========================================================================
  WRITINGS OF GEORGE H LANG
  by George H. Lang
========================================================================

A collection of theological writings, sermons, and essays by George H. Lang,
compiled for study and devotional reading.

  Chapters: 63

------------------------------------------------------------------------
  TABLE OF CONTENTS
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    1. 01.00. FIRSTFRUITS AND HARVEST
    2. 01.000.     Introduction
    3. 01.01.        The Hope
    4. 01.02.        Who Are Those "of Christ Jesus"?
    5. 01.03.        The Period of the Parousia
    6. 01.04.        The Pre-Tribulation Rapture
    7. 01.05.        Man's Constitution and Future
    8. 01.05.01.           His Creation
    9. 01.05.02.           Death
   10. 01.05.03.           What Takes Place at Death?
   11. 01.05.04.           Where is Hades?
   12. 01.05.05.           Do Saints Go Tto Heaven at Death?
   13. 01.05.06.           Paradise, When and Where?
   14. 01.05.07.           The Souls Under the Altar
   15. 01.06.        The Judgment Seat of Christ
   16. 01.07.        Appendix on "Of Christ"
   17. 02.00. PRAYING IS WORKING
   18. 02.01.     Chapter 01. Prayer, A Force
   19. 02.02.     Chapter 02. When to Pray
   20. 02.03.     Chapter 03. Prayer and Sickness
   21. 02.04.     Chapter 04. Prayer and the Weather
   22. 02.05.     Chapter 05. Prayer in National Affairs
   23. 02.06.     Chapter 06. Prayer for Backsliders
   24. 02.07.     Chapter 07. A Hard Case
   25. 02.08.     Chapter 08. Prayer in Church Life
   26. 02.09.     Chapter 09. Prayer and Money
   27. 02.10.     Chapter 10. Delayed Answers
   28. 02.11.     Chapter 11. Prayer about Details
   29. 02.12.     Chapter 12. Supplication
   30. 02.13.     Chapter 13. It Costs to Pray
   31. 02.14.     Chapter 14. Prayer of a Righteous Man
   32. 02.15.     Chapter 15. Prayer for Justice
   33. 02.16.     Chapter 16. Prayer and Promises
   34. 02.17.     Chapter 17. Personal Experience
   35. 02.18.     Chapter 18. Let us Pray
   36. 03.00. ATONING BLOOD  - WHAT IT DOES AND WHAT IT DOES NOT DO
   37. 03.01.     What the Blood Does?
   38. 03.02.     Blood Protects from Vengeance.
   39. 03.03.     The Blood Gives Access to God.
   40. 03.04.     Why the Blood Saves?
   41. 03.05.     Who's Blood Saves?
   42. 03.06.     Whom Does the Blood Save?
   43. 03.07.     Benefits Secured by Atoning Blood.
   44. 03.08.     What the Blood Does Not Do.
   45. 03.09.     Blood Does Not Take the Place of Food.
   46. 03.10.     Blood Does Not Do the Work of Water.
   47. 03.11.     Blood is Not Oil and Does Not Serve the Purpose of Oil.
   48. 03.12.     The Blood Does Not Dispense with Discipline.
   49. 03.13.     Blood Does Not Do the Work of the Sword.
   50. 04.00.1-THE EARLIER YEARS OF THE MODERN TONGUES MOVEMENT
   51. 04.00.2-CONTENTS
   52. 04.00.3-e-Sword Module Prepared by http://www.biblesupport.com/
   53. 04.01-CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION
   54. 04.02-CHAPTER 2 THE CHURCH OF GOD
   55. 04.03-CHAPTER 3 HOW PENTECOST CAME TO LOS ANGELES
   56. 04.04-CHAPTER 4 THE CASE OF T. B. BARRATT
   57. 04.05-CHAPTER 5 WILLIAM BOOTH-CLIBBORN
   58. 04.06-CHAPTER 6 INDIA AND LONDON
   59. 04.07-CHAPTER 7 TESTING THE SPIRITS
   60. 04.08-CHAPTER 8 FALSE DOCTRINE
   61. 04.09-CHAPTER 9 SPECIAL FEATURES
   62. 04.10-CHAPTER 10 LATER CONDITIONS
   63. 04.11-CHAPTER 11 CONCLUSION

========================================================================
  CHAPTER 1: 01.00. FIRSTFRUITS AND HARVEST
========================================================================

FIRSTFRUITS AND HARVEST A Study in Resurrection and Rapture By G. H. LANG Made
and Printed in Great Britain by John Roberts Press Ltd Foropress House,
Clerkenwell Green, London, E.C.1 EDITOR’S FOREWORD Who was G. H. LANG? There is
no doubt in my mind the reader of this book will want to know, and it seems
right for me to endeavour to answer the qureston by providing two writings by
those who obviously knew him well.

Firstfruits and Harvest is, in my opinion, one of Mr. Lang’s best works. In it
he methodically sets out to interpret and expound some of the more difficult
portions of the word of God: particularly, the conditional promises, which
appear to be almost completely neglected and ‘glossed over’ my a vast majority
of regenerate believers today. Its a bold act indeed, when the people of God
wilfully set out to change a conditional promise of His into an unconditional
one!

It may be of interest to the reader to know that it was the writings of this
book which gave me a desire to search the Scriptures with an open mind, to see
if the doctrines taught here are both Scriptural and true. Being familiar (at
one time) with writings by those who believe the whole Church of God will go
through the Great Tribulation, I did not see any scriptural proof for an escape
by regenerate believers before that event commenced. After studying the writings
in this book, I changed my beliefs to partial rapture – see ‘The Pre-Tribulation
Rapture,’ pages 36-45; and partial resurrection. It is wise for Christians to
change their beliefs, if this is done on scriptural grounds with more light
given; it is foolish to hold on to them and remain in the dark, if the teachings
they believe are seen to be contrary the teachings of the word of God.

Mr. Lang’s exposition on the intermediate state and place of the dead, what
takes place at death, the souls under the altar, the judgment seat of Christ,
the pre-tribulation rapture of the living, and the First Resurrection of the
dead, are all important subjects (neglected in our churches today) which the
author has dealt with here in great detail: I am in complete agreement with him
on these very important issues also.

Beliefs, by some regenerate believers, who maintain that the whole Church of God
will be translated to heaven before the Great Tribulation commences, is, in my
opinion, wishful thinking and without any scriptural proof. To interpret a text,
without examining its context or carefully considering other scriptures dealing
with the same subject, is to be guilty of reading into it something that the
text has not said. This is what many believers (who believe they go to heaven at
the time of death) are doing with the words, “Willing rather to be absent from
the body, and to be at home with the Lord,” (2 Corinthians 5:8). They attach
themselves to those who, “concerning the truth have erred,” by “Saying [in
effect] that the resurrection is past already, and overthrow the faith of some,”
(2 Timothy 2:1). By disregarding the teachings of the Word of God on the
intermediate place and state of the dead in Hades/Sheol, and by substituting
‘resurrection’ by ‘death,’ they blind others by their demominal teachings: this,
in effect, is nothing short of religious bigotry. If those who are blind to the
whole truth, seek to lead the blind, then both will fall into the ditch at some
stage in their Christian pilgrimage.

I do not accept the author’s interpretation of ‘the Church’ as being a select
company which will be taken out from those who are eternally saved. ‘The Church
of the Firstborn,’ are (in my opinion) what Mr. Lang calls ‘the Church’.

Great emphasis is now being placed by some on ‘the Judgment Seat of Christ,’ as
proof that all believers (who are alive on earth at a particular time) will be
rapt to heaven before the Great Tribulation begins! They believe in one judgment
of God only - (after rapture and resurrection); and disregard, disbelieve, or
gloss over any prior judgment by God on their own righteousness as to whether or
not it has exceeded that of the Pharisees, (Matthew 5:20), before that time. Mr.
Lang deals extensively with this unscriptural and misguided notion in great
detail through pages 67-82.

It is not surprising to read that F. F. Bruce wrote: “Mr. Lang . . . has a
meaning and message he has patiently sought out for himself and committed to
writing for others,” (Foreword, to The Revelation Of Jesus Christ.).

G. H. Lang was also a gifted Poet and wrote “a collection of Poems to exalt
Christ and to strengthen godliness.” The following is an example which has been
chosen at random:- “The sweet commingling tints of morn Lay soft on Galilee at
dawn; But sea and shore and hills stood clear As noontide’s blazing hour drew
near.

Too swiftly fell the eastern night And shut the lovely scene from sight, Till
stars in myriads shed their ray And softly paled the gloom of grey. The moon her
full white glory threw, The shadowy hills all ghostly grew, Her borrowed
radiance saying plain, “The sun still shines, to rise again: By faith endure, by
hope be strong, Another day will dawn ere long.” On the inside cover of one of
his books which I had on loan, I found a few words which he had written. They
are as follows:-

“He will give the strength to endure any opposition that may come. It is
forbearance when opposed that commends the truth professed.”

I consider it a great honour to present these writings on disc, and highly
commend them to ‘the Christian public’ for their careful and prayerful study.

Yours in His service,

W.H.Tindle.

Access to other writings by this same author can be obtained at the following
website address:- http://website.lineone.net/~whtindle

------- GEORGE HENRY LANG - A TRIBUTE By DOUGLAS W. BREALEY

Having known Mr. Lang for nearly sixty years I am glad to be given the
opportunity of paying a tribute to his memory; in doing so I desire only to
‘magnify the grace of God’ in him.

First, I would say, that over the years I have been growing conscious of his
deep spirituality; he was one of those rare souls who really lived in heaven; he
found himself truly to be a ‘stranger and pilgrim on the earth’. His ‘city home’
was in heaven from which he saw himself to be sent to this world as an
ambassador for Christ. He was completely devoid of any earthly nationalism - it
mattered little to him where he was down here, except that he should be in the
place of Christ’s choosing for the moment; so from time to time he was found in
many countries on the service of his Lord, now enduring the scorching heat of
Arabian deserts, now the freezing cold of Russian steppes; he was equally
content to be posted by his Sovereign in some primitive village of ‘the pensive
East’, or in some great city of the West with all its modern amenities. Thus he
roamed the world, Christ’s ‘ambassador at large’, beseeching sinners to be
reconciled to God.

He was essentially a man of faith, never looking to man for the means of his
subsistence, but only to his heavenly Father, and faith grew with its exercise.
In this school, like his great predecessor, he learned in whatsoever state he
was therewith to be content; he learned the secret of how to run low and how to
run over. And he was such a man of faith because he was such a man of prayer;
his prayers were always unusual and as inspiring as they were unique; he spoke
with an intimacy to his heavenly Father as one who knew God, but whose intimacy
was the very soul of reverence.

I think I may truthfully say that he was the most apostolic man I have ever met;
perhaps for that very reason he was a very controversial figure; a correspondent
suggested to me that he was the most controversial figure in brethren circles
since J. N. Darby; yet it would be true to say that he himself was not a
controversialist. A very close student of the Word, and an independent thinker,
he was not prepared to take traditional interpretations unless he was personally
convinced that they were right. Though completely convinced of the eternal
security of the believer, many of his views on prophecy led him into avenues of
thought and teaching where a great number of us felt unable to follow.
Unfortunately this closed doors to his otherwise extremely valuable ministry.
Perhaps one of the greatest teachers of his time, multitudes could testify to
the great help they have received from him, either from his public utterances or
from his numerous writings.

It was only to be in his presence to realise that one was in the presence of a
true saint of God whose holy life gave weight and authority to all he taught.
From our midst has gone ‘a prince and a great man’; he has been an ensample to
the flock. If we cannot follow all he taught, we may well follow his faith, and
like him, come [search] the Scriptures with an open mind and teachable heart,
ever keeping before us that day, quickly coming, when differences of judgement
will have disappeared for ever and when ‘we shall know even as we are known’.

F. F. Bruce, Sheffield, writes: “Another well-known teacher who influenced him
(Lang) still further was G. H. Pember. In 1900, Mr. Lang read Pember’s "The
Great Prophecies", and wrote to him about some questions which that book raised
in his mind. Pember answered him at length, and thereafter sent him a copy of
each book he produced. From these books Mr. Lang tells us that he ‘soon saw two
things: first, that he (Pember) did at least endeavour to deal thoroughly with a
large class of solemn passages of Scripture which most others let severely
alone, or misapply to the unregenerate, or pervert to teach that a child of God
may be finally lost; and then, that if his views thereon were correct, it
involved a further revision of yet other opinions in which I had been reared and
which I had held tenaciously’. But it required more than Pember’s arguments to
make Mr. Lang revise his earlier opinions. One day, however, when he was about
to preach on the text ‘Follow after peace with all men’ (Hebrews 12:14), he
studied the context (as every good expositor must do) and considered more
carefully what the firstborn rights’ were which Esau forfeited by his folly, and
why the case of Esau is presented there as a warning to Christians. This passage
in Hebrews was not one to which Pember had drawn his attention, but as he
studied it he became convinced that Pember’s interpretation of other scriptures
provided the key to this one - namely, that believers because of unfaithfulness
might forfeit the privilege of reigning with Christ in the Millennium. Such
Christians, if they died before the end-time, would remain in their graves until
the second, post-millennial resurrection. As for Christians who were alive at
the end-time, unfaithfulness could deprive them of a share in the ‘selective
rapture’ of the ‘firstfruits’ of Revelation 14:4, but the ensuing great
tribulation might purify them sufficiently to be eligible for participation in
Christ’s royal glory. Hence our Lord’s warning to his disciples to pray that
they might ‘prevail to escape all these things that shall come to pass, and to
stand before the Son of man’ (Luke 21:36).

. . . Having reached this position, he made it the centre around which his
interpretation was organised. While he fully accepted the doctrine of the
believer’s eternal security, he held that there were great and precious
privileges which might be forfeited by unfaithfulness, and this served in his
eyes as an added incentive to personal holiness - a leading theme in his
ministry . . . .

Referring to Mr. Lang’s literary work, F. F. Bruce continues: “By all these
writings, his spoken ministry and private correspondence and conversation, he
has proved to be for many of us ‘an interpreter, one among a thousand’. But we
think of him even more as a humble and warm-hearted man of God, whose personal
holiness and ‘cheerful godliness’ were an inspiration to us.” Harold St. John,
who had a great affection for him, said to me once with a twinkle in his eye, ‘I
agree with him completely so far as the past is concerned’; but added with sober
emphasis: ‘He is a man whose prayer-life I envy!’ Such an appraisal from a man
of Mr. St. John’s spiritual calibre speaks volumes. And if anyone wishes to
learn the secret of Mr. Lang’s spiritual power and personal influence, he may
find it in three pamphlets from his pen - Praying is Working, Prayer Focussed
and Fighting, and Divine Guidance.

G.H. Lang - A modern Caleb ‘He hath followed me fully’ Numbers 14:24.

Two courageous men were born in 1874; Churchill and G.H. Lang. November 20th
will mark the Centenary of that lucid and powerful Bible teacher - G.H. Lang. He
was never called before kings or judges, but he was that rarity - a man who
taught what he really believed, and lived by what he taught regardless of
consequences. This simple courage was to him but simple common sense. God was
his father, and father’s wisdom is always good. I commend the idea to us all. It
saves a lot of heartaches if you refuse to look at the hazards, and look simply
to God. His childhood was spent in a Christian home at Greenwich, Bennondscy and
Sidcup. At the age of seven and a half he trusted the Saviour; of that
experience he wrote ‘it was so real that it is as vivid after 70 years as if it
had just happened.’ The first of many adventures in guidance occurred when about
13 years old, he was attacked by a bullying gang from Bexleyheath. He recounted
later ‘I was about to answer cheekily when something arresting happened. There
rang in my heart words I had no recollection of having heard before’ “A soft
answer turneth away wrath” I changed my tactics, answered quietly, and was
allowed to go home without damage. That experience has been a determining factor
for more than 60 years. I have taken for granted that God will work, speak,
guide and help and that the Bible is the medium he chooses to use for his
messages. I have heard his Voice in the Book not once, but many times.’ By 1899
he was an insurance assessor’s clerk with very good prospects but one day he was
given an assignment which touched his conscience. He set out to ask a friend’s
advice, when a voice said ‘I will instruct thee.’ (Psalms 32:8). He returned
home and waited some days; on 27th. May the Voice said ‘Whatsoever ye do, do all
in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God the Father through Him.’
(Colossians 3:7). He saw at once he could not do the business called for. On 1st
June he wrote his resignation, without having any other job to go to. I remember
him telling me. ‘The ink wasn’t dry on that letter, when a deep peace filled my
soul.’ He promised the Lord to take whatever job he was led to; ‘until then’ he
told me ‘I said I would devote all my time to his service.’ His eyes twinkled as
he continued ‘I am still waiting for that job.’ So for 54 years he served God in
many lands: Britain, India, Burma, Egypt, Tunisia, Palestine, Syria,
Scandinavia, Germany, Poland, Rumania, and elsewhere. He laboured in teaching,
writing and most valued of all by a great circle of friends personally
counselling hundreds of believers to lives of total devotion to Christ.

Almost his last journey was to the wedding of our friend George Patterson in
1953. In 1954, at 80 years of age, he told me that the Lord had said to him that
his journeys were ended, but he began to publish a new magazine, ‘The Disciple’
given free to all who would read it prayerfully, each edition published only
when the Lord had sent the money for it. I have a full set, 22 numbers, more
than 950 pages; close on half a million words, more than half as long as the
Bible, mostly from the pen of an ailing man in his 80’s.

George Lang wrote 14 major books, and innumerable booklets, 3 of which were
published by the Enfield Christian Bookshop! I recall him saying ‘No man should
write a book until he is 40. He needs to prove his theories in practice before
publishing.’ All but 9 of his many writings were published after he was 50. His
views on prophecy and the hereafter did not win universal acceptance: his views
on the Church, the most lucid and scriptural expositions I have ever come
across, are unacceptable to denominational Christians and most clergy. He
trusted his reputation to God, and when doors were closed he found others opened
by the Lord! He very strictly maintained silence before men on the subject of
financial needs. He truly lived by faith.

Probably his most influential books were his biography of Anthony Norris Groves
(1939) and The Churches of God (1928). In my view, all believers should read
both before their 25th birthdays, they would avoid having to unlearn so much in
later life.

Lang’s quiet, gracious, determined spirituality stemmed from a love for Christ
which valued more than anything else the great gift which the risen Saviour had
given him, the personal anointing of the Holy Spirit, which he said took place
in the 30th year of his life. The titles of some of his best pamphlets are
evidence of this great preoccupation; ‘The Rights of the Holy Spirit in the
House of God.’ (1938) * ‘God at work on his own lines.’ (1952) ‘The personal
indwelling of the Holy Spirit.’ (1954) ‘Praying is working.’ (1918). The same
theme runs through his biographies ‘A.N. Groves’, ‘Aroolappen’, ‘E.H.Broadbent’
and his autobiography ‘Pages from an ordered life.’

[* Can be obtained on disc by personal request. Not for general use. – Ed.]

F.F. Bruce concludes his Epilogue to the posthumous edition of Lang’s Biography
thus:- ‘He takes his secure place in the ranks of those whom we are bidden to
bear in mind: ‘Remember your guides, who spoke to you the Word of God, consider
the outcome of their life, and imitate their faith.’ (Hebrews 13:7).

I have been lucky to have known several people utterly devoted to Christ. G.H.
Lang was one of them. I thank God for his memory.

M. Collier. By kind permission.

-------

BOOK CONTENTS

Introduction

I. The Hope 1. The Change of Body.

2. With the Lord.

3. On Going to Heaven 4. The Principle of Selection II. Who are those “of Christ
Jesus”?

1 Thessalonians 4:1-18; 1 Corinthians 15:1-58 III. The Period of the Parousia
IV. The Pre-Tribulation Rapture V. Man’s Constitution and Future.

Hades and Paradise His Creation

Death What takes Place at Death? Where is Hades? Do Saints go to Heaven at
Death?

Paradise, When and Where? The Souls under the Altar VI. The Judgment Seat of
Christ The Time thereof VII. Appendix on “Of Christ”

-------


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 2: 01.000.     INTRODUCTION
========================================================================

FIRSTFRUITS AND HARVEST A Study in Resurrection and Rapture BY G. H. LANG Second
Edition Of The Author “Wretford,” Oakley Road, Wimborne, Dorset 1946 FIRSTFRUITS
AND HARVEST A Study in Resurrection and Rapture

INTRODUCTION.

“We must not adhere to those systems of doctrine that never can bear an
infringement of a view that is held popularly. For instance, perhaps we have all
been brought up in the notion that all the children of God, in all ages, compose
the church of God. Now it will be found on closer research that this is not
supported by the Word of God.” *(William Kelly, Occasional Lectures, vii, 19.)

[* We must learn to distinguish between the “Church” and “the Church of the
Firstborn”. All regenerate believers are incorporated (through faith in Christ)
into ‘the Church,’ – it composes of all the saved of all ages, Old Testament
saints as well as New, (Acts 7:38): but not all (regenerate believers), thought
initially given opportunity during this life to ‘attain’ (or ‘gain by effort’)
firstborn status (Genesis 25:32), will make it into ‘the Church of the
Firstborn.’ (Hebrews 12:23; Genesis 25:32, Genesis 25:34). The latter are
selected out from the former, and ‘accounted worthy’ (by the Lord) to receive
firstborn status and blessings. That is, they will obtain a double inheritance:
(1) they inherit ‘eternal life’ through faith – “the free gift of God,” (Romans
6:23, R.V.); and (2) ‘a just recompense of reward’ for their faithfulness and
fidelity - an inheritance in Christ’s Millennial Kingdom in the “Age” to come
(Luke 20:35; Matthew 5:20). – Ed.] The world system that occupies the earth is
aged and decrepit. Like some vast, worn‑out machine it creaks and groans as at
the breaking‑point. The age is as weary as wicked, and the only solid comfort is
that its consummation seems to be nearing. The death‑throes of this vast body
corporate will be desperate and painful; yet they will be also the birth‑throes
of a better age. The chief need of the world is competent government. Even the
best disposed and ablest rulers prove signally unequal to relieving the woes of
the nations, but for this urgent need the mercy of God has made full provision.
He has in readiness a perfect Sovereign for heaven and earth, His own Son, Jesus
Christ the Lord, and His coming to earth to assume the government is a chief
theme of the Word of God. (Psalms 96:9-11, Psalms 97:1 : etc.)* [* Quotations
are usually from the Revised Version.] In this expectation the apostles of
Christ as devout Jews were trained; but their Lord when about to leave them
inti­mated that there were circumstances connected with that expectation which
yet awaited disclosure, and that the Spirit [page 8 - Christ’s Germinal
Teachings] of God, Who had visited and inspired the prophets, should come to
them also, to abide with them, and to guide them into all the truth, and to
disclose unto them those things to come (John 16:13).

One of these yet undisclosed particulars Christ had just hinted in the words of
John 14:2-3 : “In my Father’s house are many abiding places; if it were not so I
would have told you; for I go to prepare a place for you. And if I go and
prepare a place for you, I come again, and will receive you unto myself; that
where I am, there ye may be also.” This intimation was probably as yet obscure
to the apostles, It suggested:1. That for them the Lord had in mind an abode
away from the earth in the heavenly regions; 2. That that place was not yet
ready, but that He was about to go thither and prepare it for their use; 3. That
He would come again from heaven; 4. That at His coming He would take them away
from the earth to that prepared region; 5. That this was in order that they
might be in His company in His heavenly abode.

