, that “these are the opinions of men who are notable, but who are atheistic in tendency, and consequently they cannot be regarded by that more Christian element in the modern socialistic movement.” But the fact is that logic is with these men; and the very same reasoning that would share all the sources of wealth equally among the people according to the deeds of each, and also according to the needs would demand eventually that most prized of all wealth, - woman’s love; and in order to equal rights – free love, as the inexorable conclusion. We do not hesitate to say that this is “a doctrine of devils,” calculated to degrade men and women to a level with the beasts of the field; and calculated to result in a new savagery; in the struggle of which only the most blood-thirsty and lustful and large muscled would survive; and that as for oppression, the present order would not compare with that which would be the inevitable product of such a philosophy when pushed to its legitimate end. And then as we have said it is a program of religion vs. infidelity. Jesus Christ acknowledged God the Father, set men the example of worship, and made faith in God the ground of salvation; the basis of all blessing; the harbinger of all hope. The Socialistic Alliance declares itself atheistic; that is its first article of faith. Bebel writes, “The idea of God must be destroyed; atheism is the true root of liberty, equality and fraternity.” Our objection to this is more practical than philosophical. As to whether one theory or another is sustained, it would not make so much difference if it only amounted to a debate, and a decision of judges as between competing orators. But if it be a difference as great as that between sin and holiness, sorrow and happiness, ignorance and education, lost and love, death and life, hell and heaven, then it is worth while to contend. And some of us believe that James Russell Lowell was right when he said: “The worst kind of religion is no religion at all; and men living in ease and luxury, indulging themselves in the amusement of going without religion, may be thankful that they live in lands where the Gospel they neglect has tamed the beastliness and ferocity of men, who, but for Christianity might have long ago have eaten their carcasses like the South Sea Islanders, or cut off their heads and tanned their hides like monsters of the French Revolution. When the microscopic search of scepticism, which has hunted the heavens and sounded the sea to disprove the existence of a Creator, has turned its attention to human security, and has found a place on this planet ten miles square where a decent man can live in decency, comfort, and security, supporting and educating his children unspoiled and unpolluted – a place where age is reverenced, infancy respected, manhood maintained, womanhood honored, and human life held in due regard – when sceptics find such a place ten miles square on the globe, where the Gospel of Christ has not gone and cleared the way, and laid the foundations and made decency and security possible – it will then be in order for the sceptical literati to move thither and ventilate their views. But as long as these very men are dependent upon the religion which they discard for every privilege they enjoy, they may well hesitate a little before they seek to rob the Christian of his hope, and humanity of its faith, in the Saviour, who alone has given to men that hope of eternal life which makes life tolerable and security possible, and robs death of its terrors and the grave of its gloom.” A few words then on THE SOCIAL REDEMPTION and we conclude this discourse. “Ye that are strong ought to bear the infirmities of the weak.” But how shall the favoured be brought to believe it? And more important still, how shall the stronger be brought to practice it? Not by legislation! Acts of Parliament have proven themselves powerless as against selfish greed; and the laws of Congress and Senate are alike forgotten by the sinful. The social redemption of the world is not a political problem; it is a religious one, and apart from God in will never be accomplished, for men, unaided by the Divine providence, reveal poor fraternity toward one another. The social redemption depends then, first upon moral improvement rather than material progress. You do not change a man’s nature by throwing all the sources of wealth into one great corporation and telling him he is master member of it. The corporate masters of the world, surrounded by beauty, advantaged by education, catered to by the church, controlling government itself, are not angels of holiness; many of them are devils. Nor indeed has anybody ever suspected them as being the happiest class of humankind. One might read Begbie’s “Twice Born Men” and imagine that the slums of London had all of its sin, but he would be a fool to so conclude. As Robertson writes, “Kelvinside is no better off than the Cowcaddens; hell is as rampant in the