Here then is the introduction of the subject of the removal of some of mankind
from the earth to dwell in the heavens. In his Progress of Doctrine in the New
Testament (24), Bernard has well said, and shown, “that there is no part of the
later and larger doctrine [of the New Testament] which has not its germs and
principles in the words which Christ spake with His own lips in the days of His
flesh. It is provided that all which is to be spoken after shall find support
and proof from His own pregnant and forecasting sayings.” This is a fact, and it
is of the first importance for a right interpreting of the New Testament. The
four Gospels open the truths expanded in the epistles; the latter must be
construed with the former and cannot be rightly explained in separation from
them. The doctrine of the rapture is an instance. It is rooted in this germinal
saying of our Lord, even as that of the first resurrection is rooted in His
words in Luke 20:34-36 : “The sons of this age marry and are given in marriage:
but they that are accounted worthy to attain to that age [the age to follow this
age, the age of the kingdom], and the resurrection which is out from among the
dead, neither marry nor are given in marriage: for neither can they die any more
[as those individuals raised [page 9 – “Going To Heaven] from the dead before
that resurrection had done and could yet do]: for they are equal to angels; and
are sons of God, being sons of the resurrection” The doctrine of the Rapture is
thus rooted in this germinal saying of our Lord in John 14:2-3. The idea itself
was not wholly new. Enoch and Elijah while living had been removed bodily from
the earth to the heavenly world; but that a similar honour was open to
themselves was probably a new idea to the apostles; nor did Christ here make
clear whether the subjects of this favour would be found living at the moment or
be raised from the dead. These and other particulars were afterwards revealed by
the Spirit, and our present purpose is to set forth briefly some main elements
of the New Testament teaching upon this theme.


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 3: 01.01.        THE HOPE
========================================================================

I. THE H0PE.

1. The Necessary Change of Body. Man by constitution is made of and for the
earth. He is physically incapable of living in the presence of God (1
Corinthians 15:50; 1 Timothy 6:16), so that a change of body is indispensable (1
Corinthians 15:50-58; Php 3:20-21; 2 Corinthians 4:16-18, 2 Corinthians 5:1-10).
It is not at death but at the coming of the Lord that this change will be
effected and we shall be made like Him (Colossians 3:4; 1 John 3:1-3).

2. With the Lord. The purpose and effect of this removal and change is that the
Lord may have us with Himself, like Himself, to share His glory and authority
and to assist in ruling His kingdom (John 14:3, John 14:17, John 14:24; 1
Thessalonians 4:17; Revelation 3:4-5, Revelation 3:21; Revelation 14:4;
Revelation 17:14; Revelation 20:4).

3. This is Unique in the Ways of God. The expression “going to heaven” has
become a commonplace, used as the equivalent of a sinner being delivered from
hell, but it implies vastly more. A king may pardon a rebel liable to death
without taking him to live in the royal palace and appointing him to high office
and, honour. So sinners might have been saved from eternal death and been given
eternal life without their ever being removed to the heavens as their abode.
This certainly will be the lot of multitudes of the saved and might have been of
all. There will be a new earth with saved nations, and God coming down to them,
not their being taken up to His region (Revelation 21:1-31). That some of the
saved are to be honoured as above indicated seems to be exceptional in the ways
of God and is the final secret of His eternal counsels.* Since God cannot make
any superior to His Son, He can do nothing greater than to cause some to share
His Son’s glory and authority. This is the highest possible to the creature to
all eternity.

[* Colossians 2:3 : omit “even Christ,” and read “in which,” that is, “the
mystery of God in which are all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge hidden.”
See Alford, and Darby, New Translation.]

4. The Principle of Selection. In view of our sinful state and wicked works it
is evident that this “holy calling” to share His own kingdom and glory is given
to us by God “not according to our works, but according to His own purpose and
grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before times eternal” (2 Timothy 1:9).
But since not all the saved of mankind will enjoy this highest destiny there
must be some principle of selection, for God always acts on moral grounds, not
arbitrarily or by caprice.

(a) Enoch was translated alive to heaven before that first age developed its
worst degree of corruption and long before the judgment of heaven was poured
out. Concerning him the Spirit emphasizes that he looked forward to the coining
of the Lord and forewarned the wicked of the judgment then to fall (Jude
1:14-15), as also that he “walked with God” (Genesis 5:24) in such wise that
“before his translation he hath had witness borne to him that he had been
well‑pleasing unto God” (Hebrews 11:5). Nothing therefore can be clearer than
that the unique privilege of translation must be preceded by such a life of
faith in God as produces a clear witness, and a holy walk which God already
endorses as well‑pleasing to Himself, and which He will crown by a removal to
His own sphere of the universe. Unless this were the lesson for us of this
christian age why are these pointed comments upon Enoch made in the New
Testament?

(b) Concerning certain Old Testament saints we are told that they desired that
heavenly country, looked for that heavenly city, and therefore in practical
daily life walked in separation from the world, confessing that they were
strangers and pilgrims in the earth. This manner of life amongst the godless and
violent was attended by manifold inconveniences and perils (Genesis 13:7-9;
Genesis 14:22-23; Genesis 21:25; Genesis 23:4, Genesis 23:16; Genesis 26:15-21).
The divine comment on these men of faith and this way of living is, “Wherefore
God is not ashamed of them, to be called their God: for [that is, it is evident
He is not ashamed of them, because] He hath pre­pared for them a city” (Hebrews
11:8-16), which He would not do for any of whom He might be ashamed. This
“where­fore” is most significant. It shows that it was this same manner of life,
their response and devotion to the call of God’s grace, that made sure to them
their calling, by God’s choice, to the heavenly world. They had not been ashamed
to serve the true and living God among men who did not wish to retain Him in
their knowledge (Romans 1:20); He is not ashamed of them who thus confessed Him.
They embraced the offer that grace made them of a place in the heavens, and in
consequence they walked a sanctified life in separation from the godless; and
therefore He Who was their sanctifier was not ashamed of them, and shall bring
them to glory (Hebrews 2:10-11), by the first resurrection. To us also this
applies: to us those of old are set forth as a weighty example (Hebrews
11:1-40); to us the Scripture, speaking specifically of our obtaining a rich
entrance (i.e., by the first resurrection, instead of by the second resurrection
after the millennial age) into the eternal kingdom and glory to which we are
called, cries: “Give diligence to make your calling and election sure” (2 Peter
1:10-11; 1 Peter 5:10). For it was to such as had just confessed Him to be the
Christ of God that Jesus solemnly said, “Whosoever shall be ashamed of Me and of
My words, of Him shall the Son of Man be ashamed, when He cometh in His own
glory, and the glory of the Father, and of the holy angels” (Luke 9:20-26; comp.
Mark 8:38: Matthew 10:32-33: Luke 12:8-9; 2 Timothy 2:10-13).

(c) Thus translation, both of the living, as of the dead by the first
resurrection, is consequent upon a life of faith which seizes upon the offer of
the heavenly calling and shapes its course and conduct accordingly. So the Lord,
dealing with the first and select resurrection, spoke of those that are
accounted worthy to attain to that age and the resurrection from among the dead
(Luke 20:34-36). “That age” (singular) is not a Bible term for eternity, which
is not one age but many. “the ages of the ages” (thirteen times in the
Revelation). “That age” is set by Christ in direct contrast to “this age,” and
so means the age of the kingdom to follow this age. A general resurrection the
Jews expected (John 11:34: Acts 24:15), but here Christ speaks of “the
resurrection which is out from among the dead” (tees anastaseos tees ek nekron).
This is the first clear intimation of such a limited, select resurrection (this
doctrine also, as has been pointed out, being rooted in a germinal saying of
Christ), and its terms are the key to and must control all subsequent
instruc­tion upon the subject. And it is made very clear that this resurrection
is a privilege to which one must “attain” and be “accounted worthy” thereof. The
notion that a share in the first resurrection is a certainty, irrespective of
attainment and worthiness, can only be held in direct disregard of this primary
declaration by the One who will effect the resurrec­tion and determine who shall
participate therein, the Son of God.

It was through Paul that the Holy Spirit saw fit to give in permanent written
form fuller particulars as to this theme (1 Corinthians 15:1-58; 1 Thessalonians
4:1-18), and it is Paul who elsewhere repeats the words of our Lord Jesus just
considered, declaring that, whereas justifying righteousness is verily received
through faith in Christ, not by our own works, yet, in marked contrast, “the
resurrection which is from among the dead (teen exanastasin teen ek nekron) is a
privilege at which one must arrive (katanteeso) by a given course of life, even
the experimental knowledge of Christ, of the power of His resurrection, and of
the fellowship of His sufferings, thereby becoming conformed unto His death (Php
3:7-21). Surely the present participle (summorphizomenos becoming con­formed) is
significant, and decisive in favour of the view that it is a process, a course
of life that is contemplated.

It has been suggested that Paul here speaks of a present moral resurrection as
he does in Romans 6:1-23. But in that chapter it is simply a reckoning of faith
that is proposed, not a course of personal sufferings. The subject discussed is
whether the believer is to continue in slavery to sin (douleuein), as in his
unregenerate days, or is the mastery (kurieuo) of sin to be immediately and
wholly broken? It should be remembered that when writing to the Philippians Paul
was near the close of his life and service. Could a life so holy and powerful as
his be lived without first knowing experimentally the truth taught in Romans
6:1-23? Did the Holy Spirit at any time use the apostles to urge others to seek
experiences which the writer had not first known, and to which therefore he
could be a witness? And again, if by the close of that long and wonderful career
Paul was still only longing and striving to attain to death to the “old man” and
victory over sin, when did he ever attain thereto? Such reflections upon the
apostle are unworthy, and, as has been indicated, the experience set forth in
Romans 6:1-23 is not to be reached, or to be sought, by suffering, by attaining,
by laying hold, by pressing on, or any other such effort as is urged upon the
Philippians, but by the simple acceptance by faith of what God says He did for
us in Christ in relation to the “old man.”

Thus this suggested exposition is neither sound experimental theology nor fair
exegesis. Paul indicates as plainly as language can do that the first
resurrection may be missed. His words are: “If by any means I may arrive at the
resurrection which is out from among the dead.” “If by any means” (ei pos) “I
may” – “if” with the subjunctive of the verb ‑ cannot but declare a condition;
and so on this particle in this place Alford says, “It is used when an end is
proposed, but failure is presumed to be possible”: and so Lightfoot: “The
apostle states not a positive assurance, but a modest hope”: and Grimm‑Thayer
(Lexicon) give its meaning as, “If in any way, if by any means, if possible,”
and Ellicott to the same effect says, “the idea of an attempt is conveyed, which
may or may not be successful.” Both Alford and Lightfoot regard the passage as
dealing with the resurrection of the godly from death, and Ellicott’s note is
worth giving in full. “‘The resurrection from the dead’; i.e., as the context
suggests, the first resurrection (Revelation 20:5), when, at the Lord’s coming
the dead in Him shall rise first (1 Thessalonians 4:16), and the quick be caught
up to meet Him in the clouds (1 Thessalonians 4:17); comp. Luke 20:35. The first
resurrection will include only true believers, and will apparently precede the
second, that of non‑believers, and disbelievers, in point of time. Any reference
here to a merely ethical resurrection (Cocceius) is wholly out of the question.”
With the addition that the second resurrection will include believers not
accounted worthy of the first, this note is excellent. The sense and force of
the phrase “if by any means I may arrive” are surely fixed beyond controversy by
the use of the same words in Acts 27:12 : “the more part advised to put to sea
from thence, if by any means they could reach [arrive at] Phoenix, and winter
there” (ei pos dunainto katanteesantes), which goal they did not reach.

Further, speaking upon the very subject of the resurrection and the kingdom
promised afore by God, Paul used the same verb, again preceded by conditional
terms, saying (Acts 26:6-8), “unto which promise our twelve tribes, earnestly
serving God night and day, hope to attain.” Here the force of elpizei
katanteesai “unto which they hope to attain” is the same as his words in
Philipplans ei pos kantanteeso, “if by any means I may attain.” This hope of the
Israelite of sharing in Messiah’s kingdom is plainly conditional (Daniel
12:2-3). It is assured to such an Israelite indeed as Daniel (Daniel 12:13), and
to such a faithful servant of God in a period of great difficulty as Zerubbabel
(Haggai 2:23). It was also offered to Joshua the high priest, but upon
conditions of obedience and conduct. Joshua had been relieved of his filthy
garments and arrayed in noble attire (Zechariah 3:1-5), but immediately his
symbolic justification before Jehovah had been thus completed, and his standing
in the presence of God assured, the divine message to him is couched in
conditional language: “And the Angel of Jehovah protested unto Joshua, saying,
Thus saith Jehovah of hosts, If thou wilt walk in My ways, and if thou wilt keep
My charge, then thou also shalt judge My house, and shalt also keep My courts,
and I will give thee places to walk among these that stand by” (Zechariah
3:6-7).

It is at this point that the “ifs” of the Word of God come in, and are so solemn
and significant. Whenever the matter is that of the pardon of sin, the
justifying of the guilty, the gift of eternal life, Scripture ever speaks
positively and unconditionally. The sinner is “justified freely by God’s grace,”
and “the free gift of God is eternal life” (Romans 3:24; Romans 6:23), in which
places the word “free” means free of conditions, not only of payment. Eternal
life therefore is what is called in law an absolute gift, in contrast to a
conditional gift. The latter may be forfeited if the condition be not fulfilled;
the former is irrevocable. But as soon as the sinner has by faith entered into
this standing before God, then the Word begins at once to speak to him with
“Ifs.” From this point and forward every privilege is conditional.

It is truly “in all wisdom and prudence” that God has made known to us the
mystery of His will (Ephesians 1:8-9). The indispensable minimum, justification,
without which no further blessing is possible, and which the sinner is utterly
unable to acquire, having no nature that can produce ought acceptable to God,
this God grants freely through the atoning work of the Lord Jesus. But now that
a new nature has been implanted by grace, capable through the Spirit of pleasing
God, all attainment is made conditional upon the exertion that this new nature
is able to make, and must make. The whole promised land, together with the title
to share it and the power to conquer it, are gifts of covenant grace, but no one
shall get an inch more than he sets his own foot upon, by the use of the power
freely granted to faith that obeys. And some who had equal title with the rest
shall not reach the inheritance at all, though neither shall they ever get back
to Egypt. “Let him that readeth understand,” and ponder the “ifs” of the epistle
to the Hebrews.* [* See my “Firstborn Sons.”] The comments of Mr. David Baron
upon the incident of Joshua are impressive. (The Visions and Prophecies of
Zechariah, 103‑105.) I extract the following. “The word ‘protested’ means
solemnly to protest, and is intended to express the solemnity and importance of
the charge about to be made. The expressions, ‘Walk in My ways’ and ‘Keep My
charge’ are frequently used in the Pentateuch for ‘holding on in the way of
life, well‑pleasing to God, and for keeping the charge given by God.’ The first
part of the charge refers particularly to Joshua’s personal attitude towards the
Lord ‑ to fidelity in his personal relations to God; and the second to the
faithful performance of his official duties as high priest. And the reward of
his thus studying (in his personal and official capacity) to present himself
approved unto God will be (a) ‘Then thou shalt also judge My house . . .’ (b)
‘And shalt also keep My courts . . . ’ (c) But the climax of promise in this
verse is reached in the last clause, ‘And I will give thee places to walk among
these that stand by. . .’ ‘These that stand by’ ‑ as we see by comparing the
expression with verse 4 - are the angels, who were in attendance on the Angel of
Jehovah, and who ‘stood before Him’ ready to carry out His behests. The Jewish
Targum ... is, I believe, nearer the truth [than many christian commen­tators]
when it paraphrases the words, ‘In the resurrection of the dead I will revive
thee, and give thee feet walking among these seraphim.’ Thus applied to the
future the sense of the whole verse would be this: ’If thou wilt walk in My ways
and keep My charge, thou shalt not only have the honour of judging My house and
keeping My courts, but when thy work on earth is done thou shalt be transplanted
to higher service in heaven, and “have places to walk” among these pure, angelic
beings who stand by Me, hearkening unto the voice of My word’ (Psalms
103:20-21). Note the ‘ifs’ in this verse, my dear reader, and lay to heart the
fact that, while pardon and justification are the free gifts of God to all that
are of faith, having their source wholly in His infinite and sovereign grace,
and quite apart from work or merit on the part of man, the honour and privilege
of acceptable service and future reward are con­ditional upon our obedience and
faithfulness: therefore seek by His grace and in the power of His Spirit to
‘walk in His ways and to keep His charge,’ and in all things, even if thine be
the lot of a ‘porter’ or ‘doorkeeper’ in the House of God, to present thyself
approved unto Him, in remembrance of the day when ‘we must all be made manifest
before the judgment‑seat of Christ, that each one may receive the things done in
the body, according to what he hath done, whether it be good or bad’ (2
Corinthians 5:10).” By virtue of their relationship to Abraham all Israelites
are natural sons of the kingdom which is the goal of their national hopes
according to the purpose and promise of the God of Abraham; but the King has
told them plainly, first, that Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, together with all the
prophets ‑ that is, all the men of faith and devotion ‑ shall be in that
kingdom, but secondly, that it is very possible that some of the sons of the
kingdom may forfeit their entrance thereinto (Matthew 8:10-12: Luke 13:28-29);
for there are those who may have been first in privilege and opportunity who
shall be last in final attainment.

If, therefore, an Israelite attains to that kingdom it will be on the basis of a
covenant made by God with his federal head, Abraham; the source of which
covenant is the grace of God in Christ, the working principle of which on man’s
side is faith proving itself by obedience. Wherein now does this differ in basic
principle from that new and better covenant which introduces to better, that is,
to heavenly privileges, to sharing the heavenly sphere of that same kingdom, not
only its earthward side? This new and higher order of things is also derived
from a covenant made with our federal Head, its source is in that same grace of
God, its working principle on our side is a faith that proves its quality in
obedience.

Moreover, since the man of true faith in that earlier age could aspire to this
same heavenly city and country as our­selves there manifestly was no difference
in his position and ours in this matter, though it may be he had only a more
distant view and not so full a revelation of the purpose of God in all this
project. So that if they of old could miss their share, on what principle of
righteousness shall we be exempted from their need of diligence and obedience?
Such exemption not only would contain an invidious and inexplicable distinction,
but it would prove highly dangerous to our moral fibre and our zeal for
godliness. And has not this been seen? We heard it boldly stated from a
platform, that the sharing in the bridal glories of the wife of the Lamb is
guaranteed absolutely no matter what our practical life may or may not have
been. But obviously if the very highest of all honours cannot possibly be
forfeited plainly nothing is forfeitable, and the whole notion of reward for
effort, so heavily emphasized in Holy Scripture, is swept away. For ourselves we
repudiate this common teaching as grossly immoral in its tendency, the sheerest
antinomianism, and flatly repugnant to the Word. The Lord told His disciples
that status in the kingdom of the heavens was to be determined by the measure of
obedience and of having encouraged others to obedience, and He as clearly added
that entrance itself into that kingdom was conditional upon a certain degree of
practical righteous­ness (Matthew 5:19-20). He further plainly warned the
apostles themselves that except they turned from their high­-mindedness, and
became as humble as a little child, they should on no account enter into the
kingdom (Matthew 18:3). And this same possibility of missing our inheritance by
practical misconduct became a stock element in the apostolic teaching of their
converts, and most especially and notably of Paul (1 Corinthians 6:7-10;
Galatians 5:19-21; Ephesians 5:5).

It followed that godly Israelites, bent on securing a share with Abraham in the
kingdom of Messiah, served God, as Paul says, with the utmost earnestness and
ceaselessly: “earnestly (en ekteneia) serving God night and day” (Acts 26:7). It
is an intensive form of this very word which Paul employs in the Philippian
passage (epekteinomenos) to describe his own strenuous endeavours in godly
service and suffering to reach that same goal, the out‑resurrection. The word
pictures the racer leaning far forward, stretched out toward the goal, straining
every fibre to win the coveted prize. It is the sharpest possible rebuke to the
complaisant idea that so great a reward is guaranteed to all believers
irrespective of piety, zeal, devotion, and life‑long perseverance. Nor is there
warrant for the assertion that to Paul only or even first were these themes made
known. He indeed learned them direct from the Lord, but so did other “holy
apostles and prophets,” according to his own statement (Ephesians 1:1). These
mighty truths were as much the need of and as much the property of those many
saints whom Paul never taught as of that portion of the church of God to whom he
ministered. And that the other apostles did in fact know and teach the truth of
a select resurrection, prior to the general resurrection of all men, and thus
knew and taught prior even to Paul’s conversion, is seen from the statement in
Acts 4:2, that from the very earliest days they “proclaimed in Jesus the
resurrection which is out from among the dead” (teen anastasin teen ek nekron).
The clearness of their understanding of this first, select resurrection, of
which the Lord had spoken while with them, is shown by the definite­ness and
vigour with which they announced it., for katangello, in the A.V. weakly
rendered “preach,” means “to proclaim with authority, as commissioned to spread
the tidings throughout those who hear them” (Westcott, on 1 John 1:5). Therefore
such a resurrection was not revealed for the first time when Paul wrote to the
Thessalonians; those who were apostles before him made it their business to
announce this truth to all to whom they proclaimed the gospel, for, as Paul
himself tells us, it was the “commandment of the eternal God” that the secret
counsel of which the first resurrection is part should be “made known unto all
the nations” (Romans 16:26), which demanded that other heralds before and
besides Paul should receive and proclaim the message. When first writing to the
Thessalonians he could say that they already “knew perfectly” about the day of
the Lord, and when writing again he added that he had told them about these
things when with them (1 Ephesians 5:2; 2 Ephesians 2:5). This is further shown
by the way he speaks without explana­tion of those who “will be left unto the
presence of the Lord,” to His parousia. How could he have enlarged when with
them upon these topics and yet not even himself have known about the vital
matter of the first resurrection? Yet this is necessarily involved in the
assertion that this truth was not made known before the first letter to the
Thessalonians.


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 4: 01.02.        WHO ARE THOSE "OF CHRIST JESUS"?
========================================================================

II. WHO ARE THOSE “OF CHRIST JESUS”? But it is urged that two important
scriptures upon the topic of resurrection seem to contemplate all believers as
sharing in the first resurrection. These are 1 Thessalonians 4:1-18 and 1
Corinthians 15:1-58. The former passage speaks of those who “have fallen asleep
through Jesus” (1 Thessalonians 4:14, R.V. marg.). Is this of necessity the fact
concerning the end of all believers? Is there not such a thing as death through
Satan, acting as the executioner of the sentence of the court of heaven against
a believer’s sins?. (1 Corinthians 5:5; 1 Corinthians 11:30; Acts 5:10 : comp. 1
Timothy 1:19-20; 1 John 5:16-17; James 5:19-20).

Man through sin is by nature in the power of Satan as the one who, by his angel
servants, ends human life when the Most High requires.* But the sinner who in
faith submits to Christ is transferred from Satan’s authority and is put under
that of the Son of God (Colossians 1:13), and thenceforth the Evil One cannot
touch him (1 John 5:18). In life his Lord protects him and in death puts him to
sleep. But on account of gross sin, of living again as if a servant of Satan, he
may be “delivered unto Satan,” as regards his present experience (Matthew 5:23,
Matthew 5:26; Matthew 6:13; Matthew 18:34-35) and his bodily life, in which case
Satan may be permitted to cut short his life, as the above cited passages show.

[* Hebrews 2:14; Acts 12:23; Luke 12:20, marg. “they,” i.e., angels: contrast
Job 6:1.]

It is not such A death that is “gain” within the meaning of Php 1:21. When Paul
wrote of death as “gain” he made no general statement concerning all believers.
He said, “For to me to live is Christ and to die is gain.” At that time he was a
prisoner, and it was not certain that he would not shortly die for the faith.
That was the death immediately in question, and similarly such an one as the
faithful Stephen, dying as a witness for Christ, could say, “Lord Jesus, receive
my spirit.” The Lord accepted the trust, and the simple record of that dreadful
moment is, “he slept.” Doubtless not martyrs alone but each who can truly say,
“for to me to live is Christ” may add truly, “to die is gain.” Those who thus
fall asleep will, as we expect, share in the first resur­rection; others have no
guarantee that they will do so. But it is further urged that in 1 Corinthians
15:51, the Scripture declares that though “we shall not all sleep,” but some be
alive at the descent of the Lord, yet “we shall all be changed,” and surely,
says the objector with emphasis, all means all. Truly; but in 1 Corinthians
15:22, “For as in Adam all die, so also in the Christ shall all be made alive,”
“all” means all of mankind, for every child of Adam will at some time be raised
by Christ (John 5:28-29). But not all at the first resurrection (Revelation
20:5). Therefore in this very chapter “all” means different things, and in 1
Corinthians 15:51 requires limiting, since it refers to a smaller company than
in 1 Corinthians 15:22. The last and immediate context is in 1 Corinthians
15:48-49, which speak of those who are to “bear the image of the heavenly,” that
is, are to share with the Lord in His heavenly form, glory, and sovereignty. Now
the more difficult, and therefore the more probable reading here is as in the
R.V. margin: “As we have borne the image of the earthy, let us also bear the
image of the heavenly.” It is evident that one copying a document is not likely
to insert by mistake a more difficult word or idea than is in the manuscript
before him; so that, as a general rule, the more difficult reading is likely to
have been the original reading. Moreover, in this case “let us also bear” is so
well attested by the manuscripts as to have been adopted as the true reading by
Lachmann, Tischendorf, Tregelles, Alford, and Westcott and Hort, and is given as
the text in the latest editions of the Greek Testament, those of Nestle and Von
Soden. Ellicott prefers the common read­ing, but on subjective and internal
grounds only, and his remark on the external authority is emphatic: “It is
impos­sible to deny that the subjunctive, phoresomen is supported by very
greatly preponderating authority.” Alford (on Romans 9:5) well says, “that no
conjecture [i.e., as to the true Greek text] arising from doctrinal difficulty
is ever to be admitted in the face of the consensus of MSS. and versions.”
Weymouth gives the force well by the rendering “let us see to it that we also
bear.” By this exhortation the apostle places upon Christians some
responsibility to see that they secure that image of the heavenly which is
indispensable to inheriting “the kingdom of God” (1 Corinthians 15:50). In this
Paul is supported by Peter, who also writes of that “inheritance which is
reserved in heaven” (1 Peter 1:4), which he describes by the later statement
that “the God of all grace called you unto His eternal glory in Christ” (1 Peter
5:10). But Peter goes on to urge the called to “give the more diligence to make
your calling and election sure” (2 Peter 1:10), thus showing that this calling
to share the glory of God has to be made sure. He is not at all discussing
justification by faith or suggesting that it must be made sure by works done
after conversion. Justification and eternal life are not in the least his
subject. He writes expressly to those “who have [already] obtained like precious
faith with us in the righteousness of our God and Saviour Jesus Christ” (2 Peter
1:1). The calling of grace is to share in God’s own eternal glory, or, as Paul
expresses it, to share God’s “own kingdom and glory,” and he tells us that he
exhorted, encouraged, yea, and testified, to the end that his children in faith
should “walk worthily of God” Who had called them to such supreme dignity (1
Thessalonians 2:11-12).

Since therefore this most honourable calling must be “made sure” by “walking
worthily,” in order that we may be “counted worthy of the kingdom of God, for
which ye also suffer” (2 Thessalonians 1:5), the reading “let us also bear the
image of the heavenly” becomes consistent and important. Thus 1 Corinthians
15:51-52 is addressed to those who are assumed (whether it be so or not) to have
responded to that exhortation, and it will mean that “we [who shall be accounted
worthy to bear that heavenly image] shall not all sleep, but we shall all be
changed.” Of that company it is strictly true that all means all.

Further, the primary antecedent to 1 Corinthians 15:52 is in 1 Corinthians 15:23
: “But each [shall be made alive] in his own order: Christ the first‑fruits;
then they that are Christ’s in His Parousia: then the end . . .” Does not the
whole sentence, in the light of other passages, carry the force: But each shall
be made alive, not all at the same hour, but each in his own class or company
(tagma); first‑fruit, Messiah; then, next, those of the Messiah, i.e., in His
character as first‑fruit, at His Parousia; then, later, the end of all
dispensations, involv­ing the resurrection of all, saved and unsaved, not before
raised? Here is additional reason for R. C. Chapman’s view (to be considered
later) that the first resurrection is one of “first‑fruits,” and not of all who
will be finally raised in the “harvest” of eternal life. The translation “they
that are Christ’s” is not an exact rendering. The Greek reads: “then those of
the Christ (hoi tou Christou) in His Parousia,” and it is not a question of what
these words may mean to an English reader to‑day with his mind obsessed by a
certain theory, but what did they convey to a Greek ear of the day when they
were written. (See Appendix.) In the ideal and possibility all who are “in
Christ” are “of Christ,” but that it is possible to be a believer on Him unto
salvation from hell and not to be of that privileged personal circle which He
will acknowledge before God, angels, and men as His companions, is plainly
taught in the Word. “If I wash thee not, thou [Peter, my believing, devoted
follower until now] hast no part with Me” – not “in Me,” that would have
forfeited all, including salvation; but “with Me,” which means that unwashed
thou canst not continue in My company, My circle (John 13:8). Again, “Thou hast
a few names in Sardis who did not defile their garments, and they shall walk
[walk about habitually, peripateesousin] with Me in white, for they are worthy”;
that is, they shall be My companions (Revelation 3:4 : compare the personal
associates of king Rehoboam, those that had “grown up with him,” (1 Kings
12:7-10). With these who have thus walked with Christ in humiliation and shall
walk with Him in glory contrast those mentioned in John 6:66 : “Upon this many
of His disciples went back, and walked no more with Him.” But of those who go on
with Him He graciously adds, “The one overcoming shall thus [as the consequence
and counterpart of having walked in white on earth, of having ‘kept himself
unspotted from the world,’ James 1:27]­ - shall thus be arrayed in white raiment
[as a companion of the King; indeed, as His wife, Revelation 19:8]; and I will,
in no wise blot his name out of the book of life, and I will confess his name
before My Father and before His angels”; the King’s public acknowledgment that
such are of His honoured and intimate circle.*

[* Revelation 3:4-5 : comp. Luke 12:9, with the use the apostle and the early
church made of that saying, as in 2 Timothy 2:11-13.] The fact that such as show
special trust in and fidelity to God are granted intimacy with Him beyond others
is very natural and it runs throughout Scripture. Instances are: Abraham,
peculiarly the friend of God, from whom Jehovah would hide none of His purposes
(Genesis 18:17-19): Moses, privileged beyond others of the people of God with
mouth to mouth converse with Him, because he was faithful (Numbers 12:7-8): the
prophets, without informing whom Jehovah would not act (Amos 3:7): of which
Elisha is a notable instance, as witness the tone of surprise in his words,
“Jehovah hath hid it from me and hath not told me!” (2 Kings 4:27). So God,
reproving false prophets, says: “Who [of them] hath stood in the council of
Jehovah?” and, “If they had stood in My council” (Jeremiah 23:18, Jeremiah
23:22) – not counsel, as A.V., but in “My secret council,” as the Hebrew means,
whither faithful prophets were transported in spirit (1 Kings 22:19).

Thus also in the New Testament we learn of very many hundreds who believed on
Jesus when He was here (1 Corinthians 15:6, e.g.), but of these, some few
enjoyed His special love, as the Bethany family (John 11:5); a small band were
honoured to share peculiarly His toil, ministry, reproach, and company, and will
therefore be specially honoured in His kingdom (Luke 22:28-30;Revelation 22:14):
of which few again a smaller circle were more especially favoured with His
confidence (Luke 9:28; Matthew 26:37), and one was loved above them all (John
13:23; John 19:26, John 21:7, John 21:20). But as there is no respect of
persons, no favouritism, with the Lord, as we are repeatedly and emphatically
assured (Colossians 3:25; 1 Peter 1:17 : etc.), there must have been reason for
this distinguishing of some. In John 15:14-15, Christ lays down its condition in
the words: “No longer do I call you slaves [though it is to be well noted from
the openings of the epistles that that is exactly what they continued ever­more
to call themselves]; for the slave knoweth not what his lord doeth: but I have
called you friends; for all things that I heard from My Father I have made known
unto you.” Thus as with Abraham His friend, so with these, He had hid nothing
from them, had had no secrets, but had made known unto them all that He had
heard. But the terms of this incomparable friendship were, and are, “Ye are My
friends if ye do the things which I command you,” a condition nowhere attached
to the forgiveness of sins or to the obtaining of eternal life, but of the
simple nature of things in friendship between the Creator and the creature, the
King and the subject. To this privileged circle all indeed may attain, but it is
reached by such only as pay the (in reality) purely nominal but quite
unavoidable price of full obedience to their Saviour as their Lord.

Thus also in Hebrews 3:12-14, we learn that “we have become companions* of the
Messiah (metochoi tou Christou), if it be so that (eanper) we hold fast the
beginning of our confidence firm unto the end.” And in Hebrews 3:6 preceding we
are told that we are the household over which the Son of God is ruler “if we
hold fast our boldness and the glorying of our hope firm unto the end.” Israel,
though redeemed by blood and delivered, did not become the “house” of God until
one whole year after redemption (Exodus 40:1); and, though the people of God by
covenant and redemption, they only narrowly escaped the penalty of never having
God dwelling among them and so of not being to Him as a house (Exodus 33:1-3).
To be a pardoned rebel, restored to being a loyal subject of the sovereign, is
one thing, and is great indeed, but to be a member of the royal house, a chosen
intimate of the sovereign, is much greater. His pardon Of the rebel, sealed and
delivered, God never recalls; but the privilege of belonging to His Son’s
personal circle is contingent and may be forfeited.

[* Darby, New Translation, note: “I use the word ‘companions’ as being the same
one as in c.1:9 metochoi, to which, I doubt not, it alludes; that is, to the
passage quoted, Psalms 45:1-17. ‘Partakers of Christ’ has indeed quite a
different sense.”] The type of tabernacle and temple when taken in its entirety
shows that the “house” of God may be forsaken by Him and be temporarily
destroyed (Jeremiah 7:12; Psalms 78:60-61; Jeremiah 12:7; Psalms 74:7; Matthew
23:38); and the New Testament solemnly declares the same as to the believer: "
“Know ye not that ye are a sanctuary of God, and the Spirit of God dwelleth in
you. If any man destroyeth the sanctuary of God [mars it ‑ see Jeremiah 17:7,
Jeremiah 17:9, where the LXX use this word ‑ so rendering the house unfit as a
dwelling for the Holy One], him shall God destroy (see 1 Corinthians 5:5 :
etc.), for the sanctuary of God is holy, which sanctuary ye are” (1 Corinthians
3:16-17). The believer who so lacks the spirit of Christ, and so walks according
to flesh, as to incur that judgment, will indeed, by the changeless grace of God
and through the eternal virtue of redemption by the precious blood of Christ, be
himself, as to his person, saved, yet only “so as through fire” (1 Corinthians
3:15); but such will not be sharers of the privileges pictured as being the
“house” of God or “companions of the Messiah,” the King. But inasmuch as all who
rise in the first resurrection will share those very privileges (Revelation
20:4-6), it results that such as are adjudged by the Lord unworthy thereof will
not have part in that resurrection, even as the many scriptures reviewed
declare.

Thus the expressions “fallen asleep through Jesus” and “those of Him in His
Parousia” (those who are to be com­panions with Him during the period of His
“presence” as King of this earth), both allow for the solemn possibility of some
who might have been “accounted worthy to attain unto that age [of the Presence]
and the resurrection which is from among the dead” (Luke 20:35) failing to
attain thereto.

Passages which deal with a matter from the point of view of God’s plan and
willingness use general, wide terms to cover and to disclose His whole
provision. But these must be ever considered in connection with any other
statements upon the same subject which reveal what God foresees of the human
element which, by His own creation of responsible creatures, He permits to
interact with His working. Out of these elements, through self‑will in the
believer, arises the possibility of individuals not reaching unto the whole of
what the grace of God had offered in Christ. The isolation of the former class
of passages produced Calvinism, of the latter Arminianism. Truth is found by
construing all Scripture together. The principle of the divine provision is
grace: the principle of our attaining is faith; and “according to your faith be
it unto you” is the inflexible condition. Now faith is not merely an
apprehending of ideas by the intellect, nor only the assent of the reason,
though it includes of necessity both of these elements: faith is a principle of
action which produces obedience to God and works out in love to men. Incipient
faith obeys God upon the primary point of trusting to Christ for salvation from
wrath, and it secures that primary benefit for which it trusts. Developing faith
obeys God upon various successive points of His holy will; this issues in
sanctity of character and purity of conduct; and according to this advance of
faith in prac­tical godliness will be the weight of glory which each will be
capable of bearing. Any particular possibility for which one’s measure of faith
does not qualify will not be obtained. “The path of sorrow is not indeed the
meriting, but the capacitating preparation for glory” (Moule on Romans 8:18).

It is unquestionable that this unchanging, because unavoid­able, rule operates
undeviatingly as to benefits available in this life: the Scripture shows plainly
that it operates as to benefits available beyond this life. Of these one is the
sharing in the first resurrection and so inheriting the kingdom of God. There is
not any ground in Scripture or reason why these particular privileges should be
an exception to the invariable rule stated; for the rule lies in the essential
nature of man and his relationships with God, and no suspension or exception
seems possible so long as God is God and man is man. Apart from faith it is
impossible for man to be pleasing to God or for God to grant to him the blessing
of such as please Him. The measure of blessing in the possibility is the
immeasurable merit of Christ, freely made available to sinners by the grace of
God: the measure of blessing in actual attainment is our faith, faith as above
defined and evidenced. Therefore both translation and the better resurrection
are consequent upon a life of faith that pleases God (Hebrews 11:5, Hebrews
11:35).

“Such faith in us, 0 God, implant, And to our prayers Thy favour grant, Through
Jesus Christ, Thine only Son, Who is our fount of health alone.” When it is said
that the acceptance of the believer in Christ involves the imputation to him of
all the acceptability of Christ, and that he is thereby qualified to share the
eternal glory of Christ in the presence of the Father, and that conse­quently
his own life and works can have no place in the matter, we point out that,
inasmuch as the merit of Christ is imputed judicially to every believer equally,
therefore every believer should of necessity share equally in all and every
privilege, and no distinction in reward would be possible, one star could not
then differ from another star in glory. But the opposite of this is taught in
the Word. The imputa­tion of righteousness in Christ gives to every believer
equality of standing and of opportunity, but it does not, and cannot, do away
with the necessity for faith, or alter the rule that attainment is according to
faith.

It being therefore the case that the first resurrection, while open indeed to
all, is a prize which must be attained, and which, like every prize, may be
forfeited, it is at once made clear why in Revelation 20:4-6, where the two
resurrections are set, one at the opening of the Millennial kingdom and the
other at its close, it is said that “blessed and holy” is he that hath part in
the former, including pre‑eminently those who in varying degree had suffered for
and with Jesus and for the word of God. And that some believers not accounted
worthy of that resurrection, will rise in the second resurrection unto eternal
life, though they will have missed reigning with Christ in His Kingdom, fitly
explains why at the final judgment the book of life will be opened and searched
(Revelation 20:11-15). Were it known as a fact that no possessors of eternal
life would or could be there this examining of the book of life would not be
required, nor should we expect the statement that “if any was not found written
in the book” he was cast into the lake of fire; for in that event the natural
expression would be “as their names were not found, etc.” A correct
understanding of future events is of high value in the life of the Christian,
but it is not fundamental to the gospel, neither does any rearranging of the
order or par­ticulars of those events imperil the faith. Men of undoubted
orthodoxy and greatly used of God have taken very divergent views on these
topics, which teaches that great names cannot prove any one view to be the true
meaning of Scripture. On the other hand, this divergence should assure
toleration and earnest research, so that more light may be gained and ever
closer agreement be reached.

It is worthy of mention that Hudson Taylor and R. C. Chapman held the view here
advocated. In the Appendix to his small work on The Song of Songs, entitled
Union and Communion (ed. 5, p. 83), Hudson Taylor wrote of such as “if saved,
are only half‑saved:* who are for the present more concerned about the things of
this world than the things of God. To advance their own interests, to secure
their own comfort, concerns them more than to be in all things pleasing to the
Lord. They may form part of that great company spoken of in Revelation 7:9-17,
who come out of the great tribulation, but they will hot form part of the
144,000, ‘the first‑fruits unto God and to the Lamb’ (Revelation 14:1-5). They
have forgotten the warning of our Lord in Luke 21:34-36; and hence they are not
‘accounted worthy to escape all these things that shall come to pass, and to
stand before the Son of Man.’ They have not, with Paul, counted ’all things but
loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus the Lord,’ and hence
they do not ‘attain unto’ that resurrection from among the dead, which Paul felt
he might miss, but aimed to attain unto.

We wish to place on record our solemn conviction that not all who are
Christians, or think themselves to be such, will attain to that resurrection of
which St. Paul speaks in Php 3:11, or will thus meet the Lord in the air. Unto
those who by lives of consecration manifest that they are not of the world, but
are looking for Him, ‘He will appear without sin unto salvation’.”

Robert Chapman about the year 1896 issued a series of Suggestive Questions.
Number 10 includes the following: “Are not the redeemed in Revelation 4:1-11 and
Revelation 5:1-14 the same with those in Revelation 20:4, ’Thrones and they sat
upon them’? (Revelation 20:5) ’This is the first resurrection.’ Is it not a
resurrection of first‑fruits?” . . . Now in the essential nature of the case
first‑fruits are but a portion of the whole harvest, and so the Question
proceeds: ’And the rest of the dead (in the same verse) do they not include all
the family of God? not the wicked dead only. Hence, in Revelation 20:12,
’Another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged
out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works’
(Revelation 20:15). ’And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was
cast into.the lake of fire’.”

Further as to this last passage, the exact rendering in the Revised Version, “if
any was not found written in the book of life he was cast into the lake of
fire,” by its negative form strongly supports this view. If it should be said of
the crowd at a platform barrier that, If any was found not to have a ticket he
was refused admittance, no one would suggest the meaning that not one of all who
were there had a ticket or was allowed to pass. The late Mr. E. S. Pearce was
intimately acquainted with Mr. Chapman’s views for he lived with him many years.
He wrote to me as follows: “It was Mr. Chapman’s desire that, by so walking with
God and by obedience to His Word in all things, he might not shut himself out
from the honour of reigning with Christ. He saw no authority from the Scripture
for saying that all the children of God would. Revelation 20:4, ’And they sat
upon them,’ Mr. Chapman con­sidered were distinguished persons, not all the
saints."

Now from Revelation 20:4 and Revelation 20:6, “they lived and reigned” and
“Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection ... they shall
reign,” it is clear that all who rise in the first resurrection do reign, from
which it certainly follows that such as are not accounted worthy to reign do not
rise at that time. Who shall say to what large degree this searching,
conscience‑quickening belief contributed to the blamelessness of Mr. Chapman’s
beautiful life? The doctrine of the coming of our Lord is in the Scripture so
set forth as to promote holiness of life (1 John 3:3; 2 Peter 3:11-14; 1 Peter
1:13). That line of exposition will be found most accordant with Scripture which
makes the most imperative demand for holiness. To gain that prize I towards that
goal will struggle Which God has set before; To gain that prize ’gainst sin and
death I’ll battle And with the world make war; And if it brings me here but
shame and troubles And scorn, if pain life fills, Yet seek I nothing of earth’s
empty baubles; My God alone my longing stills. To gain that prize, to reach that
crown I’m pressing Which Christ doth ready hold;

I mean His great reward to be possessing, His booty for the bold.

I will not rest, no weariness shall stay me, To hasten home is best, Where I
some day in peace and joy shall lay me Upon my Saviour’s heart and rest.

(From the German).


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 5: 01.03.        THE PERIOD OF THE PAROUSIA
========================================================================

III. THE PERIOD OF THE PAROUSIA. The first resurrection, accompanied by the
removal of the living, will take place at a certain moment when the Lord Himself
shall descend from His present place at the right hand of the throne of God, in
the upper heavens, to the neighbourhood of the earth (1 Thessalonians 4:15-17).
He is now absent from the earth: then He will be present again. This will be the
commencement of His Parousia (presence). The Word of God shows that this descent
will take place at the end of that Great Tribulation which is to be inflicted
upon the saints by the Beast at the very close of this age. It has been
suggested that the phrase sat down on the right hand of the Majesty in the
heights (Hebrews 1:3) does not imply place, but merely dignity. Yet this will
not be said of 1 Kings 2:19 : “The king sat down on his throne, and caused a
throne to be set for the king’s mother, and she sat on his right hand.” There is
a spot in the heaven of heavens where the Father is throned in light
unapproachable by man in the flesh. There the Son sits at the right hand of God,
and thence He will descend at the hour which the Father has set within his own
authority.

1. Christ stated that a time would come when His enemies should “see the Son of
man sitting at the right hand of power, and coming on the clouds of heaven”
(Matthew 26:64): from which it would appear that down to an hour when He is to
be seen by the godless at the right hand of power He remains there, which place
therefore He did not leave for the air several years before that time. Christ
had said before that the hour when the world should thus see Him would follow
the Great Tribulation (Matthew 24:29-30).

2. Now under seal 6 (Revelation 6:1-17) the godless are shown fleeing in terror
from the face of God and from the wrath of the Lamb and are hiding in the rocks.
This accords with paragraph one above and with Isaiah 2:10, Isaiah 2:19, Isaiah
2:21. The latter passage fixes the hour as that when “Jehovah ariseth to shake
terribly the earth,” again showing at what point the Lord leaves the throne on
high. Seal 6 repeats the many signs in heaven and earth which Christ said should
follow the Tribulation (Matthew 24:29-30), which confirms that the “arising” of
the Lord and the appearing of His glory to men follow that Tribulation.