aristocratic, perfumed drawing rooms of the West End as in reeking beer cellars of the West End.” The great change needed in men is not so much in their circumstances as in their character. When their natures are changed they will alter their environment; when there natures are changed they will become brotherly; when their natures are changed the stronger will help the weak; when their natures are changed even adversities will be made to contribute to progress, and hardship to the songs of praise, and hellish experience to heavenly aspirations. Christ knew all of this; Christ insisted upon an individual regeneration, rather than upon an economic reconstruction. “Ye must be born again” was His slogan for social redemption. He knew perfectly well that a new man would do new things, and that the old things would pass away; but if He kept the old man and created about him new environment he would spue his poison into it and the second state of society would be even worse than the first. Herbert Spencer was right. “There is no political alchemy by which you can get golden conduct out of leaden instincts.” The simple truth is, the greater the material prosperity of a people, the greater their moral decline. All the money in the world, many times multiplied and so evenly divided that the poor would be unknown, would reduce misery in nothing, if immorality reigned. Its effects are the most dire, the most deadly; the most damning! The first step, therefore, to be taken in the social amelioration is the moral salvation of a man. The last step needful to social happiness is personal holiness. Let me bring you an illustration that amounts to a scientific proof of this position. One of the most remarkable books coming from the press in many a month is that by Harold Begbie, entitled “Twice Born Men.” He cites the cases of a dozen men, fished from the social sewers of the great city of London, and made respectable members of society by a little Salvation Army lass, known to her admirers as “The Angel Adjutant.” Before conversion they were the most wretched and suffering lot; after conversion, they prospered, every one. Among them was the plumber, the boy who had a bad start in life, but who at sixteen years of age was shrewdly educated in the school of hardship, and had finished his apprenticeship as a plumber, coming into an occupation which rendered him a splendid wage and put him in a position to steal as much daily as he earned. But this double source of wealth hardly sufficed to satisfy his craving for drink, and in the course of time he took the furniture from his home, the clothes of his own little children, and again and again the very tools by which he earned his bread, and traded them for additional drams. His poor starving wife lost all heart, his little children learned to scuddle under the bed at his approach, and yet he went on receiving daily a large wage, but indulging his appetite to a point where he himself scarcely felt the need of food, and the members of his family seldom saw any. One day his wife entered the public house and begged him to come home. The drinking mates about him said, “We wouldn’t permit our old woman to follow us about like that.” He ordered her to “get out,” as if he was speaking to a dog. She didn’t move as swiftly as he wanted and he threatened to kill her. Seeing that even that had not sent her at once home, he said, “For God’s sake woman go. If you don’t…I’ll…sign the pledge.” To which she hotly replied, “You have done that often enough; and wetted it every time.” Strange enough that sentence brought him to his senses. He knew the truth of it! He knew that if he signed it, he couldn’t keep it. He knew that drink was his controlling demon. He knew that it had dehumanized him. That very night he went after a former chum, who had been converted and joined the Salvation Army. He said, “Charlie, I want to get out of what I am. Can I do it?” “Not alone,” said the other. “Tell me, for Christ’s sake, how?” “Do you mean it?” the converted man questioned. “Yes,” said the plumber. “I was never more in earnest than now.” “Well, then,” said the friend, “You have just got to get down and tell God what you told me; that you are up agin’ it, and that He’s got to help you, or you are doomed and will shortly be damned, and you have to do it now.” The plumber knelt and poured out his heart in petition. He rose dazed, confused, shaken. He was trembling like a leaf! He promised to go to the Salvation Army meeting that night. And then he left his friend’s room and went out into the streets alone. He knew something had happened inside him. The whole outside world reflected it. The pavements shone like gold; the horizon was a haze of bright light; the leaves of the trees looked like hands waving a welcome to him. He was so happy he did not understand himself. He was positively afraid that this great joy might all of sudden jump from him. That night he made his public confession and rose the next morning for