3. According to Paul himself the “blessed hope” of the church is the “appearing
of the glory of our great God and Saviour Jesus Christ” (Titus 2:13), not any
secret, invisible event. The words in italics are a repetition of words used by
Christ on the same topic (Matthew 24:29-30). So that at the close of His then
presence with His disciples the Lord pointed them onward to His appearing in
glory, and they adopted that appearing as their hope. But the Lord stated that
this His appearing would be after the signs that should immediately follow the
Great Tribulation. The suggestion that the “blessed hope” is a first event and
the appearing a second is denied by the grammar of the passage in Greek. “Hope
and appearing belong together” (Alford. See also Bloomfield, Conybeare,
Weymouth, etc.). “‘The blessed hope’ is the appearing” (Speaker’s Commentary).

4. The Lord stated next (Matthew 24:31) that at that moment of His appearing He
would gather together His elect. That the elect are Christians, not Jews, is
certain. (a) No gathering of Jews to Palestine at this hour is known to
Scripture. There is to be one before the reign of the Beast, for he will
persecute them there, and another, expressly termed the second, after Christ
shall have come to Jerusalem (Isaiah 11:10-12). If this at the moment of the
appearing were of Jews that later one would be the third. (b) This gathering of
the elect is universal: were it of Israelites none of these would be left for
that later and second gathering. (c) The Gentile nations, not angels, will be
agents of that second gathering of Israel (Isaiah 11:12; Isaiah 14:2; Isaiah
49:22; Isaiah 66:19-20). (d) This gathering takes place while Christ is yet in
the clouds, whereas Israel are not to be gathered there, but to their land and
city. (e) The term “elect” is applied to angels (1 Timothy 5:21) and to Christ
(Luke 13:35; 1 Peter 2:6). “Election” is used of God’s purpose concerning Jacob
(Romans 9:11). The cognate verb “chosen” is used of Jehovah’s choice of Israel
as His earthly people (Acts 13:17), of guests selecting the chief seats (Luke
14:7), and of Mary choosing the good part (Luke 10:42). None of these places has
any bearing upon the interpretation of Matthew 24:31 and Mark 13:27 : and in
every other place of the many in the New Testament the invariable application of
these terms is to Christians. Even in Romans 11:5, Romans 11:7, Romans 11:28,
though Israelites are in view, it is as Christians they form the “remnant
according to the election of grace.” Nothing arises to suggest that Christ meant
the term in another sense to His former use in Luke 18:7, “shall not God do
justice to His own elect,” or for supposing that the Christians to whom the
Gospels first came could think it to have any other than its by that time fixed
application to Christians.

5. Christ further stated that the gathering of the elect should be accompanied
by “a great sound of a trumpet” (Matthew 24:31). This is repeated in 1
Thessalonians 4:16, and 1 Corinthians 15:52 describes this as the “last trump.”
The last trump of Scripture is recorded in Revelation 11:15-18. Under it four
events are grouped: (1) The anger of the nations and God’s wrath upon them; (2)
The time of the dead to be judged ‑ the godly dead, for it is before the
millennium: comp. Daniel 7:22; (3) The rewarding of the prophets, saints, and
those who fear God; (4) The destruction of the destroyers of the earth.

Thus the raising and rewarding of the godly take place at the same epoch as the
destruction of the wicked, and all is after the Tribulation, for it is the time
of the destruction of the Beast, and is after he has persecuted, and has killed
the Two Witnesses in Jerusalem (Revelation 11:1-13).

6. This is confirmed by the declaration of the strong angel whose message
follows trumpet 6 (Revelation 10:5-7). He announces that the mystery of God
shall be completed during the period of the seventh trumpet. Paul taught
concerning: (1) the mystery (secret); (2) that it was according to the gospel
(good tidings); (3) that it was made known according to the commandment of the
eternal God; (4) and that this was done through the writings of the prophets
(Romans 16:25-27). The angel repeats these four particulars concerning (1) the
mystery; (2) that it was according to the good tidings (the same word as
gospel); (3) that it was declared by God; (4) through His servants the prophets.
The two passages read thus:

Romans 16:25-27 : “Now unto Him that is able to establish you according to my
gospel and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the
mystery which hath been kept in silence through times eternal, but now is
manifested, and by the scriptures of the prophets, according to the commandment
of the eternal God, is made known unto all the nations unto obedience of faith.
. . .”

Revelation 10:7 : “. . . in the days of the voice of the seventh angel, when he
is about to sound, then is finished the mystery of God, according to the good
tidings which He declared to His servants the prophets." The attempt to make out
that these are not the same mystery, and that there are two divine purposes of
which all four particulars are equally and separately true, will surely only be
made in the interests of some special theory of interpretation. The mystery that
was such a vital element in apostolic teaching is shown by Ephesians 3:1-13 to
be the gathering of the church from Jews and Gentiles, and therefore was it to
be made known unto all the nations. This work will be com­pleted by the
resurrection and rapture, which will be under trumpet 7, which will be after the
Tribulation, as shown above under (5).

7. Other Scriptures also reveal this same grouping of events. In 2 Thessalonians
1:6-8, it is said that the delivering of the saints from trouble at the hands of
the godless will be at the time of the destruction of the latter by the Lord at
His revelation in flaming fire with His angels. Thus the church of God is viewed
as continuing in affliction right down to the apocalypse (public appearing) of
Christ.

1 Thessalonians 4:13-18 and 1 Thessalonians 5:1-11, belong together, though
often arbitrarily dissevered, and they similarly associate these events for the
godly and the godless respectively. The “times and the seasons” of verse 1
necessarily means the times and the seasons in which will come the events just
mentioned. No other events have been mentioned, so that there is no other
antecedent to the expression, which thus connects the paragraphs.

Thus the earliest revelations by Christ, the middle period teachings of Paul and
others (see 2 Peter 3:15, that Peter and Paul taught alike), and the latest
through John (Revelation 10:11), agree.

8. This harmony is seen further in the passages which picture the Lord as coming
as a thief.

Christ used the figure to warn His own servants of His own household (Matthew
24:42, Matthew 24:44; Luke 12:39). Peter, who heard that warning, repeats it to
those who had “obtained like precious faith” with himself “in the righteousness
of our God and Saviour Jesus Christ” (2 Peter 3:10-11, 2 Peter 1:1). Paul
reminds the Thessalonians that they, by his particular instruction, knew of that
thief‑like coming, and so they need not be caught unawares by its unannounced
arrival, only they must be very careful to keep awake, continuing watchful and
sober (1 Thessalonians 5:21). The Lord from heaven repeats these warnings to the
church at Sardis (Revelation 3:3), plainly declaring that it is possible for
Christians to cease to watch (comp. Mark 13:36), and so to be overtaken by that
day as a thief. Finally, just as wicked spirits are gathering the armies of the
Beast for the final battle with the Lamb at His return, the Lord interjects the
announcement, “Behold, I come as a thief” (Revelation 16:15). This were a
singularly inappropriate place for the renewal of this warning if in fact the
coming as a thief had taken place long previously at a supposed coming of the
Lord before the end days entirely.

Thus it appears that the “house,” and the Lord’s servants in it, continue on
earth in His absence down to the close of the Tribulation era when the Beast is
preparing for the final battle.

9. That the first resurrection takes place after the Tribulation is clear from
the fact that those martyred by the Beast share therein (Revelation 20:4). The
supposition that this resurrection will be completed in stages, of which this
will be the last, is not needed and seems without Scripture authority.

10. In Revelation 14:1-20 there is a series of six visions. In the first a
company of saints are seen on the Mount Zion with the Lamb, in the region of the
throne of God, for the elders and the living creatures are present, before the
throne.* These saints have been “purchased out of the earth” (showing that they
are not then on earth), and they learn the song of heaven. In the second vision
the hour of judgment strikes; that is, the end days begin. In the third we learn
that the Harlot, Babylon, has been destroyed, which vision is amplified in
Revelation 17:1-18. In the fourth the Great Tribulation is contemplated, for the
Beast is persecuting. After this the fifth vision shows: (1) The Son of man now
on the clouds, having therefore come down from Mount Zion. (2) His angels (the
sickle, comp. Matthew 13:39) are gathering up from the earth His “harvest,” the
ripened saints He has grown as wheat, and will gather into His barn in safety.
The sixth and last vision pictures the destruction of the Beast and his armies,
which is further shown in Revelation 19:11-21.

[* In Revelation “before the throne” always means a heavenly locality, not on
earth. It is the place of the presence of God, of the elders, living creatures,
angels, the glassy sea, the heavenly throne and altar. See Revelation 4:5-6,
Revelation 4:10; Revelation 7:9; Revelation 8:3; Revelation 14:3; Revelation
20:12; all its occurrences.]

Here again the presence on the clouds, with the gathering up of the godly, is
put between the Tribulation and the destruction of the lawless. With unique
emphasis Christ had taught that the “wheat” must remain in the field with the
“tares” “until the harvest” and that the harvest is the “consummation of the
age” (Matthew 13:30-39), not any point of time prior to the End Days. In
Revelation 14:1-20 this harvest is shown appropriately as the last great event
but one in this age. The whole New Testament agrees in putting at this point the
appearing in glory of the Son of man, which was seen from afar by Old Testament
prophets; nor does the Scripture know of any earlier descent of the Lord from
the throne to the air. And so Paul in one sentence (2 Thessalonians 2:1-5)
grouped together (a) the Parousia, (b) our gathering together unto the Lord, and
(c) the Day of the Lord, and most expressly announced and warned that these all
must be pre­ceded by the apostasy and the revelation of the Man of Sin. George
Muller said: “having been a careful diligent student of the Bible for nearly
fifty years, my mind has long been settled upon this point, and I have not the
shadow of a doubt about it. The Scripture declares plainly that the Lord Jesus
will not come until the apostasy shall have taken place, and the man of sin, the
‘son of perdition’ (or personal Anti­christ) shall have been revealed, as seen
in 2 Thessalonians 2:1-17.”


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 6: 01.04.        THE PRE-TRIBULATION RAPTURE
========================================================================

IV. THE PRE‑TRIBULATION RAPTURE.

There are two principal views upon the matters here considered: one, that the
Parousia will commence prior to the Times of the End, and that at its inception
all believers of the heavenly calling, dead and living, will be taken to the
presence of the Lord in the air; the other, that the Parousia will occur at the
close of the Great Tribulation, until when no believers will be raised or
changed. The one view says that no believers will go into the End Times, the
other that none then living will escape them. The one involves that the utmost
measure of unfaithfulness or carnality in a believer puts him in no peril of
forfeiting the supreme honour of rapture or of having to endure the dread End
Days: the other view involves that no degree of faithfulness or of holiness will
enable a saint to escape those Days. As regards this matter, godliness and
unfaithfulness seem immaterial on either view; which raises a doubt of both
views. Our study thus far has shown that the former view is unfounded: we have
now to see that the latter is partly right and partly wrong. It is right in
asserting that the Parousia will commence at the close of the Great Tribulation,
but wrong in declaring that no saints living as the End Times near will escape
that awful period.

1. For our Lord Jesus Christ has declared distinctly that escape is possible. In
Luke 21:1-38 is a record of instruction given by Him to four apostles on the
Mount of Olives. It is a parallel report to Matthew 24:1-51 and Matthew 25:1-46
and Mark 13:1-37, and it deals specifically with the Times of the End and His
Parousia. He foretold great international wars, accompanied with earthquakes,
famines, and pestilences, to be followed by terrors and great signs from heaven
(vv. 10, 11: comp. Seals 1 ‑ 4, Revelation 6:1-17). These things are to be
preceded by a general persecution of His followers (ver. 12), which will be the
first indication that the End Days are at hand. Then Jerusalem is to be trodden
down by the Gentiles right on until the Times of the Gentiles run out (ver. 24:
comp. Revelation 11:2. where the same term “trodden down” is used, and Zechariah
14:1-5). This shows that it is the End‑times of which Christ is speaking, as is
further shown by His earlier statement that at that time of vengeance “all
things that are written” shall be fulfilled. All things that are written in the
prophets concerning Jerusalem, Israel, and the Gentiles were not by any means
fulfilled at the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70.

Then He mentions the disturbances in nature and the fears of mankind that are
grouped under seal 6 in Revelation 6:12-17, and adds explicitly that “then shall
they see the Son of Man coming in a cloud with power and great glory,” and that
when these things begin His disciples may know that their redemption draweth
nigh (ver. 27, 28). In concluding this outline of the period of the Beast the
Lord then uttered this exhortation and promise: “But take heed to yourselves,
lest haply your hearts be overcharged with surfeiting, and drunkenness, and
cares of this life, and that day come on you suddenly as a snare: for so shall
it come upon all them that dwell on the face of all the earth. But watch ye at
every season, making supplication, that ye may prevail to escape all these
things that shall come to pass, and to stand before the Son of Man.” This
declares distinctly: (1) That escape is possible from all those things of which
Christ had been speaking, that is, from the whole End‑times. (2) That that day
of testing will be universal, and inevadable by any then on the earth, which
involves the removal from the earth of any who are to escape it. (3) That those
who are to escape will be taken to where He, the Son of Man, will then be, that
is, at the throne of the Father in the heavens. They will stand before Him
there. (4) That there is a fearful peril of disciples becoming worldly of heart
and so being enmeshed in that last period. (5) That hence it is needful to
watch, and to pray ceaselessly, that so we may prevail over all obstacles and
dangers and thus escape that era. This most important and unequivocal statement
by our Lord sets aside the opinion that all Christians will escape irrespective
of their moral state, and also negatives the notion that no escape is possible.
There is a door of escape; but as with all doors, only those who are awake will
see it, and only those who are in earnest will reach it ere the storm bursts. In
every place in the New Testament the word “escape” has its natural force ‑
ekpheugo, to flee out of a place or trouble and be quite clear thereof.* It
never means to endure the trial successfully. In this very discourse of the Lord
it is in contrast with the statement, “He that endureth (hupomeno) to the end
[of these things] the same shall be saved” (Matthew 24:13). One escapes, another
endures.

[* It comes only at Luke 21:36; Acts 16:27; Acts 19:16; Romans 2:3; 2
Corinthians 11:33; Hebrews 2:3; Hebrews 12:25. In comparison with Romans 2:3,
see its use in the LXX in the interpolated passage after Esther 8:13 : “they
suppose that they shall escape the sin‑hating vengeance of the ever‑seeing God”;
also Judges 6:11; Job 15:30; Proverbs 10:19; Proverbs 12:13. The sense is
invariably as stated above.] The attempt to evade the application of this
passage to Christians on the plea that it refers to “Jewish” disciples of
Christ, is baseless: (a) No “Jewish” disciples of Christ are known to the
Scriptures (Galatians 3:28; Ephesians 2:14-18). (b) The God‑fearing remnant of
Israel of the End‑days, will in no wise escape these things that shall come to
pass (Malachi 3:14; Zechariah 13:8-9; Jeremiah 30:7-8). (c) Nor will they
believe on Jesus as their Messiah until they see Him coming in glory (Zechariah
12:9-10; Zechariah 13:6; Matthew 23:39). (d) The assertion that the title Son of
Man is “Jewish” is equally unwarranted, for the term “man” is necessarily
universal to the race, and does not belong peculiarly to any one nation. (Comp.
John 3:14-15; John 5:25-29; “whosoever” and “all”).

2. In harmony with this utterance of our Lord is His further statement to the
church at Philadelphia (Revelation 3:10): “Because thou didst keep the word of
My patience, I also will keep thee from (ek) the hour of trial, that hour which
is to come upon the whole inhabited earth, to try them that dwell upon the
earth.” Here also are declared: (a) The universality of that hour of trial, so
that any escape from it must involve removal; (b) the promise of being kept from
it, (c) the intimation that such preservation is the consequence of a certain
moral condition: “Because thou didst keep ... I also will keep.” As this is
addressed to a church no question of a “Jewish” application can arise. Nor do
known facts or the Scriptures allow of the supposition that every Christian
keeps the word of Christ’s patience (Matthew 24:12; Revelation 2:5; Galatians
6:12; Colossians 4:14 with 2 Timothy 4:10 concerning Demas); so that this
promise cannot be stretched to mean all believers. In The Bible Treasury, 1865,
p. 380, there is an instructive note by J. N. Darby (see also Coll. Writings,
vol. 13, Critical 1, 581) on the difference between apo and ek. The former
regards hostile persons and being delivered from them; the latter refers to a
state and being kept from getting into it. On Revelation 3:10 he wrote: “So in
Revelation 3:1-22 the faithful are kept from getting into this state, preserved
from getting into it. or, as we say, kept out of it. For the words here answer
fully to the English ‘out of’ or ‘from’.” That the thought is not being kept
from being injured in soul by the trials is implied in the expression “Keep thee
out of that hour”; it is from the period of time itself that the faithful are to
be kept, not merely from its spiritual perils.

3. Of this escape and preservation there are two pictures as there are two
promises. In Revelation 12:1-17 is a vision of (a) a woman; (b) a man‑child whom
she bears; (c) the rest of her family. Light on this complex figure may be
gained from Hosea 4:1-19 and Isaiah 49:17-21; Isaiah 50:1. Israel and Zion,
viewed as corporate systems in continuity, are a “woman,” a “mother”; individual
Israelites at any one time are the “children.” This usage is the same as when an
individual Romanist calls the church his “mother.” The “mother” is that system
continuing through the centuries; yet in one sense, the woman at a given hour is
composed of her children. As to this “woman” the dominant fact is that at one
and the same time she is seen in heaven arrayed with heavenly glory and on earth
in sorrow and pain. This simultaneous and contradictory experience is true of
the church of God only (comp. Ephesians 2:6 with Ephesians 3:13 and Ephesians
6:10-13; and 1 Peter 1:3-5 with 1 Peter 1:6-7). In Scripture Israel corporately
has no standing in the heavens: her destiny and glory are earthly. The national
divisions of earth do not continue in heaven. As to the Man‑child, his birth and
rapture, as with the whole of this book from c. 4:1, pointed to events which the
angel distinctly said were future to the time of the visions. There is no
exception to this, and therefore there is no possible reference to the
resurrection and ascension of Christ. Nor, in the fact, did our Lord at His
birth escape from Satan by rapture to the throne of God: on the contrary, the
Dragon slew Him in manhood and only thereafter did He ascend to heaven. Nor at
the ascension of Christ was Satan cast out of heaven. Thirty years later, when
Paul wrote to the Ephesians, he and his servants were still there (Ephesians
6:12), and another thirty years later again, when John saw the visions, his
ejection was still future (Revelation 12:1-17). The identity of this Man‑child
is indicated by the statement that he “is to rule all the nations with a rod of
iron,” for this is a repetition of the promise (Revelation 2:26-27), “And he
that overcometh, and he that keepeth My works unto the end [comp. the keeping
the word of My patience, as above], to him will I give authority over the
nations, and he shall rule them with a rod of iron.” This promise is given only
to Christ and the overcomers of the churches. As it cannot here (Revelation
12:1-17) apply to Him it can only apply to them. This removal of the Man‑child
cannot be the event fore­told in 1 Thessalonians 4:15-17, for those there in
view will be taken up only as far as to the air around this earth when the Lord
descends thereto from heaven, but this removal takes the Man‑child to the throne
of God, which is where Christ now is, in the upper heavens. This fulfils the
promise that such as prevail to escape shall “stand before the Son of Man.” As
we have seen, the Lord does not descend from heaven till the close of the Great
Tribulation, not before Satan is cast down. Moreover, this one child can be only
a part of the whole family, not the completed church in view in 1 Thessalonians
4:1-18 * and 1 Corinthians 15:1-58. The “woman” out of whom he is born remains
on earth, and after his ascent the “rest of her seed” are persecuted by the
Beast; but his removal is before the Beast is even on the scene or Satan is cast
out of heaven. Thus those who will form this company escape all things that will
occur in the End‑times, as Christ promised; and the identification with the
overcomers declares that they had lived that watchful, prayerful, victorious
life, upon which, as the Lord said, that escape will depend.

[* In 1 Thessalonians 4:15, 1 Thessalonians 4:17 the word perileipo, “that are
left,” deserves notice. It is not found elsewhere in the New Testament, but the
force may be seen in the LXX of Amos 5:15, and of the verb (in some editions) at
2 Chronicles 34:21; Haggai 2:3. In each case it means, to be left after others
are gone. So the lexicons also, and they are confirmed by The Vocabulary of the
Greek Testament. In this place it seems redundant save on our view that the
rapture there in question is at the close of the Tribulation and that some
saints will not have been left on earth until that event, but will have been
removed alive earlier; for to have marked the contrast with those that had died
it would have been enough to have said “we that are alive,” without twice
repeating this unusual word.]

Consequent upon this removal of the watchful, Satan is cast out of heaven, and
presently brings up the Beast, who persecutes the rest of the woman’s family
(Revelation 12:17-18; Revelation 13:7-10). So that one section of the family
escapes the End‑times by being rapt to heaven, and the rest, the more numerous
por­tion, as the term indicates, go into the Great Tribulation. These latter are
such as “keep the commandments of God and hold the testimony of Jesus” (ver.
17). In Revelation 14:12, such are termed “the saints,” which in New Testament
times, was the term regularly used by Christians of one another; and among their
number John had already included himself (Revelation 1:2, Revelation 1:9). It
covers therefore the church of God, of which he was a leader.

4. The second picture of this pre‑Tribulation rapture is given in Revelation
14:1-20. In this chapter there are six scenes: ‑

1. “First‑fruits” with the Lamb on the Mount Zion (Revelation 14:1-6).

2. The hour of judgment commences (Revelation 14:6-7).

3. “Babylon” is announced as having fallen (Revelation 14:8).

4. The Beast period is present and persecution is in progress (Revelation
14:9-13).

5. The Son of Man on a white cloud reaps His “harvest” (Revelation 14:14-16).

6. The “vintage” of the earth is gathered, and is trodden in the winepress on
earth (Revelation 14:17-20). The agricultural figure wrought into this chapter
by the Holy Spirit is the key to its teaching. In the early summer the Jew was
to gather a sheaf of corn as soon as enough was ripe, and this was to be
presented to God in the temple at Jerusalem as “first‑fruits” (Leviticus
23:9-14). After some time (Leviticus 23:15) the whole of the fields would be
ripened by the great summer heat and the whole harvest would be reaped. But
this, though removed indeed from the fields where it had grown, would not be
taken so far as to the temple, but only to the granary on the farm. Then the
season closed with the vintage, and the clusters were not taken away from where
they had grown, the winepress being in the vineyard and the grapes being crushed
therein. Thus the “first‑fruits” are shown as on Mount Zion with the Lamb, the
“harvest” is taken only as far as to the clouds, which accords with 1
Thessalonians 4:1-18; and the vintage is trodden outside the city of Jerusalem,
where the armies of Antichrist are camped. The last scene is the destruction of
the Beast by the Lord at His descent to Jerusalem (Revelation 19:15). Next prior
to that event is the removal of the elect to the clouds: imme­diately before
this is the period of the Tribulation: preceding that is the destruction of the
harlot system of Revelation 17:1-18 (see Revelation 17:16-18): this event
follows first upon the striking of the hour of divine judgment: but before any
of those things of the End commence the First‑fruits are seen with the Lamb in
heaven, as He promised (Luke 21:36). The First‑fruits cannot be a picture of the
whole of the redeemed as they will finally appear at the end of the drama of
those days, for first‑fruits cannot be more than a portion of the whole harvest,
neither can first‑fruits describe the final ingathering. It were a contradiction
to speak thus. First­fruits must be gathered first, before the reaping of the
remainder. The number 144,000 need not be taken literally. In the Apocalypse
numbers are sometimes literal, but some­times figurative. As has been noted
above, these had been purchased out of the earth, which shows that they were not
then on earth, and they learn the song of the heavenly choir. Nor can this Mount
Zion be at Jerusalem, but must be that in the heavens, for the Lord will not
descend to the earthly Zion till after the Tribulation, not before it, as this
scene is placed. The 144,000 of Revelation 7:1-17 are a different company. They
are the godly Remnant of Israel seen on earth after the Appearing and the
gathering of the elect to the clouds, and are sealed (comp. Ezekiel 9:1-11) so
as to be untouched by the wrath of the Lamb now to be poured upon the godless
(Zephaniah 2:3; Isaiah 26:20-21). The identity of these First‑fruits is revealed
by a similar means to that which reveals the identity of the Man‑child. These
persons are shown as connected with the Father, the Lamb, and the Mount Zion,
which also refers back to the promises to the overcomers, and shows that the
First‑fruits will be a portion of the company of the victors, who, it is
promised, will be marked as connected with the Father, the Son, and the New
Jerusalem (Revelation 3:12). These three marks of identification come together
in these two passages only. Now the moral features attributed to these
First‑fruits show that they had lived just that pure, faithful Christian life
which necessarily results from watchfulness, prayerfulness, and patient
obedience to the words of Christ, as inculcated in the corresponding passages
quoted. As the Man‑child and the rest of the woman’s seed were but one family,
only removed in two portions, one before the Beast and the other after his
persecutions, so first‑fruits and harvest were grown from one sowing in one
field, only they were reaped in two portions, one before the hour of judgment
and the other after the Beast had persecuted. We have remarked above that these
latter are termed “saints,” and that this was the regular title that Christians
gave to one another; that it is amplified by the double description “they that
keep the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus,” and that in this
description John had before twice included himself; so that the terms mean that
company in which John had membership, the church of God. Moreover, as the Jewish
remnant will not have owned Jesus during the period in view the terms can apply
only to Christians.

Finally, as between the gathering of the sheaf of first‑fruits and the
ingathering of the harvest there came the intensest summer heat, so between the
removal of the First‑fruits and the reaping of the Harvest there is placed (ver.
9 ‑ 13) the Great Tribulation, that final persecution which while, like all
persecution, it will wither the unrooted stalk (Matthew 13:21), ripens the
matured grain. It is ripeness, not the calendar or the clock, that determines
the time of reaping (Mark 4:29). The Heavenly Husbandman reaps no unripe grain:
hence, “the hour to reap is come” when the harvest is “dried up” (Revelation
14:15), for the dryness of the kernel in the husk is its fitness for the gamer
and for use. Thus the Great Tribu­lation will be a true mercy to the Lord’s
people by fully developing and sanctifying them for their heavenly destiny and
glory.

It thus appears that the foretold order of events will be: ‑

1. The removal of such as prevail to escape the Times of the End. These will be
taken up to God and to His throne on the Mount Zion, not to the air. Nor does
the Lord come for them; they are simply taken, like Enoch or Elijah: taken to
stand before Him and His throne. Nor is a resur­rection announced for this
moment. The dead, because dead, will have escaped the End‑times, which escape is
the announced object of this rapture.

2. The Beast arises and persecutes.

3. The Lord descends to the clouds and gathers together His elect (Matthew
24:29-31; 1 Corinthians 15:51-52; 1 Thessalonians 4:15-17; Titus 2:13;
Revelation 14:14-16). At this time there will be the first resurrection. Each
who shall be accounted worthy of the coming age will “arise into his lot at the
end of the days,” not sooner, certainly not before the End days have commenced
(Daniel 12:13). Nor may we assume of the First­fruits that they will have
priority in the Kingdom over equally faithful saints of earlier times.

4. After an interval the Lord descends to the Mount of Olives, destroys the
Beast and his armies, and establishes the Kingdom of the heavens on the earth.

It is therefore our wisdom to give earnest, unremitting attention to our Lord’s
most solemn exhortation “take heed to yourselves, lest haply your hearts be
overcharged with surfeiting and drunkenness [that is, fleshly indulgence], and
cares of this life [that is, its burdens through either poverty or riches], and
that day come on you suddenly as a snare: for so shall it come on all them that
dwell on the face of all the earth. But watch ye at every season, making
supplication, that ye may prevail to escape all these things that shall come to
pass, and to stand before the Son of Man (Luke 21:34-36).

Oh, dare and sufler all things!

Yet but a stretch of road, Then wondrous words of welcome, And then ‑ the FACE
OF GOD!

Many of the perplexities felt as to these themes are caused by misconceptions
upon three subjects ‑ the constitution of man, the place and state of the dead,
the judgment of the Lord upon His people. Some discussion of these matters
follows.

S0UL OR SPIRIT, WHICH IS THE MAN?


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 7: 01.05.        MAN'S CONSTITUTION AND FUTURE
========================================================================

V. AN ENQUIRY AS TO MAN’S CONSTITUTION AND FUTURE, WITH REMARKS ON HADES AND
PARADISE. As treasures heavy and valuable may hang upon a small hook, so
consequences weighty and far‑reaching may follow the settlement of what may seem
a small point.

Because at death the spirit of man returns to God who gave it (Ecclesiastes
12:7), it is generally thought that man goes then to God in heaven. If the
passage meant this it would teach that the ungodly, as well as the godly, go to
heaven at death, for it refers to man as man. This alone shows that this is not
the sense of the passage. But further, the meaning given assumes that the man,
the conscious entity, the person, the ego, is his spirit. But if this is not so,
then the opinion stated, has no support in Scripture.

Again, many annihilationists deem that the man, the person, consists of two
parts only, the body and the spirit, and that when these are parted at death the
person, the conscious, ego, ceases to exist until the two parts are reunited m
resurrection. But if the conscious personality has ceased to exist, it is
extremely difficult to conceive that it is the identical conscious person that
comes into existence again. Would it not rather be a new personality that comes
into being at resurrection? How can continuity of personality persist during
non‑existence, and how, then, shall this new man be held morally responsible for
the deeds of that former person, and be righteously liable to judgment therefor?

Moreover, this would involve (what indeed we have heard asserted) a
disintegration of the person of the Man, Christ Jesus, between His death and
resurrection. According to the theory, during that period His humanity was
non‑existent. So that whilst the Son of God existed, Christ did not until
resurrection. This is fatal heresy, and alone forbids the doctrine in question.
The alternative must be for the annihilationist to adopt the first mentioned
view, that personality attaches to the spirit, as others of that school do. But
if it be, that the soul is the person, and that after death the soul has its own
separate existence, then the whole assertion fails.

Inasmuch therefore as most serious issues are involved, this inquiry is of great
practical importance. Indeed. it may be said that many most interesting and
profitable themes can only be understood aright by a right understanding of our
question ‑ Soul or Spirit, Which is the Man?

It must here be remarked that this theme, like all such profounder topics of the
Word of God, cannot be studied in the English Authorised Version. It is not
possible, on account of the deliberate irregularity in translation used by the
Translators so as to secure pleasing English. We quote here generally the
English Revised Version, and sometimes the New Translation of J. N. Darby
(Morrish, London). This, one of the earliest individual translations, remains,
in our opinion, by far the most helpful of all such.


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 8: 01.05.01.           HIS CREATION
========================================================================

1. THE CREATION OF MAN. The creation of man is described in Genesis 2:7 : “And
Jehovah Elohim formed man, dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils
the breath of life; and man became a living soul.”

Here are three stages. 1. A material form fashioned but of material particles,
dust. This is the body. 2. A some­what inbreathed by God, named in Ecclesiastes
12:7, “spirit.” That the “breath” of Genesis 2:7, and the “spirit” of
Ecclesiastes 12:7 are one is confirmed by the combination of the two terms in
Genesis 7:22 : “All in whose nostrils was the breath of the spirit of life.” 3.
The result, that man became what is here called “soul,” a living soul.

1. As to the body, it is to be observed that it was not itself the man. It lay
there, fashioned and prepared, but the man was not yet there. The body was an
inanimate form, which preceded the existence of the man. This as against the
Sadducean materialist and his assertion that the body is the man, and that when
it dies his existence ends.

2. The same is true of the breath or spirit, which God inbreathed. It also was
in existence prior to the man, for God breathed it into the body. It was not
God; it is not divine: it is not said that God breathed of Himself, or breathed
His Spirit into the body, but a somewhat not to be defined by us as to its
substance or nature, but which God terms “spirit.” In Zechariah 12:1 it is
declared to be a created thing, a thing “formed,” as an article made by a
potter. It is the same word as “potter” in Zechariah 11:13, and is found first
at Genesis 2:8, God “formed man.” This as against the pantheist, and the
doctrine akin to pantheism, that there is a measure of divinity in all men by
creation. The immanence of God in all creation is truth, the identity of all
things, or of any created thing, with God is error, deadly error.

Thus the spirit was not the man, for he only came into existence by reason of
the inbreathing of the spirit into the body, which conjunction of two separate,
previously existing things, resulted in the creation of a third: “man became a
living soul.”

3. It remains only that the man is what he is here des­cribed to be, “a living
soul.” The man is the soul, not the spirit, even as he is not the body. This as
against the annihilationist theory above mentioned.

It is fairly certain that every false philosophy that has beclouded the thoughts
of man had been instilled into men’s minds by spirits of darkness in Babylon
before Moses wrote Genesis, and had thence infected all races. In that case he
would have been instructed in them in Egypt among the rest of its learning; and
when he was re‑instructed by the God of truth, he so described the creation of
the universe, and of man in particular, as to deny every false idea current then
or since. This threefold composition of man is implied everywhere in the Word of
God, and sometimes is distinctly stated. Thus in 1 Thessalonians 5:3 : “And the
God of peace himself sanctify you wholly; and may your spirit and soul and body
be preserved entire, without blame in the parousia of our Lord­ Jesus Christ.”
The body is distinguished from the spirit in James 2:26 : “The body apart from
(the) spirit is dead”; and the soul from the spirit in Hebrews 4:12, “The word
of God . . . piercing to the dividing of soul and spirit.” The man has a body
with which he operates upon the material world; but the body is not the man. He
has also a spirit with which he has dealings with the spiritual realm; but the
spirit is not the man. The man himself, the con­scious ego, is the soul.
Personality in man inheres in the soul, which will become yet more apparent as
we proceed, but may be seen in such passages as Exodus 1:5 : “all the souls were
seventy souls”; Leviticus 4:2 : “if a soul shall sin” Leviticus 5:2 : “if a soul
touch”; Leviticus 5:4 : “if a soul swear” Leviticus 7:18 : “the soul that
eateth”, etc., etc. The evident sense is: “If a person” do this or that. See
also LXX Ezekiel 16:5.


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 9: 01.05.02.           DEATH
========================================================================

2. THE MEANING OF THE WORD DEATH.

Now “the body without spirit is dead” (James 2:26), and the soul, the man,
cannot use or inhabit a dead body. The spirit imparts to the body vitality,
animation, and makes it usable by man. Thus so long as the two are united man is
a living soul, but when God recalls the spirit which He gave, the body ceases to
have life, the soul vacates it, and thenceforth, until resurrection, the man is
dead. But it is carefully and always to be remembered that in Scripture the term
“life” does not mean simply existence, but much more and much rather it means a
certain mode or quality of existence, and equally so the term “death,”
there­fore, does not mean, non‑existence, but an opposite state or mode of
existence. Many things exist which do not exhibit the property called “life.”
All annihilationist reasoning which we have read assumes this false sense of the
words “life” and “death” and cannot proceed without it.

Yet in some real sense Adam died the day he disobeyed God, according to the
sentence, “in the day that thou eatest of it thou shalt certainly die” (Genesis
2:17), but he did not cease to exist that day. So, by a powerful antithesis, it
is said, “she that giveth herself to pleasure is dead while she liveth,” which
cannot be read, ceases to exist while she exists (1 Timothy 5:6). In much the
same way we speak of a living death.

Equally arresting is our Lord’s argument against the annihilationists of His day
(Luke 20:37-38).

He first admits that Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob are dead, saying, “But that the
dead are raised,” and at once adds that “God is not the God of the dead, but of
the living, for all live unto Him.” So dead in one sense, they are yet alive in
another, showing that both terms describe only relative conditions of existence.
Similarly the Lord makes the father of the prodigal say: “This my son was dead,
and is alive again” (Luke 15:24), though in another sense he had been as much
alive in the far country as after his return. Further, it is clear that the
first death does not cause the annihilation of the sinner or there could be no
second death for him.

Thus the word death does not of itself mean ceasing to be, and such as say that
the second death means annihilation are bound to show that the Scripture adds to
the word this sense which does not belong to it. The second death is the “lake
of fire” (Revelation 20:14). The beast and the false prophet are cast thereinto
before the thousand years reign of Christ (Revelation 19:20); they are still
there at the close of that period when Satan is cast there (Revelation 20:10);
so that a thousand years in the second death has not destroyed their existence,
and the sentence upon all three is that “they shall be tormented day and night
for the ages of the ages.” It would be impossible to torment that which had
ceased to be.

It is consistent with the holiness and the love of God­ - for it is fact – that
angels that abused His favour shall be confined in that place of misery,
Tartarus, for already thousands of years (2 Peter 2:4); that Dives (Luke
16:1-31), who abused His goodness on earth, shall be tormented in a flame in
Hades for a period unknown to us, for it is not yet ended; that the Beast and
the false prophet, who blasphemed His holy name, shall be in the lake of fire
for more than a thousand years at least. As this is consistent with the love and
justice of God why should it not be so for 10,000 years, for 100,000, for a
billion years, or for ever, and especially in the case of those who rejected His
amazing love in Christ, trampled under foot the Son of God, and definitely
resisted the Spirit of truth? We are not competent to form our own opinion as to
what God may or may not, do consistently with His character and because of it.
We can only bow to what He has revealed, assured that He will ever act
consistently with what He is, for He is not able to do otherwise. We can best
estimate what sentence a judge may pass by con­sidering what sentences he has
before passed, as well as what statements he may have made as to future
sentences.


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 10: 01.05.03.           WHAT TAKES PLACE AT DEATH?
========================================================================

3. WHAT TAKES PLACE AT DEATH? The passage before cited tells us that “the dust
returns to the earth as it was, and the spirit returns unto God who gave it”
(Ecclesiastes 12:7). But what becomes of the soul? An actual case is better than
much speculation, an ounce of fact being worth a ton of theory. Of the Man
Christ Jesus we ate told distinctly what took place at His death.

1. His dead body was laid in the tomb.

2. His last words on the cross were, “Father, into thy hands I commend my
spirit” (Luke 23:46), the human spirit thus returning unto God who gave it. That
the human spirit is not the divine Spirit is seen clearly in the case of our
Lord, for His entire holy humanity was a created thing conceived by an operation
of the Holy Spirit in Mary (Luke 1:35); years later it was anointed with power
by the Spirit of God coming upon it; and at last on the cross, He surrendered
His human spirit to the Father: an act impossible in relation to the Spirit of
God with Whom He as God was in indissoluble union. The distinction - necessary
and unavoidable ‑ between the human and the divine is thus ever maintained. It
was the human spirit which vitalized His body that Jesus gave up that He might
die.

3. But the Spirit of prophecy in David (Psalms 16:10) had put into Messiah’s
mouth these other words: “Thou wilt not leave my soul to Sheol,” which words
were later, on the day of Pentecost, applied by Peter to Christ. “Thou wilt not
leave my soul unto Hades” (Acts 2:27). The error of Apollinaris (cent. 4), that
the person of Christ consisted of a human body and soul only, with the divine
Spirit (or Logos) taking the place in Him of a human spirit, must be steadfastly
resisted. His humanity, as ours, con­sisted of body, soul, and spirit.

Sheol and Hades are equivalent words in Hebrew and Greek respectively. Of this
region there is abundant informa­tion in Scripture. It is very far from the
fact, as spiritualists assert, that no certain information as to the state after
death is available save what they think they receive from spirits through
mediums. But most unfortunately the reader of the Authorized Version is
completely stopped from this study by the variety of the terms employed. Sheol
and Hades are rendered “grave,” “pit,” and “hell.” The last in its older English
meaning was not inaccurate, but it has come now to mean only the final place of
the lost, the lake of fire, which never is the sense of Sheol or Hades. However,
any diligent reader can pursue the subject in the Revised Version, for these
original terms are given in either text or margin where ­ever they occur. This
is one example, and an important one, of the superiority of the R.V. over the
A.V.


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 11: 01.05.04.           WHERE IS HADES?
========================================================================

4. WHERE IS HADES? So the soul of our Lord was in Hades between His death and
His resurrection on the third day. And Ephesians 4:9-10 shows beyond question
(1) that the “soul” was the Lord Himself, the personality, and (2) where Hades
is situate. It says: “Having ascended up on high he has led captivity captive,
and has given gifts unto men. Now this, having ascended, what is it but that He
also descended into the lower parts of the earth? He that descended is the same
who has also ascended far above all heavens, that he might fill all things.”

1. The Person that ascended is the same Person that had descended, and from His
own express words to Mary directly after His resurrection it is certain that He
himself did not go to the Father at the hour of death, for He said to her: “I
have (perf. ind., anabebeeko) not yet ascended to my Father; but go to my
brethren and say unto them, I ascend to my Father” (John 20:17). As His ascent
to the Father had yet to take place it is clear that His human spirit, which He
had commended to His Father as He died, was not Himself. Nor would the words
admit the thought; for a man cannot send his personality, his self, away from
himself, but we read of Jesus that “he gave up the spirit,” or, breathed out the
spirit, expired, as we say, the exact reversal of the act of creation when God
breathes in the spirit. The spirit therefore was not Himself, but a part of His
composite humanity that He could dismiss by an act of the will. Man does not
possess the power to do this; he must use violence to terminate his life: but
Christ had received this power specially from His Father, according to His
statement that the Father had given Him authority to lay down His life by His
own act (John 10:17-18).

2. The realm to which Christ descended, elsewhere, as we have seen, named Hades,
is in this place in Ephesians stated plainly to be in “the lower parts of the
earth.” Scripture always locates it there and nowhere else. So Jacob of old
said: “I will go down to Sheol to my son” (Genesis 37:35); and so the great
prophet Samuel, when permitted by God to come from the world of the dead to
announce the doom of Saul (an exceptional permission and event) said: “Why hast
thou disquieted me to bring me up?” (1 Samuel 28:15). And so Christ said of
Capernaum: “Shalt thou be exalted unto heaven? thou shah go down unto Hades”
(Matthew 11:23). As certainly as heaven is above the surface of the earth so
certainly is Hades in the opposite direction.

Readers of the great classics will not need to be reminded that it was the
common belief of the ancient world that the place of the dead was within the
earth. We are not aware that any other opinion was then in men’s minds. Their
details of that place and its conditions are not to be accepted without
Scripture confirmation, even as those of mediaeval writers like Dante are not to
be; but the general facts of the location of the world of the dead within the
earth, and of its having two divided regions, one of pain and one of bliss, are
plainly adopted in Holy Scripture (as in Luke 16:1-31), and so are confirmed as
facts. And it could be shown that some details also are thus confirmed; as that
the poets made visitors to and from that realm go and come through some cave or
opening in the earth, and the Revelation similarly represents demon hordes as
coming from the abyss through a shaft or opening therefrom (Revelation 9:1-11).
We take the idea in each case to represent the conception that the realm of the
dead is within the earth.


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 12: 01.05.05.           DO SAINTS GO TTO HEAVEN AT DEATH?
========================================================================

5. BUT DO NOT SAINTS AT DEATH “GO TO HEAVEN”? The death of Stephen presents the
exact features seen at the death of his Lord. We are told that “he called upon
the Lord, saying, Lord Jesus, receive my spirit ... and ... he fell asleep”
(Acts 7:59-60). His body did not fall asleep: it was battered to death by brutal
ill‑usage, and devout men buried it. It does not say that his spirit fell
asleep, but that he surrendered it to his Lord. We shall see later that neither
does the soul “sleep” in relation to that other realm to which it goes at death;
so that the expression “fell asleep” can only mean as to its relation to this
earth‑life which it leaves at death. But did not Stephen “go to heaven” when he
died? Do not all who die in Christ do so? It has been the almost universal
belief of Protestants, but there is no Scripture for it. If Solomon’s words,
“the spirit returns to God who gave it,” mean this, then the saints before the
time of Christ must have gone there, and, as before remarked, not saints only,
but the ungodly also, for the statement applies to all men.

It has been often asserted that when the Lord rose he released from Hades the
godly dead and removed them to Paradise in the presence of God, and that ever
since all His people go there at death. The Scripture nowhere declares this, but
is wholly against it.

It should be asked, Where were these multitudes of souls during the forty days
before Christ himself ascended? Raised at His resurrection, as the theory
asserts, what was their location during that period? But it is known definitely
that one of the most renowned of Old Testament men of God did not ascend to
heaven with the Lord, for at Pentecost, which was after the ascension, Peter
distinctly stated that “David has not ascended into the heavens” (Darby, Acts
2:34). Why was David left behind? There is no reason to think he was: the other
godly dead also stayed there, as far as Scripture is concerned.

Alford translates: “David himself [i.e., in contrast to Christ] is not
ascended”: Whitby: “David is not (yet) ascended”: Canon Cook (Speaker’s
Commentary) remarks: “David’s soul was still in the‑ intermediate state.” Had
David in fact ascended even but a few weeks before Peter was speaking, the
latter could not have made the assertion “David ascended not.” The aorist used
(anabee) covered all pre­ceding time, from the death of David to the speech of
Peter. Moreover, if at any time David had ascended the point and conclusiveness
of Peter’s argument were gone. Its cogency lay in the fact that no one but Jesus
Christ had ascended:therefore He and He alone fulfilled the prophecy; for if any
one else had ascended from the grave to the throne of God how should it be
certain that he did not fulfil the prediction? In his great work on The Creed
(Art. 5, He descended into Hell) Bishop Pearson shows how little basis the
opinion in question has. He says: “The next consideration, is whether by virtue
of His descent, the souls of those who before believed in Him, the Patriarchs,
Prophets, and all the people of God, were delivered from that place and state,
in which they were before; and whether Christ descended into Hell to that end,
that He might translate them into a place and state, far more glorious and
happy. This has been, in the later ages of the Church, the vulgar opinion of
most men ...