the first time in his life without an appetite for alcohol and went to his work with a light heart. The mates noticed the change, and began to jeer him. “Have you joined the salvationist, Alf?” “Ain’t you dry?” “No!” “Wouldn’t you like a half a gauge?” “No!” “Found Jesus, eh?” they said with a sneer. When they couldn’t tempt him to drink then they set about brow-beating; they mocked, and jeered and insulted. They profaned in his presence, they descended into dirty filth and slime in their speech. They have the liquor man ran him out an unpaid bill, to remind him of his previous conduct. They raised a row when he attempted to sing a religious song; then they offended his ears by singing in his presence the dirtiest one they could bethink. Finally when they found they could not move him they went in a body and demanded his discharge; and he was cashed out. For six long months he tried to find a place as a plumber, but they had him blackballed and no man dared to take him on. For all this time his income was so small that the wife and children could hardly live, and the only thing that made it endurable was the fact that “Father kisses mother now, and is kind to the children.” One day he quit the city and tried what he could do in the country, but the farmers looked him over and shook their heads, and in a deep gulch beside the country road, he pushed his knees into the mud and clay, folded his hands across his breast and with haggard face, uplifted, or three cried, “Oh, God don’t forsake me! You know I love you and I am going to do my best.” Then he pulled out his pocket a little old Bible, the Salvationist had given him, and he read it earnestly and long and rose again more determined than ever. He went back to the city and hired out as a street sweep, and an occasional job in the parks and took the lessened wages of the common laborer. It was a hard step for him; but he said, “It is all that is open, and if God will help me I can with this income be happy. And Begbie says “When I entered his home it was a neat little house. There was a carpet on the floor and comfort in every appointment.” Speaking of the pictures he had hung on the walls he said, “You know, I used to hang pictures on my wife’s face, and they were heart-breaking to look upon. I have taken those off, and smile come instead since I have purchased some for the walls.” Every day his eldest little girl goes to meet him; the very child that used to run under the bed to escape his brutal scowl or blow. His is a model little home and the man’s face is a Te Deum. His gratitude to God, his enthusiasm for conversion, his certain conviction that it is only religion that can reform the individual or help the state, make him a tremendous worker among the lost, and a wholesome friend of the unhappy. I cannot refrain from agreeing with Begbie’s conclusion, “Surely this story of the plumber, narrated in a few words of print, must bring home to the politicians and sociologist who are really acquainted with the social conditions of modern life, the great truth that in the Christian religion is the one great hope of regeneration, the one certain guarantee of a noble posterity; and there is really nothing else.” ======================================================================== CHAPTER 79: S. DIVINE HEALING ======================================================================== Divine Healing “Is any sick among you? let him call for the elders of the church; and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord: And the prayer of faith shall save the sick, and the Lord shall raise him up; and if he have committed sins, they shall be forgiven him. Confess your faults one to another, and pray one for another, that ye may be healed. The effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man availeth much.” (James 5:14-16). TO properly interpret this text, or better still, not to interpret it at all, but to accept it for what it says—to believe it because God has uttered it—is to preach what many eschew as false. It requires no special courage to condemn the faiths that one’s own folks condemn; but to set up as Scriptural what has long been overlooked by one’s own people is to bring upon the speaker criticism, and, often, even rebuke. And yet no man is quite so safe in standing firmly by the text of Scripture as is the preacher, the first article of whose denominational faith reads like this: “We believe that the Holy Bible was written by men divinely inspired, and is a perfect treasure of heavenly instruction; that it has God for its Author, salvation for its end, and truth, without any mixture or error, for its matter; and is the supreme standard by which all human conduct, creeds, and opinions should be tried,” I should hesitate for a long time to overthrow any dogma that had the support of a few sacred texts, hut to cut the cable of tradition and set sail by the chart and compass of God’s Word is always a safe course for a, believing soul. “To the law and to the Testimony; if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them!” And if those who hold another opinion “speak not according to this Word, it is because there is no light in them.” To the text then: “Is any sick among you? let him call for the elders of the church; and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord: And the prayer of faith shall save the sick, and the Lord shall raise him up; and if he have committed sins, they shall be forgiven him. Confess your faults one to another, and pray one for another, that ye may be healed. The effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man availeth much.” Three great truths, with their minor and constituent suggestions, stand out in it, Sickness is Real First, the Scriptures speak of sickness as real. The Old Testament and the New know nothing of the modern “illusion” theory. “Behold, thy father is sick”: was said of Jacob (Genesis 48:1). “And the Lord struck the child that Uriah’s wife bare unto David, and it was very sick”, is said in 2 Samuel (2 Samuel 12:15). “And I Daniel fainted, and was sick certain days” Daniel says (Daniel 8:27), These three samples of Old Testament statements might be followed by fifty passages out of that part of the Word that uses the same expression “sick”, and never once suggests that it is not a substantial fact, a bitter experience. In the New Testament we read how “a certain man was sick, named Lazarus”, and to Jesus they said, “Lord, behold, he whom Thou lovest is sick.” And “when Jesus heard that” He did not say, “This is not sickness, but a delusion.” But He did say, “This sickness it is not unto death, for the glory of God”. All through the New Testament Christ goes healing the sick, and never once does He explain to them that they are not sick, but are suffering from an “illusion.” On the contrary, it is reported that they were sick and that He “healed all that were sick”, and “oppressed of the devil” (Matthew 8:16; Acts 10:38) The Scriptures teach that sickness is real and to deny that is neither scriptural nor reasonable. The unreasonableness of the “illusion” theory appears at once in the face of a story I heard a few years since. A gentleman down in the southern part of this state was sick. The wife—a Christian Scientist— met on the street by a neighbor who said, “Your husband is sick?” “Oh, no,” she replied, “he only thinks he is sick.” The small boy of the family heard the mother’s answer. Three days later the same neighbor met him on the street and said, “How’s your father?” To which the youth replied, “He thinks he’s dead!” The Scriptures commonly attribute sickness to Satan. Present-day preachers commonly attribute it to God. It would be well for those of us who stand in the pulpit to study the Scriptures upon the subject of sickness, and cease maligning our Father in Heaven who is not disease, but is health instead. In all the cases of sickness reported in the Bible, I could count on my fingers those instances for which God assumes the responsibility. Miriam was smitten by God of leprosy; David’s son was smitten of the Lord; Herod was smitten of God and there are a few other instances. These are exceptions to the rule; they are dire judgments against sins. Satan is back of the ordinary sickness and suffering. Job and his wife alike supposed that God had smitten him with loss of children, of property, and with loathsome disease. But the Scriptures expressly teach that Satan was back of the whole business. In the New Testament it is said of Christ that He cast out the evil spirit in one, and compelled the “dumb and deaf spirit” in another to come out; and out of the lunatic He cast out the evil spirit. The woman who had an infirmity of eighteen years, He speaks of as one hound by Satan to these many years. And then the general assertion is made that He healed all that were sick and “oppressed of the devil”. When my children were small and suffering from sickness it was impossible for me to keep my conception of God, as a God of goodness and of love, and yet believe that He was afflicting the innocent little ones with dread disease. That the devil would delight is such business, is just like him; and so when I found them suffering I was not surprised, for Satan is “the god of this world”, including the flesh. Along with this unscriptural teaching that God is the Author of disease is a common assertion that sickness is a means of grace. Those who say this remind as of the Scripture, “Whom the Lord loveth He chasteneth, and scourneth every son whom He receiveth” (Hebrews 12:6). The son in my house that I loved best. perchance, I chastened oftenest; and yet I never put disease upon him, nor could I have, so long as a father’s heart was in my breast. Shall men be tatter than God? Is it a means of grace? Are the sick people of this world, as a rule, its sweetest spirits, its most enthusiastic Christians? May, verily, the majority of them, I believe, are soured by