“But even this opinion, as general as it hath been, hath neither the consent of
Antiquity, nor such certainty as it pretendeth. Indeed, very few (if any) for
above five hundred years after Christ, did so believe that Christ delivered the
saints out of Hell, as to leave all the damned there. Many of the Ancients
believed not, that they were removed at all, and few acknowledged that they were
removed alone.” But it is asked, What became of those who came forth from their
graves after Christ had risen and who appeared unto many? (Matthew 27:52-53).
Did they not “go to heaven” with the Lord? Let those say what became of these to
whom God may have given private information upon the point; but it cannot be
learned from Scripture that they went to heaven. And in return it may be asked,
What became of Lazarus and the other persons who were resuscitated, as mentioned
in Scripture? Did they go to heaven without dying again or, are they still on
earth? or, did they not in due time go back to the death state, from which they
had been temporarily recalled to exhibit the power of God? That Christ “led
captivity captive” carries no suggestion that He took the godly dead to heaven.
The figure itself forbids the idea. It is taken from the ancient practice that a
victorious commander dragged many, and the most noble, of his captives to his
capital city and exhibited them for his glory at his triumphal entry. The
expression could in no wise apply to the possible recovery of some of his own
subjects from captivity by his enemy and their return home with him in liberty.
The sense may be seen plainly in the place in Judges 5:12, from which the phrase
is quoted in the later passages. As the conqueror Barak returns from the victory
over Sisera Deborah cries: “Arise, Barak, and lead away thy captives.” It is the
Lord’s conquest of the hosts of dark­ness that is celebrated in the New
Testament passages (Ephesians 4:8; Colossians 2:15), as it is also the theme in
Psalms 68:18, from which the quotation is actually made. The figure is again
military. God is pictured as among a mighty host: “The chariots of God are
twenty thousand, even thousands upon thousands,” and then it is said, “Thou hast
led away captives,” the phrase formerly used of Barak.


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 13: 01.05.06.           PARADISE, WHEN AND WHERE?
========================================================================

6. WHEN AND WHERE IS PARADISE?

Paradise is not the actual dwelling place of God, the house or temple in heaven.
The meaning of the word will not allow this, for it describes the pleasure
grounds of a great man, say a king. Thus Solomon using the word says, “I builded
me houses; I planted me vineyards; I made me gardens and parks (paradises, LXX),
and I planted trees in them of all kinds of fruits” (Ecclesiastes 2:4-5). The
parks were not the houses. The former, like the vineyards, might be at a
distance from the palace. In the Septuagint (LXX) the word is used of the garden
of Eden.

Paul says that he was “caught away into the paradise” (2 Corinthians 12:4),
which, in view of the meaning of the word, does not mean the heaven of heavens
where God has His own especial dwelling. The word “caught up” is not exact, for
the Greek word harpazo does not in itself indicate the direction. Nor is it
certain that by “the paradise” he means the “third heaven” to which he had been
taken according to the verse preceding, because he had said (2 Corinthians 12:1)
that he was about to speak of “visions,” not of only one vision, whereas he did
not mention more than one, unless the two are separate events. But if the
article “the paradise” points to one such region that is pre‑eminently Paradise,
and if that is in the upper world, what follows? Nothing, as to our theme;
certainly not that all saints go thither at death. Paul is using the experi­ence
as proof that he had exceptional tokens that he was an apostle, which requires
that the experience itself be exceptional, not general. Moreover, that an
unusual event happened to one Christian during life is no proof that it happens
to all Christians at death. But the article “the paradise” does not require the
sense of a region in the heavens, because Christ used it when he said to the
thief, “To‑day shalt thou be with me in the paradise” (Luke 23:43), and it is
beyond question, as we have seen, that Christ did not go to the heavenly regions
that day, but to Hades, in “the lower parts of the earth.” There­fore the
blissful region of Hades, “Abraham’s bosom” (Luke 16:22) was paradise; and ought
not we, the followers of the Lord, to feel that a region which was suitable to
Him in the death state must be fully suitable for us? As far as the meaning of
the word goes there may be many paradises, even as Solomon says, “I made me
paradises”; and so it may be that “the Paradise of God,” where grows the tree of
life of which saints that have conquered in the battles of life shall be
privileged to eat, is heavenly in location (Revelation 2:7; Revelation 22:14);
but in any case that is future, not present, as to our enjoyment of it, and does
not touch the place and state of the dead. The Lord Jesus in His universal
presence is not only in heaven; He is also in the midst of two or three living
saints gathered to His name on earth. He is in Hades also: “He descended . . .
He ascended, that He might fill all things” might occupy the universe (ta
panta), might pervade it all with His presence, as the odour of the ointment did
the house (John 12:3), where the same verb is used as in Ephesians 4:10
(pleeroo). Thus, without vacating His place at the right hand of God, He could
present Himself personally and repeatedly to His imprisoned and hard‑pressed
servant on earth (Acts 23:11; 2 Timothy 4:16-17), and can also com­municate with
the dead, as we shall see shortly. And the soul, freed from the trammels of this
enfeebled, deranged body of our humiliation, can in consequence appreciate that
presence more keenly and enjoy it more blessedly, and so Paul could rightly say
that to depart and to be with Christ would be very far better than to be chained
day and night to a rough pagan soldier, as was at that time his distressing lot
(Php 1:23). It is however to be noted that the apostle does not here make any
general statement that “to die is gain”; strictly his assertion is made of
himself only. He had just stated his “earnest expectation and hope” that Christ
should continue to be “magnified in his body, whether by life or by death.” Not
every believer lives with this as his fixed and paramount intention. Not every
Christian has so dedicated his body to Christ as to be as willing for death as
for life. Then Paul adds: “For to me to live is Christ, and to die is gain” (Php
1:20-21). Doubtless this is true of each who lives to magnify Christ; but it is
not said of believers who may not so live, as those, for example, who are cut
off prematurely in their sins, as were Ananias and Sapphira and the evil living
Christians in the Corinthian church (Acts 5:1; 1 Corinthians 11:30).


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 14: 01.05.07.           THE SOULS UNDER THE ALTAR
========================================================================

7. THE SOULS UNDER THE ALTAR.

It is a serious loss to many believers that they regard the book of the
Revelation as beyond comprehension, and are afraid to accept its symbols and
visions as a revelation. Hence, when appeal is made to it they decline to accept
its testimony. But symbols, pictures, figures of speech, being used by the
Spirit of truth with divine care, teach with accuracy, and indeed with superior
vividness, those who have eyes to see and ears to hear. Hieroglyphs have plain
mean­ing to those who can read them, and this had been just as much the fact
during the period when men could not read them, or in the later period when
scholars differed as to their meaning. Patient research brought explanation and
reconciliation.

One of the most illuminating portions of Scripture upon our present interesting
and necessary themes is in Revelation 6:9-11. John says: “And when the Lamb
opened the fifth seal, I saw underneath the altar the souls of them that had
been slain for the word of God, and for the testimony which they held: and they
cried with a great voice, saying, How long, O sovereign ruler, the holy and
true, dost thou not judge and avenge our blood on them that dwell on the earth?
And there was given to them, to each one, a white robe; and it was said unto
them that they should rest yet for a little time, until their fellow‑bondmen
also and their brethren, who should be killed even as they were, should have
fulfilled their course.” At the time here in view the resurrection of the godly
has not yet come, for the roll of the martyrs is not complete. These brethren
therefore are still without their resurrection bodies. But to John, rapt in
spirit into that super‑sensuous world (c. Revelation 1:10 : “I became in
spirit,” that is, in an ecstatic state), those “souls” were visible. Therefore
death does not end the existence of the soul. Moreover, they are conscious: they
remember what befell them on earth at the hands of the godless; they know what
the future will bring of vengeance; they ponder the situation, and they wonder
at the seeming delay of their vindication by God; they appeal to their Lord;
they are given answer, counsel, and encouragement; they receive the sign of
their Master’s approval, the white robe, at once His recompense for that they
did not defile their garments in this foul world, and His assurance that they
shall be His personal and constant associates in His kingdom (Revelation 3:4-5).
This last item ‑ the giving of the white robe­s - shows further that not all
saints await a session of the judgment seat of Christ when at last He shall come
from heaven; for His decision and approval are here made known to these in
advance of His coming and of their resurrection. The vision contains also
something more, and which is completely unseen by most readers. When Samuel came
from Hades to speak to Saul (1 Samuel 28:12-14) he was seen by the medium. She
saw him “coming up out of the earth,” a further plain Intimation that Sheol is
within the earth. She described him, saying it was “an old man” who had
appeared, and he was “covered with a robe.” The description was so accurate that
Saul, who had long known Samuel on earth, recognized him by it and was satisfied
that the real Samuel was present, though he had not himself seen the appearance;
for it says that “he perceived (Heb., knew),” not that he saw that it was
Samuel. Equally does his question to the witch “What seest thou?” tell that he
had not himself seen the form. This makes evident (a) that the disembodied soul
has form and garments, such as can be seen by one endowed with vision therefor,
as were the medium then and John later; and (b) that the psychical form and
clothing of that state correspond recognizably to the outer material form and
clothing of the former earth life. This has bearing upon the –question of
recognition after death, and upon other interesting points not now to be
examined. The reality of this psychical form is often assumed or asserted in
Scripture. Dives in Hades (Luke 16:1-31) has a body that can feel anguish from a
“flame.” There is “water” that could cool his “tongue.” Lazarus has a “finger.”
Both Dives and Abraham have eyes and ears and voices; they see and hear and
speak. The reality of bliss in that state must be surrendered if the reality of
torment there be denied. That those realities are subtle as compared with their
grosser counterparts of this world, does not make them or the experi­ences less
real, but rather the more acute.

Thus also it is as to the souls “under the altar.” John sees them, and sees that
to each of them is given a “robe” that is both suitable and significant.

It was for a similar, yet even higher, experience that Paul longed; for, while
the disembodied state would indeed be far better than his painful lot as a
prisoner, yet in itself it is not the best. And so on another occasion, when he
was in freedom and rejoicing in his wondrous and privileged service, he spoke
differently (2 Corinthians 5:1-10). First he spoke of the present: “We that are
in this tent‑dwelling [the body] do groan, being burdened”: then he mentioned
the intermediate state after death: “not for that we would be unclothed”
(without adequate covering), for this is not to be desired, it is as unpleasant
and unseemly for the soul as for the body*; and then he spoke of the future: “we
long to be clothed upon with our habitation which is from heaven; if so be that
being clothed we shall not be found naked,” that is, at the coming of the Lord.

[* Compare the evident longing of the evil spirit to return into the body he had
left. Without a material body he wandered restless, like a thirsty man seeking
water in a desert (Matthew 12:43-45). Demons also begged to enter the bodies of
even swine, when driven from the body of a man. This misery of disembodied
beings is recognized by the heathen, who often, by reason of dread and unholy
contact with the demon world, have more sense of these matters than the
materialized modern westerner. Thus a Chinese driver explained the whirling dust
spouts of the Gobi desert as being spirits: “What they want is a body, and for
lack of a better one they pick up a shroud of sand” (Misses Cable and French,
Something Happened, 191).] This “if so be” implies the possibility of not having
part in the first resurrection, for (1 Corinthians 15:54) that is the hour when
“what is mortal shall be swallowed up of life,” by the soul being clothed upon
with its “building from God, a house not made with hands, eternal, in the
heavens,” a “house” in contrast to this present body, the frail transitory tent.
This is the meaning of his earlier prayer above noticed, that “the spirit and
soul and body be preserved entire, un­blemished,” and so unblamable (amemptbs
includes both) when the Lord shall come (1 Thessalonians 5:22). No “naked,” that
is, unembodied, soul can be presented before the presence of God’s glory,
because for that it must be without blemish (amomos), not to be blamed (Jude
1:24; Ephesians 1:4). Were a man, however perfect his form, and even were he of
the royal family, to present himself naked on a court day before the king upon
his throne he would be severely blamed. Not only comeliness of person, but
clothing, and suitable clothing, is indispensable. Indeed, the officers of the
court would prevent anything so utterly unseemly. Shall the King of kings
receive less respect? He that hath ears to hear let him hear this, and lay to
heart that not death, but resurrection or rapture fits for translation to the
realms above and the court of the God of glory. It was thus with Christ himself.
For entrance into the holy places the priest had not only to be one of the
redeemed people of God; he had also to be unblemished as to his person
(Leviticus 21:1-24), and he had further to be clothed in garments of glory and
beauty (Exodus 28:1-43). Both were indispensable for access to the presence of
God. Moreover, before the perfect form could be clothed in such garments it had
to be washed with water (Leviticus 8:6; Leviticus 16:4), which is the work our
Moses, Christ, wishes to effect in us in this earthly life by His word
(Ephesians 5:25-27) and by discipline (Hebrews 12:10), in preparation for that
coming day of our being clothed for access to and service in the true sanctuary
above.

If it be asked whether the righteousness imputed to the believer upon first
faith in Christ does not include all this that is evidently necessary, the
answer is a distinct negative. One consideration settles this. That imputed
righteousness is the “righteousness of God,” and this is of necessity
indefectible, untarnishable. But, according to the regulations, the priest may
possibly be defective in form or defiled in person and clothing: were it not so,
what need of the regu­lations and purifying ceremonies? For the forgiveness of
sins, and for life as a forgiven man in the camp, neither perfection of form,
nor washing at the gate of the tabernacle, nor special clothing, were demanded;
but for access to God and for priestly service all these were as indispensable
as the atoning blood. Imputed righteousness settles completely and for ever the
judicial standing of the believer as justified before the law of God; but
practical righteousness must be added in order to secure many of the mighty
privileges which become possible to the justified. Let him that hath ears hear
this also, for loss and, shame must be his at last who has been content to
remain deformed and imperfect in moral state, or is found to have neglected the
washing, and so to be unfit to wear the noble clothing required for access to
the throne of glory. Such neglect of present grace not only causes the loss of
heart access to God, as the careless believer surely knows, but will assure the
forfeiture of much that grace would have granted in the future.

Here lies the weight of the warning which our Lord announces from heaven as to
be specially applicable when His coming draws near: “Behold, I come as a thief.
[This, message is set in the midst of the gathering of the hosts of Antichrist
for the battle of Har Magedon, and so indicates the period when the coming will
be]. Blessed is he that watcheth, and keepeth his garments, lest he walk naked
and they see his shame” (Revelation 16:15). Therefore “garments” may be lost. If
the reference is to the imputed righteousness, then justifi­cation may be
forfeited, and the once saved be afterwards lost. But let those who rightly
reject this, inquire honestly what it does properly mean as to the eternally
justified. And let them face what is involved in the loss of one’s garments. In
the temple of old the guards were placed at nightfall at their posts. The
captain of the temple, at any hour he chose, went round with a posse of men
unannounced, and if a guard was caught asleep at his post, he was stripped of
his clothes, which were burned, and he was left to go forth in his shame. The
shame of his nakedness was the outward counterpart of the deeper shame that he
had slept when on duty. Not in that dishonoured state dare he enter the house of
God and sing or serve. And it would be long ere the disgrace of that night would
fade from memory, his own or others. My soul, keep awake through this short
night of duty while thy Lord is away! Thou knowest not in which watch of the
night He will come, and it were dreadful to be left un­clothed with that house
which is from heaven should He come suddenly and find thee sleeping! To return
to seal 5. These, then, are “souls” not “spirits.” Man has spirit as part of his
composite being, but he is not a spirit, as angels are. In the 397 places where
the word “spirit” comes in the New Testament man is never called a spirit,
because he himself is not one, but is a soul. Hence, by the way, the “in‑prison
spirits” of 1 Peter 3:19 are not human beings, but those fallen angels whom
Peter again mentions (2 Peter 2:4: comp. Genesis 6:1-4 and Jude 1:6). This is
put beyond question by the fact that these are in the underworld, in prison, in
Tartarus ‑ a region well known to the ancient world, and by this name that Peter
uses, as the deepest and most dreadful part of Hades, a prison of fallen angels;
whereas the spirit of man does not go to the under­world, but to “God who gave
it.”

It is therefore the soul which is the person; and ‑ against the annihilationist
‑ the soul has not ceased to exist, or lost its sense of personality, because of
being without spirit or body. Yet neither can man in this incomplete condition
stand in the all‑holy presence of God in heaven. For entrance into the holy of
holies the high priest himself must be arrayed in garments specially pure and
glorious. It was only in His resurrection body of glory that the Man Christ
Jesus entered into the holy place on high, and so only can the under‑priests,
His followers, do so. To stand there the being must be complete in structure and
perfect morally, which is the point of Paul’s prayer for fellow‑saints: “The God
of peace himself sanctify you wholly; and may your spirit and soul and body be
preserved entire, blameless in the parousia [the presence, at His coming] of our
Lord Jesus Christ” (1 Thessalonians 5:23). This shows that the phrase “the
spirits of just men made perfect” points to the resurrec­tion. It has just
before been said of them, that “apart from us they [i.e., Old Testament saints
are included, (see Exodus 28:4-39) in this chapter. – Ed.] could not be made
perfect” (Hebrews 12:23; Hebrews 11:40). All the other glories to which in this
passage we are said, to have come are future, to be realized actually at the
coming of the Lord. See my “Firstborn Sons,” 84 ff. The use of spirit in this
place (Hebrews 12:23) may seem at variance with the statement that man is not
called a “spirit!” It is a rare instance, perhaps in the New Testament the only
instance, of Cremer’s fourth sense in which the term is used. It “comes to
denote an essence without any corporeal garb for its inner reality”; that is, in
Hebrews 12:23, which he cites, the man, the soul, without its body, is described
as spirit, meaning a spiritual substance destitute of a material covering. This
does not cancel the regular distinction in Scripture between soul and spirit,
but indicates only the immateriality of the soul, the ego, in itself. The
student should by all means study Cremer’s treatment of pneuma and psuche
(Lexicon of N.T. Greek), and note his conclusion that “psuche [soul] is the
subject or ego of life."

Now these souls that John saw are “under the altar.” Not one of the first six
seals, of which this is the fifth, pictures events in the presence of God in
heaven; all deal with affairs of earth, or as seen from the earth. This altar,
then, is not in heaven. There is an altar in heaven pictured in the book, but it
is specified as being the “golden altar,” that is, the one for incense (comp.
Exodus 30:3), and as being “before the throne” or “before God” (Revelation 8:3,
Revelation 9:13). In this book “before the throne” always means the upper
heavens. But this other altar is one of sacrifice, though not of atoning
sacrifice. We Christians have an altar of atoning sacrifice (Hebrews 13:10): it
is the cross of Jesus, the Lamb of God. But that is not in view here. The
picture is really quite simple. The brazen altar of sacrifice in the tabernacle
was square and hollow, with a grating upon which rested the wood and the
victims. When the fire had done its work the remains of the sacrifice fell
through the grating to beneath the altar, whence they could be removed on
occasion. Now the place, the “altar,” where these martyrs of Christ sacrificed
person and life in His cause is obviously this earth, and thus this vision
simply declares what we have seen from other scriptures, that the place of the
dead is under the earth: “He descended into the lower parts of the earth”;
whence those still there will be removed at resurrection.

Since these pages were written I have learned that this was the explanation of
the earliest known Latin commentator on the Apocalypse, Victorihus of Pettau
(died 303). Mr. F. F. Bruce summarized this in The Evangelical Quarterly (Oct.,
1938) as follows: “The altar (6:9) is the earth: the brazen altar of
burnt‑offering and the golden altar of incense in the Tabernacle correspond to
earth and heaven respectively. The souls under the altar, therefore, are in
Hades, in that depart­ment of it which is ‘remote from pains and fires, the rest
of the saints’. ” This confirms Bishop Pearson cited above as to the view held
in the earliest Christian centuries. A great deal more concerning Hades can be
learned from Scripture, but it would require separate treatment. Here we deal
with the matter only as connected with the subject in hand.

It is true, as above indicated on Hebrews 12:23,that the words soul and spirit
take, by much usage, shades of meaning derived from their primary sense. The
student will discover these, and will not be confused thereby if only the
primary, dominant sense of each has been first grasped firmly. And keeping that
sense before him, we believe he will find it to illuminate many obscure
scriptures and subjects to see that the soul is the person ‑ a living soul while
on earth ‑ a dead soul while in the underworld ‑ and to be made alive in
im­mortality at the resurrection, with a body of glory incor­ruptible,
indestructible. The term “immortal soul” is incorrect and misleading when used
of our present state or of the dead. To be immortal is to be incapable of dying.
Man is not this as yet. Neither the innocent humanity of Adam, nor even the
sinless humanity of Jesus was immortal, for both were capable of dying, and did
in fact die. But the saved of men will become immortal in resurrection, as the
man Christ Jesus did. The soul, the man, has now endless existence but not
immortality, in the proper sense of the word, until resurrection; and then only
the saved will be incapable of dying; the lost will exist for ever, but in a
state termed “dead,” the “second death.”

We rightly describe death as a “dissolution,” for the partnership between man’s
spirit and soul and body is dis­solved. Of our Lord in resurrection we read the
glorious fact that “He liveth in the power of indissoluble life” and “death no
more hath dominion over Him” (Hebrews 7:16; Romans 6:9-10). This life His people
will share for ever and ever. But for them, as for Him, it can be reached only
by resurrection or rapture, never by death. It will be no small profit from this
discussion if it be seen that the opinion that the believer goes at death to
glory diminishes the sense of need of resurrection or rapture, and consequently
of the return of Christ when these will take place; and also if it thus cause
some hearts to feel that these events are utterly indispensable, the proper, the
blessed hope of the believer. As Peter exhorts, let us “set our hope perfectly
[that is, undividedly] on the favour that is being brought unto us at the
revelation of Jesus Christ” (1 Peter 1:13).


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 15: 01.06.        THE JUDGMENT SEAT OF CHRIST
========================================================================

VI. THE JUDGMENT SEAT OF CHRIST.

1. God has an inescapable duty to be the “Judge of all the earth” (Genesis
18:25). Those who submit to Him are subject to this judgment equally with the
insubordinate: “The Lord shall judge His people” (Deuteronomy 32:36; Psalms
135:14; Hebrews 10:30). The children of the sovereign are amenable to the laws
and the courts and liable to penalty for misconduct.

2. This judgment is ever in process. There is a perpetual overruling of human
affairs by higher authorities. Prominent instances are Job (Job 1:1-22 and Job
2:1-13), Ahah (1 Kings 22:1-53), Nebuchad­nezzar (Daniel 4:1-37). The first case
shows the judicial pro­ceedings effecting perfecting, the second death, the
third reformation.

Job was a godly man under discipline for his good: an upright man was made a
holy man. Thus still does God chasten His sons that they may become partakers of
His holiness (Hebrews 12:10-11).

Sinning Christians were disciplined even unto premature death, and it is
explained that this operates to save them from liability to condemnation at the
time when God will deal with the world at large (1 Corinthians 11:32).

3. But this continuous judicial administration has its crisis sessions, its
special occasions. Instances are: the Flood; the destruction of Sodom and
Gomorrah; the judgments on Egypt at the time of the exodus of Israel; the
destruction of the seven nations of Canaan by Israel; the overthrow of Jerusalem
by Nebuchadnezzar; and later by Titus.

Hereafter there will come the destruction of Gentile world dominion and the
punishment of Antichrist. Then the judgment at Jerusalem of the living (Joel
2:1-32; Matthew 25:1-46), when the Lord has returned to Zion. And after the
thousand years the final session of the court of God, the great white throne,
whereat will be declared the eternal destiny of those there judged. But it is
most necessary to keep in mind that all such separate and specific sessions are
but part of the ceaselessly operating judicial administration of heaven and
earth.