their experience, and lose heart and hope in consequence. Impatience and selfishness are their common traits. There are beautiful exceptions, but that is the rule. Do we believe it to he from God, and a means of grace? Then why on earth do we send for a doctor to get us well as shortly as possible? Do we prefer health to holiness? You people who contend that it is a means of grace, why don’t you encourage sickness for the sake of spiritual growth? I personally, I have not found it to be a means of grace, and I do not believe it to be from God, and hence I have no hankering for unhealth. I feel about the sick-bed as the colored boy did about his place on a Southern plantation. Before the slaves were freed, he fled North. Reaching Boston, he took refuge with an abolitionist, who fell to talking with him and said, “Didn’t you have a good master in the South?” “Yes, sah.” “Did he let you sleep it) the house?” “Yes, sah.” “Did he give you a good bed?” “Yea. sah,” “Give yon plenty to eat?” “Yes, pah1’ “Well, What did yon want to run away from him then for?” “Look hea’h, Boss,” the black: boy replied, “if you thinks you wants the place, it’s open to you.” And that’s what I have to say concerning the sickbed. I believe it to he from Satan, as a rule, and so the Scriptures teach. An old writer says. “The Lord often sharpens His saints on the devil’s grind-stone,” and concerning this Dr. Gordon adds, “We admit the truth most fully, hut we do not, therefore, advise that the grind-stone be set up as a part of the furniture of tile Lord’s House.” The Lord may use sickness for the good of man, for He makes “all things work together for good”. Sometimes God has made sin to work our salvation, “What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound? God forbid” (Romans 6:1-2). Recently I have known two men whose salvation has resulted from the bitter experience of sin and its consequences. Shall we Sanctify sin and sickness into ordinances of God? By no means, lest we make? God the minister of each. Christ is offered in the Word as the sickness-bearer. The Hebrew in Isaiah 53:4-5 reads: “Surely He has borne our sicknesses and carried our sorrows. “But He was wounded for transgressions. He was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon Him; and with His stripes we are healed”. In Matthew’s Gospel—Matthew 8:16-17 we read: “When the even was come, they brought unto Him many that were possessed with devils: and He cast out the spirits with His word, and healed all that were sick: “That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by Esaias the Prophet, saying, Himself took our infirmities, and bare our sicknesses”. Commenting upon this, Dr. Gordon remarks, “The yoke of His Cross, by which He lifted our iniquities, took hold also of our disease, so that it is in some sense true that as God made Him to be sin for us, who knew no sin, so He made Him to be sick for us, who knew no sickness.” God’s Prescription for Sickness is Anointing and Prayer The elders, by request of the sick, shall anoint. “Is any sick among you? let him call for the elders of the Church: and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord”. You may ask, “Where arc the ‘elders’?” And I am compelled to answer that, at this point. Baptist churches and others have likely departed from the Scripture, and today the deacons are doing the work that the elders were originally appointed to do, while the deacon’s office is filled by men flamed trustees. The early Church had as its officers—the pastor, or bishop, elders and deacons. Now iti my denomination--the Baptist—we have the pastor, deacons, and trustees. The deacons in such churches perform largely the same office as the elders in the New Testament Church; while the trustees have been assigned the work that gave rifle, originally, to the appointment of deacons. So I reckon my deacons as the elder? in my church. According to this text; they are not to hunt out the sick, but sire to respond to the request of the sick. For three centuries after Christ that was the universal custom. Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Tertullian, Origen, Clement, and other? tell us of cases of devils cast out, of tongues given, of poison failing of its effects, and of the sick raised to health in answer to prayer, finch authors as Water land, Dodwell, and Marshall insist that miracles of healing did not fail until the rise of the Catholic Church, and we know from history that since that time they have appeared among God’s most devout people—the Waldenses, Moravians, Huguenots, Friends, Baptists, and Methodists, not to speak of the experience of the Scotch Covenanters, Knox, Wishart, Livingstone. Welsh, Baillie, Peden, Craig; as, also, with George Fox, the father of Quakerism, and our own Baptist fathers, Powell, Knollys, and Jessey; and these were men that followed the letter of our text, The “oil” here is the symbol of the Holy Ghost; and is applied as such. It is hardly medicinal, far if God is any sort of a physician, He is not a quack who would prescribe oil for all diseases, In the Old Testament and in the New, olive oil was used for anointing and, almost without exception, as a symbol of the Holy Ghost. The fact that the elders, and not physicians, were to apply it, makes this view the more reasonable, and the additional words, “And the prayer of faith shall save the stick”, puts beyond dispute the thought that the oil had any other significance than symbolizing the Spirit. Lange, one of the greatest of Bible students and scholars, commenting on Mark 6:13. and they “anointed with oil many that were sick, and healed them”, says, “Oil here is simply a symbolic medium of the miraculous work, and that the anointing was a symbol of the bestowing of the Spirit as a prerequisite condition of healing.” Prayer and confession were the essentials to restoration. Five times in as many verses here “prayer” is divinely appointed. “Is any among you afflicted? let him pray”, “is any sick among you? let him call for the ciders of the Church; and let them pray ever him”, “The prayer of faith shall save the sick”. “Pray one for another, that ye may be healed”. “‘The effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man availeth much”. Prayer! Prayer! Prayer! Prayer! Prayer! The most of us never stop to pray when our people are taken ill. We have professed to believe in God, and insist that what He says in the Scripture is so, but how easily we forget “Whatsoever ye shall ask of the Father in My Name, He may give it you” (John 15:16); “That if two of you shall agree on earth as touching any thing that they shall ask, it shall he done for them of My Father which if in Heaven” (Matthew 18:19); and even the more specific promises; “And these signs shall follow them that believe: * * they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover” (Mark 16:17-18). When I make this plea, I am not speaking against physicians, but I am speaking for God. I am not even saying that I would not, under any circumstances, call a physician; but I am saying that I have a scriptural warrant for prayer. It is all right for the unbelieving world to make their first appeal to human help, it is all wrong for the followers of Jesus Christ to make their last appeal to Divine help. I have found Christian physicians—friends of the doctrine of Divine healing. One of the first physicians in the city of Chicago, a man who was; prominent in two medical institutions, one of them famed the world around, said to me years since, that the Scriptures plainly taught that God would raise the sick ill answer to prayer; and at his request, I went into one of those institutions twice to speak to the medical students from this text. As God’s men and women, we have not begun to understand the power of prayer. And confession is also essential. “Confess your faults one to another”. We readily understand the necessity of that. Crying to God is not praying! The man who has sin in his heart might cry to God forever, and receive no answer. “Beloved, if our heart condemn us not, then have we confidence toward God” (1 John 3:21). She had had with a step-mother, and the bitter things that had been said. We sent for the woman. Mutual confessions were made, and “the peace of God, which passeth all understanding” possessed her, and her prayers, after that, availed for peace and grace. Prayer and confession, they are “Divine appointments. God’s Promise is Restoration and Forgiveness The Scripture plainly says, “The prayer of faith shall save the sick”. Mark you, it is not the oil that you use, but the prayer of faith. It is not supposing that sickness is an “illusion” that is to save, but “the prayer of faith.” It is not conversing with departed spirits that saves, but “the prayer of faith”. Blessed the man who can make “the prayer of faith”. That is a mighty tribute that Paul pays to Abraham, lie “believed Gad, end it was counted unto him for righteousness” (Romans 4:3). To believe— that is the climax of Christian blessedness.. To believe God—that is truly the divinest of all Human accomplishments. Russel Conwell, in his life of Charles Spurgeon, says: “There are now living and worshipping in the Metropolitan Tabernacle, hundreds of people who ascribe the extension of their life to the effect of Mr. Spurgeon’s personal prayers. They have been sick with disease, and nigh unto death: he has appeared, kneeled by their beds and prayed [nr their recovery. Immediately the tide of health returned, the fevered pulse became less, the temperature was reduced, and all the activities of nature resumed their normal functions, within a short and unexpected period.” The success of our own A. J. Gordon in this experience. the blessings that were upon the petitions of A. B. Simpson, and the wonderful things that have come into the work of many others, have, in my judgment, one explanation—they were men who “believed God”. But I want you to notice the next