4. It is important to remember that the Son of man is the chief Judge of the
universe. It was He who acted at the Flood: “Jehovah sat as king at the Flood”
(Psalms 29:10). It was He who, in holy care that only justice should be done,
came down to enquire personally whether Sodom and Gomorrah ought to be destroyed
(Genesis 18:20-21), and Who again came down to deliver Israel from Egypt (Exodus
3:7-8). It was His glory as judge that was seen by Isaiah (Isaiah 6:1-13; John
12:41), and later by Ezekiel (Ezekiel 1:1-28).

He is the Man appointed to judge the world in righteousness on behalf of God the
Father (Acts 17:31); for the Father has entrusted all judgment unto the Son, in
order that He may receive equal honour with the Father (John 5:19-29.

5. Yet it is particularly needful to note that the last cited passage is in
reference to the future sessions of the divine judgment, for the judging in
question is there set in direct connection with the raising of men from the dead
(John 5:21-22, John 5:27-29). For when the Son of God became man He ceased for
the present to supervise those judgments of heaven. This was among the dignities
of which He emptied, that is, divested Himself, for His immediate and blessed
purpose in becoming man was their salvation from judgment (John 5:24). Therefore
He said: “God sent not the Son into the world to judge the world, but that the
world should be saved through Him” (John 3:17); nor has He yet resumed the
office of supreme Judge, though appointed thereto as man. In relation to the
world He is still the Dispenser of the grace of God, not yet the Executor of His
holy wrath, as He will one day become. This is clear from three chief
considerations:

(1) That the Father has called Him to sit at His own right hand until the time
when His enemies are to be put under His feet (Psalms 110:1; Hebrews 1:13;
Hebrews 10:13). That is, He is not yet sitting upon His own throne and asserting
His own right and authority, as He will do in a later day (Revelation 2:26-27,
Revelation 3:21; Matthew 25:31); but He is waiting expectantly that coming day.

(2) And therefore is it twice pictured that, as Son of man, the Lamb, He is
hereafter to be brought before the Father to be invested officially with that
authority to judge and to make war the title to which is His already but the
exercise of which is in abeyance (Daniel 7:13-14; Revelation 4:1-11 and
Revelation 5:1-14). In both of these scenes it is God the Father who is shown
acting from the throne of judgment until the Son has been thus formally
installed as Judge.

(3) And therefore is He now the Advocate of His people before the Father (1 John
2:1). But the Advocate cannot be at the same time the Judge.

6. Thus during this interval the especial concern and sphere of the Son of man
is the company He is calling out of the world, the church of God. The building
of His church is His present work (Matthew 16:18): the regulating of the affairs
of the house of God, over which He as Son is the appointed ruler (Hebrews 3:6),
is His immediate and dear concern. And this work calls for both grace and
judgment. He “can bear gently with the ignorant and the erring, sympathiz­ing
with our infirmities” (Hebrews 5:2; Hebrews 4:15), but dealing with kind
severity with the wilful of His people. “Behold then the goodness and severity
of God” (Romans 11:22). Nor may we abuse His goodness by making light of His
severity; or if we do, it will be unto painful disillusionment.

7. Judgment upon His own people therefore God exercises now; this is the very
period for it; but the general judgment of the world is deferred: “The time is
come for judgment to begin at the house of God” (1 Peter 4:17). And again: “If
we discriminated [sat in strict judgment upon] ourselves, we should not be
judged, but when [failing in this holy self-­judgment] we are judged, we are
chastened by the Lord [here perhaps the Father, comp. Hebrews 12:5, Hebrews
12:9, where He who chastens is the Father of spirits] that we may not be
con­demned with the world" (1 Corinthians 11:30-31). And this chasten­ing may
extend to bodily weakness, positive sickness, or even death. So it was in the
cases of Ananias and Sapphira (Acts 5:1-11, and see James 5:19-20; 1 John
5:16-17; Matthew 5:21-26; Matthew 18:28-35).

8. The Lord made many most serious statements as to His dealings with “His own”
servants at His return. Some of these are: (1) Luke 12:22-53. From dealing with
the crowd He turns and speaks specifically to His own disciples (Luke 12:22).
Only genuine disciples, regenerated persons, are able to fulfil His precepts
here given. To mere professors the task is impossible, and such cannot be in
view. They are to live without any anxiety as to the necessities of life, and in
this are to be in express contrast to the nations; they are His “little flock,”
for whom the Father intends the kingdom, and therefore they are to give away,
not to hoard, and so to lay up treasure in heaven (Luke 12:21-34). It is
impossible to include the unregenerate in such a passage; nor would it be
attempted save to avoid the application to Christians of part of the succeeding
and connected instruction. This instruction is that disciples are like the
personal house­hold slaves of an absent master, who upon his return will deal
with each according to his conduct during the master’s absence. In particular,
the steward set over the household will be dealt with the more strictly that his
office, oppor­tunities, and example were the higher. The goodness of the master
is seen in exalting the faithful (though from one point of view he had done no
more than his duty and was an unprofitable servant) to almost unlimited
privilege and power: “He will set him over all that he hath” (Luke 12:44): his
severity is shown by “cutting in sunder”* the servant who had abused his trust,
and appointing his portion with the unfaithful (Luke 12:35-53) [* Equals
“severely scourge,” because the scourge used cut deeply into the flesh ‑ see
margin.]

(2) This is elaborated and enforced in later statements. Luke 19:11-27. The
picture is the same, namely, the absent master and the faithful or unfaithful
servants. The “pound” represents that deposit of truth entrusted to the saints
(Jude 1:3), for their use among men while Christ is away: “Trade ye till I
come.” The Nobleman himself held and used it while here, and left it with us
when He went to receive the kingdom. If we traffic with knowledge it increases
in our hands and we gain more; if we neglect to do so it remains truth,
retaining its own intrinsic value (“thou hast thy pound”), but we do not
accumulate knowledge, nor benefit others, nor bring to our Lord any return for
His confidence in us. In this parable it is not the personal life of the slave
that is in question; that may have been good: it is his use of the truth in
either spreading it among man, or hiding his light under a bushel of silence,
or, as the picture is here, burying the pound in the earth. The unfaithful
servant loses opportunity further to serve his lord, the pound is taken from
him. Sadder still, his lord has no confidence in him. But he is not an enemy of
his lord, nor is treated as such. He does not lose his life. The contrast is
most distinct between him, however unfaithful, and the foes and rebels: “But
these mine enemies that would not that I should reign over them, bring hither
and slay them before me” (Luke 19:27).

(3) Matthew 24:42. Only a few days later the Lord repeated this instruction,
with fuller detail. The head slave, set as steward of the house during the
absence of the master, will be set over all his lord’s possessions if only he
have acted faithfully (Matthew 24:45-47). “But if that evil servant” abuses his
position, and becomes self‑indulgent and tyrannical, he will be “severely
scourged,” and his portion be allotted with the hypocrites, where he will weep
and gnash his teeth over his folly and lot.

Only a believer who does not consider his own heart will assert that a Christian
cannot act the hypocrite, be unfaith­ful, or arbitrary and unloving. But the
pronoun " that” – “But if that evil servant, etc.,” leaves no option but to
regard him as a believer, for it has no antecedent to whom it can refer except
the faithful servant just before described, no other person having been
mentioned. “That evil servant” what evil servant? and there is no answer but
that the faithful steward has become unfaithful*: And such cases are known. Nor
will we, for our part, join to consign all such to eternal ruin rather than
accept the alternative of the temporary, though severe, punishments intimated by
the Lord being possible to a believer. Those who take the latter course, mainly
influenced to support certain dispensational theories, have surely never weighed
the solemnity of thus easily con­signing so many backsliders to endless misery.

[*Weymouth is definite: “But if that man, being a bad servant” plainly
identifies the good and bad servant as one person. And see Alford.]

Since, then, an unbeliever is (a) not set by the Lord over His house, nor (b)
could feed the souls of his fellows, nor (c) could be so faithful as to become
at last ruler of all the possessions of the Lord, this man must be a true
believer. But when such a one may lapse from his fidelity he does not thereby
become unregenerate; consequently the unfaith­ful steward is still called one of
the Lord’s “own servants”; and therefore a believer may incur the solemn
penalties veiled, under the figures used.

If it be thought inconceivable that the Lord should describe, one of His
blood‑bought and beloved people as a “wicked servant” (Matthew 25:26), it must
be weighed that He had before applied the term to a servant whose “debt” had
been fully remitted: “thou wicked servant, I forgave thee all that debt”
(Matthew 18:32). Thus one who, as an act of compassion by the Lord, has been
fully forgiven all his failure as a servant may prove a “wicked servant,” his
wickedness con­sisting in this, that though forgiven he would not forgive. To
deny that a child of God can be unforgiving is to blind the eyes by denying sad
and stem fact. The Lord left no room for doubt that members of the divine family
were in His mind by the application of the parable He then and there made: “Even
so shall my heavenly Father do unto you [Peter, whose question as to forgiving
had drawn forth the parable, and the other disciples, ver. 1, 21], if ye forgive
not, each one of you (hekastos), his brother from your hearts” (35). ­It is the
Father and the brothers who are in question, not here those outside the family
circle.

Moreover, if this parable be pressed to include a mere pro­fessing but
unregenerate person some inevitable implications must be accepted. It is by no
means denied that there are such persons, but if they are in view here these
consequences follow: ‑

(a) An unregenerate person has had “all his debt forgiven.”

(b) In spite of this free forgiveness he remains unregenerate.

(c) A forgiven sinner can have the free pardon of his sins, revoked, in which
case he will thereafter stand in his former lost estate exposed to the eternal
wrath of God. He may be saved to‑day yet lose this to‑morrow.

(d) Though delivered to the “tormentors” he may enter­tain hope that he may yet
himself “pay all that is due” (ver. 34); that is, the wrath of God against the
unregenerate can be somehow, some time satisfied by the sufferings and efforts
of the sinner himself. In these cases therefore “Christ died for nought”; they
can at last secure their own deliverance. In the fact, however, being “delivered
to the tormentors” has no reference to the eternal judgment of the lost. In the
lake of fire neither lost angels nor lost men are stated to torment one another,
but are all alike in the same torment. It is a picture of present and temporal
chastisement under that continually proceeding judgment of God above indicated,
and which applies to His family as to others. Regarded thus the above confusing
implications do not arise, implications which no one divinely illuminated could
accept. But it results that the wicked servant is a real servant, not a
hypocrite, and were it not for the severity of the punishment no one would be
likely to question this.

It is not difficult to see what the punishment is.

(a) The forgiveness of his great failures as a servant can be revoked, and he be
made to feel the sin and bitterness of not having walked by the same spirit as
his Lord, nor rendered to Him the due use and return of the benefits grace had
bestowed.

(b) Paul says of some who had once had faith and a good conscience (or they
could not have thrust these away), and who had started on the voyage of faith
(or they could not have made shipwreck), “whom I delivered to Satan” (the
present “tormentor,” as of Job); but not to be afflicted by him in hell, but for
their recovery, “that they might be taught not to blaspheme,” which the torments
of the damned will not teach them, as far as we see in the Word (1 Timothy
1:19-20. See also 1 Corinthians 5:3-5).

(4) We remark upon one other instance of these solemn testimonies by Christ, the
parable of the virgins (Matthew 25:11-46). It is to the same effect.

(a) They are all virgins, the foolish equally with the wise, which figure is
inappropriate to indicate a worldling in his sins, even though he be a
professing Christian. In the only other places where it is used figuratively and
spiritually it certainly means true Christians (2 Corinthians 11:2; Revelation
14:4).

(b) They are all equally the invited guests of the bride­groom, not strangers,
let alone his enemies.

(c) They all have oil, or, the foolish could not say “our lamps are going out.”
Without some oil the lamps could not even have been lit, for a dry wick will not
kindle and certainly could not have burned during the time they had slept.

(d) But the foolish had no supply to replenish the dimly burning flax and revive
their testimony. They had formerly been “light in the Lord,” but had been
thoughtless as to grace to continue alight.

(e) They found means for this renewing for in spite of the darkness they gained
the bridegroom’s gate.

(f) They did not lose their lives, as enemies, but they did lose the marriage
feast, and were left in the darkness outside the house. This is parallel to the
“wicked servant,” who also did not lose his life but did lose the entrance into
the joy of his master at his return, and was cast into “outer darkness.”

Two observations are vital to grasping the meaning of these judgments.

(1) A marriage feast is obviously no picture of anything eternal. Plainly it is
a temporary matter. Grand, intensely happy, a highly coveted honour, especially
when the king’s son, the heir apparent, is the bridegroom, it yet is but the
prelude to a life, a reign, not anything long‑extended, let alone permanent.
Does not this correspond to the joy of the millennial kingdom as the glorious
prelude to the eternal kingdom? For the “marriage of the Lamb” comes at the
immediate inception of that millennial kingdom (Revelation 19:6-9. And are not
the invited virgins those of whom Revelation 16:9 says, “Blessed are they that
are bidden to the marriage supper of the Lamb,” rather than the wife herself? A
bride is not usually invited to her wedding feast: it cannot (save, perhaps,
among Moslems) be held without her. Does not this give the clue to what the
virgins and the unfaithful servant lose?

(2) “Outer darkness” is no picture of the lake of fire. It is the realm just
outside the palace where the feast is held, not the public prison or execution
ground. If the strict sense of Scripture pictures be kept, and imagination be
not allowed to fill in what the Divine Artist did not put in, much confusion
will be avoided.

It has been felt that the words of the bridegroom to the virgins, “Verily I say
unto you, I know you not” preclude us from taking these to represent His true
people. But again the picture itself will give the real sense. The bridegroom is
here pictured as standing within the heavy and thick outer door that secures
every eastern house of quality, and the door is shut. He does not open it, or he
would see who they are, and that they are some of his own invited guests, but
standing the other side of the closed door he says, in idiomatic English, I tell
you sincerely, I don’t know who you are (Ameen lego humin, ouk oida humas). Into
such a picture it is not permissible to read in divine omniscience; it must be
taken simply as it is given. Its force may be gathered more readily by the
distinction between what is here said and what the Lord said in Matthew 7:15-23.
There He spoke of false prophets, bad trees, men who, like the sons of Sceva in
Acts 19:13, used His holy name without warrant. Picturing Himself as standing
face to face with these He protests, I never at any time made your acquaintance!
Here the scene is changed; there is no closed door between: the verb to know is
different: and the word rendered “never” is most emphatic and gives force and
finality to the assertion (Oudepote egnon humas). He did not speak thus to the
virgins.

9. It is not our present purpose to consider all such testimony of the Word.
Enough has been advanced to show how much and how solemn is the teaching of
Scripture as to judgment upon careless Christians. We wish only to deal now with
the time of the judgment seat of Christ as to His people. The most general
opinion is that this judgment lies between the moment of the Lord’s descent to
the air, when they, dead and living, are caught up to Him there, and that later
moment when He is to descend with them to the earth to set up His kingdom. That
is, the judging of His saints will take place during the Parousia.

Observations.

(1) No passage of Scripture seems distinctly to place this judgment in this
interval and in the air. It seems to be rather assumed that it must take place
then and there since the effects of it are to be seen in the different positions
and honours in the kingdom immediately to follow.

(2) As regards the parabolic instruction Christ gave when here it is to be
observed that it speaks only of persons who will be found alive when the
“nobleman,” “the master of the house” returns. Strictly, therefore, these
parables tell nothing as to the time and circumstances of the judgment of dead
believers. It must be allowed that the principles of justice will be the same
for dead and living, but the details as to the judgment of the former cannot be
learned from these passages.

(3) Some presuppositions held are:

(a) That every believer will share in the first resurrection and the millennial
kingdom.

(b) The opposite, that not every believer will do so.

(c) That the judgment of the Lord will result in some of His people suffering
loss of reward because of unfaithfulness, but nothing more than loss. This
involves that none of the positive and painful inflictions denounced can affect
true believers.

(d) The opposite, that the regenerate may incur positive chastisement as a
consequence of the Lord’s judgment at that time. Thus in “Touching the Coming of
the Lord” (84, 85. ed. 1), upon Colossians 3:25, “For he that doeth wrong shall
receive again the wrong that he hath done (margin): and there is no respect of
persons,” Hogg and Vine apply this text to that judgment of Christ at His
parousia, and say: “It may be difficult for us to conceive how God will fulfil
this word to those who are already in bodies of glory, partakers of the joy of
the redeemed in salvation consummated in spirit, soul and body. Yet may we be
assured that the operation of this law is not to be suspended even in their
case. He that ’knoweth how to deliver the godly out of temptation, and to keep
the unrighteous tinder punishment unto the day of judgment ’ (2 Peter 2:9),
knows also how to direct and to use the working of His law of sowing and reaping
in the case of His children also. The attempt to alleviate the text of some of
its weight by suggesting that the law operates only in this life, fails, for
there is nothing in the text or context to lead the reader to think other than
that while the sowing is here the reaping is hereafter. It is clear that if it
were not for this supposed difficulty of referring the words to the Christian in
the condition in which, as we know from other Scriptures, he will appear at the
Judgment­ seat of Christ, the question whether that time and place were intended
would not be raised.”

(e) Some (Govett, Pember, and others) who hold that the millennial kingdom may
be forfeited by gross sin, suppose that all believers rise in the first
resurrection, appear before the judgment‑scat of Christ, and being adjudged by
Him unworthy of the kingdom they return to the death state to await the second
resurrection and the great white throne judgment. Their names being then as
believers found in the book of life, they have eternal life in the eternal
kingdom, but they will have missed the honour of sharing in and reigning in the
millennial age.

These two last ideas (d) and (e) seem alike utterly impos­sible. It seems wholly
inconceivable that a body heavenly, spiritual, glorified, like indeed to the
body of the Son of God himself, can be subjected to chastisement for guilt
incurred by misuse of the present sin‑marred body. Not only the manner of the
infliction but the fact of it seems to us out of the question.

It seems equally so that a body that is immortal and incorruptible can admit of
its owner passing again into the death state. The ideas and the terms are
mutually con­tradictory and exclusive. Of those who rise in that first
resurrection the Lord said plainly: “neither can they die any more” (Luke
20:36).

What, then, is the solution of these difficulties?

10. We turn to passages dealing directly with the subject.

(1) 2 Corinthians 5:10. “We make it our aim, whether at home or absent, to be
well‑pleasing unto Him. For we must all be made manifest before the
judgment‑seat of Christ; that each one may receive the things done through the
body, accord­ing to what he hath done, whether it be good or bad.” This chief
statement leaves unmentioned the time and place of the judgment.

(2) Hebrews 9:27. “It is laid up for men once to die and after this judgment”
(meta de touto krisis, no article). Thus judgment may take place at any time
after death. Luke 16:1-31 shows Dives suffering anguish immediately after death,
for the scene is Hades, the realm of the dead between death and resurrection,
and his brothers are still alive on earth. But again, Revelation 20:11-15, shows
another, the final judgment, after resurrection, after the millennial kingdom.
Both are “after death” [Revelation 20:12].

Neither of these passages suggests the parousia in the air as the time or place.

(3) The statements of the Lord as to His, dealing with His own servants at His
return, contemplate that His enemies will be called before Him immediately after
He will have dealt with His own household: “But these mine enemies, who would
not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me” (Luke
19:27). “Hither,” that is, to the same spot where He had just been dealing with
His servants. This, as to servants then alive on earth at least, excludes the
parousia in the air, for His enemies will not be gathered there.

(4) Luke 16:19-31. Dives and Lazarus are seen directly after death in conditions
the exact reverse of those just before known on earth. The passing of the soul
to that other world, and the bringing about of so thorough a change of
condition, is too striking, too solemn just to happen. Some one must have
decided and ordered this reversal; that is, there must have been a judging of
their cases and a judicial decision as to what should be their lot in the
intermediate state. This judgment therefore may take place at or immediately
after death, as Hebrews 9:27 above. And in the time of Christ thus almost all
men believed. See, for example, the judgment of Ani directly after death, before
Osiris the god of the underworld, in the Egyptian Book of the Dead. Or, as to
the Pharisees, to whom particularly Christ spoke of Dives and Lazarus, see
Josephus, Antiquities, 18:3.

(5) 2 Timothy 4:6-8. “I am already being poured out as a drink offering, and the
time of my departure is come. I have fought the good fight, I have kept the
faith; I have finished the course, henceforth there is laid up for me the crown
of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous judge, shall give to me at that
day: and not only to me, but also to all them that have loved His appearing.”

Paul was now certain he had won his crown. When writing to the Philippians a few
years before (Php 3:10-14) he spoke uncertainly: “not that I have already
obtained,” for then he had not yet finished the course; but now he writes with
certainty. How could this assurance have become his save by communication from
the Righteous Judge? But this implies that the Judge had both formed and
communicated His decision upon Paul’s life and service, even though Paul had not
yet actually died. In such a case, as it would seem, any session of the judgment
seat “in that day” will be only for bestowment of the crown already won and
allotted, not for adjudication upon the race or contest, the latter having
before taken place as to such a person.

(6) The expression “I have finished my course” is taken from the athletic world
which held so large a place in Greek life and interest and is so often used by
Paul as a picture of spiritual effort. In 1 Corinthians 9:24-27, it is used as a
plain warning that the coveted prize may be lost. Php 3:12-14 employs it to urge
to intense and unremitting effort to win that prize. The Lord is the righteous
Judge, sitting to adjudi­cate upon each contestant in the race or contest.

Now of unavoidable necessity the judge of the games automatically formed his
decision as to each racer or wrestler as each finished the course or the
contest. The giving of the prizes was indeed deferred to the close of the whole
series of events: Paul’s crown would be actually given “in that day”; but not
till then did the judge defer his decision as to each item or contestant. It
could not be, for the most celebrated of the Greek games, the Olympic, lasted
five days. The figure, taken with the case of Paul, and in the light of Dives
and Lazarus, suggests a decision of the Lord as to each believer before or at
the time of his death. That decision issues in determining the place and
experience of the man in the intermediate state, and may extend to assurance
that he has won the crown, the prize of the high calling.

(7) Revelation 6:9, Revelation 6:11, The Fifth Seal. As before shown, these
martyrs “under the altar” are not yet raised from the dead, for others have yet
to be killed for Christ’s sake, and only then will they be all vindicated and
avenged. But to each one of them separately a white robe is given. Now
Revelation 3:4-5, shows that the white robe is the visible sign, conferred by
the Lord, of their worthiness to be His companions in His glory and kingdom.
This again makes evident that for these the Lord’s judgment has been formed and
announced. No later adjudication upon such is needful or conceivable: only the
giving of the crown “in that day.”

11. From these facts and considerations it seems fairly clear that the judgment
of the Lord upon the dead of His people is not deferred to one session but is
reached and declared either (a) immediately before death (as Paul), when there
is no further risk of the racer failing, or (b) immediately after death (as
Lazarus), or (c) at least in tile intermediate state of death (the souls under
the altar).

If this is so, then it will follow that the decision of the Lord as to whether a
believer is worthy of the first resur­rection and reigning in the kingdom is
reached prior to resur­rection, in which case the two insoluble problems above
stated simply do not arise; that is, there is no question of one raised in a
deathless state returning to the death state, nor of bodies of glory being
subjected to chastisement. Believers adjudged not worthy of the first
resurrection will not rise, but will remain where they are until the second
resurrection.