sentence, “and the Lord shall raise him up”. The woman who comes to me saying that, as a medium, she can accomplish health, incites a reply that “if so, you must do it through Satan’s power, for God has never given this to mortal man. He alone has this power.” The newspapers used to speak of Dr. Dowie, “the Divine Healer”. They used to apply a kindred term to Dr. Cullis, “the Faith-cure Man”; and to a multitude of others whose claims have better or poorer foundations. But such men as love the Scriptures reject instantly, and almost with insult, having any such abilities assigned to them. When Peter and John, in the Name of Jesus Christ, had spoken the word of healing to the lame man at “the Beautiful gate of the Temple”, we read: “All the people ran together unto them in the porch that is called Solomon’s greatly wondering. “And when Peter saw it, he answered unto the people, Ye men of Israel, why marvel ye at this? or why look ye so earnestly on us, as though by our own power or holiness we had made this man to walk”? (Acts 3:10; Acts 3:12) Some of the Lord’s people seem to think that ii one teaches the doctrine of “Divine Healing,” he assumes to himself some peculiar “power of holiness.” but Peter utterly repudiated the thought, “as though by our own power or holiness we had made this man to walk”? “The God of Abraham, and of Isaac, and of Jacob, the God of our fathers, hath glorified His Son Jesus; * * “And His Name through faith in His Name hath made this man strong, whom ye see and know: yea, the faith which is by Him hath given him this perfect soundness in the presence of you all” (Acts 3:13; Acts 3:16). “We do not deny that Theosophy has its healing. We do not question that healing has come out of Spiritualism; nor can we doubt that Christian Science has seen much of physical improvement and health. But we say this, that any system that does not conform its teaching to the truth in God’s Word, must explain its healing upon some other ground than that of the intervention of the Divine One. He would not, He could not cooperate with error. The author of sickness, even Satan, it he could, by associating healings with heterodoxy and all error, deceive God’s people and lead them into darkness—would delight himself in so doing. We read in the Word that “Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light”, and would “deceive the very elect”. If we be men of God, our faith ought to be firmly grounded in the Word of God. What it does not teach, we dare not accept; what it plainly teaches, we dare not reject. And more blessed still, He who heals the sick, forgives sins. “And if he have committed sins, they shall be forgiven him”. Physical health is it good thing. Second to a saved soul. I count of consideration a sound body and a balanced mind, which is health. But it is second. The first thing in importance, the thing all-essential in importance, the thing without which life is a failure, the thing in the lack of which death is doom—is sins forgiven and the soul saved. Divine healing rests in Divine love, “God is love”. “If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins” (1 John 1:9). There is no way in which to put God to pain, more effectually, than to call into question His Spirit of love, or disposition to forgive. Henry Moorehouse was in Dublin one day, when a friend asked him to go and see an old lady who was in great trouble. He found the poor old woman in a modest cottage, rocking herself to and fro, and moaning as if her heart would break. Moorehousc asked her what the trouble was and she answered, “My boy has broken my heart,” and then explained, “You must know, sir, that he went away and has done things that he thinks are wrong, but L could forgive him that, if only he would let me. But here is a letter that breaks my heart”; and she picked it tip and began to read and finally came to this sentence, “Dear mother, if you can never forgive me for my sins, don’t curse me.’’ Then she broke out, “I never knew how much I loved him until he went away, and now to think lie should say, ‘Mother don’t curse me.’ That breaks my heart.” She saw in that sentence the thought that she might refuse to forgive, and then, “curse him”; therein was the sorrow. It must be an infinite sorrow to the infinite heart of God for the man, in whose behalf He has given His Son, to doubt that He will forgive. Don’t do it, my friend! Come back to God, and come now, for the promise is, “Him that cometh to Me I will in no wise cast out”, and the invitation, “Come unto Me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest”. 1 heard once the cries of a woman who died in the home where we boarded. For many days before her death she cried for peace of mind, but none ever came. At last she told me of a trouble. ======================================================================== Source: https://sermonindex.net/books/writings-of-w-b-riley/ ========================================================================