We agree fully that the judgment seat of Christ will issue in chastisement for
unworthy living by Christians, but this will not be inflicted after
resurrection.

(8) Revelation 11:18 repays exact study. The four and twenty elders worship God
because He has put forth His “power, His great power” (teen dunamin sou teen
megaleen) and has exercised His sovereignty. In consequence of this asserting of
power there are five results. (1) The nations are angry, (2) God’s wrath
replies, (3) there arrives “the season for the dead to be judged,” (4) for the
faithful to be rewarded, and (5) for the destruction of the destroyers of the
earth.

Since prophets and saints are to receive their reward at the resurrection of the
just (Luke 14:14), the first resurrection (Revelation 20:1-6), the season for
the dead to be judged and rewarded is here found directly before the destruction
of the Antichrist and his helpers in the wasting of the lands.

Concerning this judging of the dead three features are to be noted.

1. It must be of godly dead, for it is before the thousand years, whereas the
judgment of the ungodly dead is thereafter (Revelation 20:1, Revelation
20:11-15).

2. It is a judgment of persons who are dead at the time they are judged. There
is no ground for reading in that they have been raised from the dead before the
judgment takes place. They are styled “the dead.” No one would think of styling
living persons “the dead.” The term employed (nekros) is nowhere used of persons
who are not actually dead, physically or morally. Moreover, resurrection does
not of itself assure life. That unique and glorious change to be the portion of
such as share the first resurrection (1 Corinthians 15:1-58) is their special
privilege; it does not attach to all resurrection. Dead persons can be raised
dead. In John 5:29 our Lord creates a clear contrast: “They that have done good
shall come forth unto resurrection of life; and they that have done evil unto
resurrection of judgment." The Lord did not say that they shall come forth out
of the tombs alive, but that they shall come forth unto resurrection of life or
“unto resurrection of judgment” (eis anastasin). There seems no scripture,
indeed, that at the moment they come forth they have even a body, other than
that psychical counterpart before noticed and which persists in the death
state.Thus in Revelation 20:12 also it is as dead that they are judged: “I saw
the dead standing before the throne . . . and the dead were judged.” It should
therefore be supposed that those there present whose names are found in the book
of life will thereupon be restored to life, that is, will be given an immortal
body, even as the Lord said: “The Father raiseth the dead (egeirei tous nekrous)
and makes them live (zoopoiei), thus also the Son makes to live whom He will”
(zoopoiei, John 5:21). Here two operations are distinguished by the “and makes
them live.”

3. The verb to be judged, “the season of the dead to be judged,” is the
infinitive passive aorist (kritheenai). Being an aorist it has the force of a
completed and final action. But this final judgment, which disposes of the case,
may be the conclusion of a process of judgment. This is seen in another place
where this aorist is twice used, Acts 25:9-10. Festus asked Paul whether he
would be willing to go up from Caesarea to Jerusalem “there to be judged of
these things before me” Paul answered that he already stood before Caesar’s
court “where I ought to be judged" (kritheenai). Both Festus and Paul meant that
a final verdict should be reached and the case be determined; hence the aorist.
But the history shows that Paul had been many times before the courts, twice
before the Sanhedrin and several times before Felix (Acts 23:1-35 and Acts
24:1-27). Thus this passage in Revelation 11:18, does not forbid that believers
may have been before judged by Christ, either in this life or after death, or
both; what it states is that at the season indicated the decision of the Lord
will be given, announcing, as we suggest, whether the person is of the “blessed
and holy” who are accounted worthy of the impending resurrection from among the
dead and of place and reward in the kingdom then about to be inaugurated. This
short discussion is no more than suggestive, directed to certain obscurities and
perplexities found in our main theme, designed to provoke enquiry so as further
to elucidate truth and dispel darkness. May the Lord in grace use it to this
end.


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 16: 01.07.        APPENDIX ON "OF CHRIST"
========================================================================

VII. APPENDIX TO PAGE 22. On the meaning of the genitive “of Christ” (tou
Christou) in 1 Corinthians 15:23.

(This critical study is submitted with respect to those able to examine it.) The
force of this genitive may be studied in the following passages.

1. In Acts 16:33 it is said of the jailer at Philippi that “he was baptized,
himself and all those of him (hoi autou),” that is, all those who happened to
form his household circle at that particular midnight hour.

2. In the first chapter of the epistle that is before us (1 Corinthians 1:12)
the apostle reproves the believers on account of the contentions among them.
“Now this I mean, that each one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos;
and I of Cephas; and I of Christ (Christou).” It cannot be sup­posed that these
believers were attributing their redemption to Paul, Apollos, or Peter; so that
the meaning is, “I am of Paul’s circle; I of Apollos’; I of Peter’s; I of
Christ’s circle.” It was sectionalism, schism, denominationalism, sectarianism;
although all alike were on the only foundation (1 Corinthians 3:10-11).

Family relationship alone did not make the jailer’s relatives to be “of him” at
that particular hour. It was those who were actually in his house at that time,
which would include servants and slaves (if any). All believers were equally
children of God, but some were “of Paul,” others “of Peter,” etc. Thus these two
instances show that it is not relationship, natural or spiritual, but open
member­ship in a known visible circle that is the idea in the term “of him.”

3. Romans 14:4 reads “Who art thou that judgest the servant of another?
(oiketees, household dependent; Luke 16:13: Acts 10:7; 1 Peter 2:18 : all
places). To his own lord he standeth or falleth.” Romans 14:7-8 add: “For none
of us liveth to himself, and none dieth to himself. For whether we live, we live
unto the Lord; or whether we die, we die unto the Lord: whether we live
therefore, or die, we are the Lord’s” (we are of the Lord, tou Kuriou esmen. The
German can express this, as the Greek, by case ending, “wir sind des Herrn,”
Elberfeld version). “For to this end Christ died, and lived again, that He might
be Lord of [might rule over] both dead and living” (Darby). Christ’s lordship,
His proprietorship of and authority over all, is indis­putable: in the apostle’s
argument all are assumed to be owning it: “he that regardeth the day, regardeth
it unto the Lord: and he that eateth, eateth unto the Lord” (Romans 14:6), but,
as we shall see shortly, not all believers do in fact own that lordship, or do
not own it continuously and to the end of life. Thus ideally all are “of Him,”
but actually some who might be, and ought to be, are not.*

[* Herodotus narrates that Astyages, king of the Medes, ordered a courtier,
Harpagus, to kill the infant Cyrus, the king’s grandson. The courtier says: “But
for safety’s sake it is necessary for me that this child should die; it is
necessary however that one of those of Astyages himself (ton tina Astyageos)
should be the slayer and not (one) of mine (ton heemon). This he said and
straightway sent a messenger to (one) of the herdsmen of Astyages (ton
Astyageos) whom he knew. . .” and left the matter to him (Hdt. I. 109, 110).
Here two circles are distinguished, that of the king and that of the courtier,
and each, in relation to its head, is described by the genitive. This force of
the genitive occasions in English the italicized words in 1 Corinthians 1:11,
“them which are of the household of Chloe,” where the original has simply ton
Chloees (those of Chloe).]

4. This same meaning is to be seen in 2 Corinthians 10:7, “Ye look at the things
that are before your face. [It is something visible that is in question.] If
anyone has confi­dence in himself of Christ to be (Christou einai), this let him
consider with himself, that as he is of Christ (Christou) thus also are we”:
that is, I Paul am evidently and obviously of Christ’s circle at least as much
as my critic is: in proof of which he adduces the known public features of the
measure and power of his ministry of the Word, which were the Lord’s open
acknowledgment of His faithful servant.

5. The same thought of a circle of persons that may be contrasted with other
circles lies in the statement in Galatians 5:24, “And those of Christ Jesus (hoi
tou Christou leesou) crucified the flesh with the [its] passions and the [its]
cravings.” In fallen human nature there works a powerful principle of evil,
described in christian terms as, “the old man which gets more and more corrupt
according to the [its] deceitful cravings” (Ephesians 4:22). Its cravings
deceive man into indulg­ing them, because they promise satisfaction though they
produce corruption. Through partaking of the divine nature the believer in
Christ is afforded a way of escaping “from the corruption that is in the world
through lust [the cravings of the old man]” (2 Peter 1:4); but it abides a
certainty, to the Christian as well as to the unbeliever, “that the one sowing
to the flesh out of the flesh shall reap corruption” (Galatians 6:8).

How this corrupting principle in human nature originated perplexed philosophers
and how to master it baffled moral­ists. Various schools had different methods.
The circle of Epicurus proposed the sensually agreeable plan of stifling the
flesh by satiating it. That of the Stoics advocated a stem rigid suppression.
Eastern philosophy, as in Buddhism, recommended a sustained passive ignoring of
all desire. The circle which bore the name of Christ Jesus had a method peculiar
to itself. It was neither satiating, suppress­ing, nor ignoring, but crucifying:
“those of Christ Jesus crucified the flesh.” They taught that Christ died on
account of the old man himself, as well as his corrupt doings. They held that,
judicially, before God, man’s creator and judge, the death of the Substitute was
the death of the sinner, that therefore the old man “was crucified with Christ”
(Romans 6:6). The messengers of this faith offered a promise from God that
whoever would accept from the heart this view, with its implications and
practical consequences, should receive power from His eternal Spirit to live in
freedom from the old tyranny of sin. The new method worked effectively where all
other attempts had failed. Moral crucifixion with Christ led on to moral
resurrection with Him, and the circle that bore His name became, as a circle,
and by contrast, con­spicuous for holiness. No doubt this crucifixion was more
distinctly apprehended and more fully exhibited by some than by others; we know
that in fact some in the circle were not children of God at all ‑ they seemed to
be "of Christ Jesus” in the sense of publicly belonging to the circle that bore
His name, though they were not “in Christ Jesus” by spiritual union: but the
thought in the statement before us is that a certain known circle or school –
“those of Christ Jesus” ‑ was character­ized by a certain attitude and doctrine,
which its members were presumed to have adopted, and were expected and exhorted
to maintain in practical conduct.

6. The important argument in Galatians 3:23-29, contains the same conception.
“But if ye are of Christ, then are ye Abraham’s seed, etc.” (ei de humeis
Christou, Galatians 3:29). Those who fear God are viewed by Him in two classes:
first, such as in, spiritual growth are yet infants, and therefore under control
by rules – “thou shalt . . . thou shalt not”; second, those who have become of
age, grown up sons, who are freed from such restrictions; are at liberty. The
former are under a tutor, the law (Galatians 3:23-25), who orders their conduct,
who restrains and punishes the outworking of their carnal nature: the “sons” are
“of Christ” (“but if ye are of Christ”), Who enables them by the Spirit to walk
by the free, holy impulses of the new nature.

Translation from the one status and association into the other is by faith and
baptism: that is, by an act of the heart known to God, but also by a public act
seen by men; for we become “in Christ Jesus by faith” (Galatians 3:26), but we
“put on Christ” by baptism (Galatians 3:27). Thus here also to be “of Christ”
means something more than to have exercised faith in Him, even to have
associated openly by immersion with those who profess to have died out of the
old circle and to have risen again into a new circle, that of Christ Jesus.

7. In 2 Timothy 2:19-21, the apostle again speaks of things plain and visible;
such as a foundation stone, and the inscrip­tion carved upon it; a house built
on the foundation; the various utensils of the house, of either valuable or
common materials, gold and silver or wood and earth. The picture is very like
Paul’s earlier metaphor in 1 Corinthians 3:1-23 where also is the foundation,
the superstructure, the precious or the perishable materials, either of which
may be built by the believer into the life‑work and character which each is
erecting on the one foundation. He exhorts the Corinthian Christians not to use
the perishable: in Timothy he exhorts to purge out of one’s character the common
elements, that the gold and silver of the divine nature, created in us by the
Spirit upon the ground of redemption, may alone remain, and one be thus a vessel
fit for the immediate use of the divine Master, not one relegated to the lower
purposes of the great house. The said inscription on the foundation reads thus:
“Knows the Lord those being of Him (tous ontas autou), and, Let every one naming
the name of the Lord depart from unrighteousness.” That is, the Lord, on His
side, knows distinctly each one who in reality, according to the Lord’s
standard, is of His circle. On our side the sign that warrants any person being
accorded by us a place in that circle is that he forsakes unrighteousness. He
who never yet has forsaken unrighteousness (wrong doing, adikia, as 1
Corinthians 6:8-9) is not “of Him,” (that is, not as the Lord judges), even
though he may hold membership in a Christian church. He who having forsaken
wrong doing afterward returns thereto is to be put out of the Christian circle
(1 Corinthians 5:13), and thus ceases to be “of Him” for the purposes of this
expression. This does not affect the final salvation of every believer; for one
is saved before he is added to the church, and therefore final salvation does
not depend upon member­ship in that privileged company who will form “the
church.” * This cuts away the root of the Romish error that one must belong to
the church to be saved. But the wrong doers of the church circle are plainly
warned that they “shall not inherit God’s kingdom” (1 Corinthians 6:9 : etc.).
Such will not be “accounted worthy of the kingdom of God” (2 Thessalonians 1:5,
2 Thessalonians 1:11), and hence will not be of the “blessed and holy” who will
rise in that first resurrection which assures reigning in that kingdom.

8. The expression under review is in Romans 8:9 : “But ye are not in flesh but
in spirit, if at least spirit of God dwells in you. But if any one has not
spirit of Christ, this one is not of Him.” The omission from verse 1 preceding
of the clause “who walk not according to flesh but according to spirit” is of
first importance, showing that the justification of a believer in Christ is not
dependent upon his walk as a Christian. At the very moment that a repenting
sinner rests his salvation upon the atoning work that Christ accomplished upon
the cross, and therefore before he has had opportunity for doing any works, he
acquires a new standing. By that faith in Christ he obtains access to the
standing of one who is in the favour of God (Romans 5:1-2). He is then and there
seen by God, his judge, no longer as he is in himself, but as he now is “in
Christ.” He is deemed to have met his doom and to be free therefrom. The storm
of wrath due to him on account of his sins has burst upon him in the person of
his Divine Substitute: he has thus endured its full fury; that storm has
exhausted itself, and “there is therefore now no condemnation to them that are
in Christ Jesus.” But this eternally justified believer may henceforth walk
either by the impulses of his old fleshly nature or by the leading of that new
spirit nature which is created in us when we believe on Christ. That a justified
person may walk “according to flesh” is certain from many Scriptures and much
sad experience. “I, brethren,” says Paul, “was not able [formerly] to speak to
you as to spiritual but as fleshly . . . But neither yet now am I able, for yet
fleshly ye are. For whereas there is among you jealousy and strife, are ye not
fleshly, and walk according to men,” that is, not according to God? (1
Corinthians 3:1-3. See also Galatians 5:13-26, for a sustained contrast between
“flesh” and “spirit,” the old nature and the new, in the believer). To the
Romans the apostle declared that if they lived according to flesh they would be
unable to please God and were liable to die (Romans 8:7-8, and comp. 1
Corinthians 10:1-6). Upon this possibility of premature death we have before
spoken. But, he adds, “ye are not in flesh but in spirit, if at least (eiper)
spirit of God dwells in you.” This “if at least” * shows clearly the possibility
of one who is for ever free from condemnation not being indwelt by “spirit of
God.” It is God the Spirit Who creates and energises the new nature, but it is
not the Holy Spirit as a person that is here in view: the question is whether
the believer is ruled still by the mind of the old nature, which is “flesh,” or
by the mind of the new nature, which is “spirit,” according to the exhortations
“be renewed in the spirit of your mind”: “Have this mind in you which was also
in Christ Jesus” (Ephesians 4:23; Php 2:5). And, adds the Scripture (Romans
8:9), “If any one has not spirit of Christ, this one (emphatic) is not of Him
(ouk estin autou).”

[* “The Greek particle is more than merely ‘if’ (which often equals ’since’ or
’as’), and suggests just such doubt and enquiry as would amount to
self‑examination. See 2 Corinthians 13:5.” Moule, Camb. Bible for Schools, in
loco. So Alford: “if so be that (‘provided that’; not ‘since’ . . . that this is
the meaning here is evident by the exception which immediately follows).”] In
the light of the other places considered this will mean that one not ruled by
the same spirit which animated Christ is not of that company which He owns as
His circle, His household. “He is not His (belongs not to Him, in the higher and
blessed sense of being united to Him as a member of Him)” Alford, in loco;
italics mine. In his learned critical work Licht vom Osten (Light from the East
‑ ed. iv. 322) Professor Adolph Deissmann has re­marked upon the parallel
between this genitive Christou, of Christ, and doulos Christou Christ’s slave,
and the expressions Kaisaros of Caesar, and Caesar’s slave, belonging to Caesar,
his own personal property; that is, his personal retinue and slaves as distinct
from the vast host of his subjects out­side of his immediate household. In
illustration he cites several of the passages here examined, including the one
chiefly before us, 1 Corinthians 15:22, “they that are of Christ in His
Parousia.” This usage is found in Php 4:22 : “All the saints salute you,
especially they that are of Caesar’s house­hold” (hoi ek tees Kaisaros oikias).
Comp. also Matthew 22:21 and parallels: “the things that are Caesar’s” (of
Caesar, ta Kaisaros) contrasted with the other circle, “the things that are
God’s” (ta tou Theou). Similarly, Christ also has a vast number who do
acknowledge Him as Saviour but have not learned to be His slaves, and so are not
“of Him” within the force of this term.

Many of the topics of this pamphlet are opened more fully, in THE REVELATION OF

JESUS CHRIST Some of the themes of this pamphlet are enlarged in

FIRSTBORN SONS Their Rights and Risks

-------


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 17: 02.00. PRAYING IS WORKING
========================================================================

PRAYING IS WORKING by G. H. Lang First Edition, May 1918. 5000 Second Edition,
November 1920. 3000 Third Edition, April 1922. 5000 Fourth edition, April 1943.
2000 Fifth Edition, February 1949. 5000 In Quotations the Revised Version is
nearly always used

James 5:13-20. Is any among you suffering? let him pray (1). Is any cheerful?
let him sing praise. Is any among you sick? let. him call’ for the elders of the
church; and let them pray (2) over him, anointing him with oil in the name of
the Lord: and the prayer of faith (3) shall save him that is sick, and the Lord
shall raise him up; and if he have committed sins, it shall be forgiven him.
Confess therefore your sins one to another, and pray for one another (4), that
ye may be healed: The supplication (5) of a righteous man availeth much in its
working. Elijah was a man of like passions with us, and he prayed fervently (6)
that it might not rain; and it rained not on the earth for three years and six
months.. And he prayed again (7) ; and the heaven gave rain, and the earth
brought forth her, fruit. My brethren, if any among you do err from the truth,
-and one convert ‘him let him know, that he who converteth a sinner from the
error of his way shall save a soul from death, and shall cover a multitude of
sins.

Chapter 1. Prayer a Force Chapter 2. When to Pray Chapter 3. Prayer and Sickness
Chapter 4. Prayer and the Weather Chapter 5. Prayer in National Affairs Chapter
6. Prayer For Backsliders Chapter 7. A Hard Case Chapter 8. Prayer in Church
Life Chapter 9. Prayer and Money Chapter 10. Delayed Answers Chapter 11. Prayer
About Details Chapter 12. Supplication Chapter 13. It Costs to Pray Chapter 14.
Prayer of a Righteous Man Chapter 15. Prayer For Justice Chapter 16. Prayer and
Promises Chapter 17. Personal Experience Chapter 18. Let Us Pray


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 18: 02.01.     CHAPTER 01. PRAYER, A FORCE
========================================================================

Prayer, A Force "Much prevailing strength has the supplication of a righteous
man in its working."

Over half a century since Dr. Fleming Stevenson enriched the church of God with
his gracious book Praying and Working. But needful as is the lesson that prayer
must be accompanied by all right effort, that book taught also, and
impressively, the truth expressed in our own title. What is here written is to
prove and illustrate the thought that praying is working, and not merely an
adjunct to working. It is a form of working, and not simply a somewhat properly
added to our efforts out of reverence to the Almighty; nor is it only an appeal
for His blessing to prosper our labours. When a righteous man prays he works.
For prayer in the spirit is one agency by which the Spirit of God effects
through the believer His will, and is, indeed, a putting forth of His energy.1
Moreover, praying is not only working; it is the very highest order of working.

(a) It is that work to which our glorified Lord is ceaselessly devoting Himself:
"He ever liveth to make intercession."2 It is therefore our closest and highest
co-operation with Him; at once our most heavenly and effective work.

(b) Prayer is that work which by itself brings to pass results which all other
efforts of man cannot effect. Elijah by prayer alone controlled the weather for
three and a half years, prohibiting all moisture, both dew and rain.3 Not all
other efforts combined, of all mankind together, could so work.

(c Again, prayer is the highest form of working because it affects the heavens
above, and not only the earth-level. The Scripture shows that the forces and
operations of nature are under the domination of angels, holy and evil. If these
do not regularly control those forces, they do so on occasion.4 Prayer affects
their doings in two ways. Firstly, being itself an effort of the spirit of man,
it is a setting in motion of a force proper to that realm where the nature of
being is spirit: "we wrestle against wicked spirits," and are thus an obstacle
to their activities. And then, secondly, prayer is an appeal behind and above
those heavenly rulers to the Supreme Ruler Who dominates them, and Who can
suspend His rules under which angels ordinarily act. Not that man has warrant
for direct appeals to angels; but prayer "moves the hand that moves the world,"
and can thus set in motion, and modify the workings of, those celestial powers.

Daniel "set his face unto the Lord God to seek by prayer and supplications, with
fasting and sackcloth and ashes"; and "at the beginning of his supplications the
commandment went forth," and Gabriel was sent to instruct him.5 Later,6 Daniel
was again in prayer, but no immediate response was gained. Therefore he, like
Elijah before him, persisted in prayer, "watching thereunto in all perseverance
and supplication,"7 and with fasting. After three whole weeks the response came,
and with it the explanation of the delay. There had been no delay on God’s part:
"from the first day that thou didst set thine heart to understand, and to humble
thyself before thy God, thy words were heard." But a mighty evil spirit, then
guiding the destinies of the Persian empire, had obstructed God’s messenger,8
who could not proceed on his errand until reinforced in the conflict by Michael,
one of the chief princes" of that kingdom of the heavens.9

1 Ephesians 6:18; Romans 8:26-27. 2 Hebrews 7:25; Romans 8:34. 3 1 Kings 17:1 4
Revelation 7:1-3; Revelation 9:14-15: Job 1:12-19; etc.. etc. 5 Daniel 9:3,
Daniel 9:23. 6 Daniel 10:2-3. 7 Ephesians 6:18. 8 Obviously no human Prince of
Persia could have retarded the great angel. 9 Daniel 11:13.

It is enough for our present purpose to note how the praying of a righteous man
caused motion, and even commotion, in the spirit world. And here again is a
result that no other effort of man could effect.

Since therefore the Christian’s greatest influence is exerted by payer he must
inevitably be at his weakest when prayerless, and be strongest when prayerful.


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 19: 02.02.     CHAPTER 02. WHEN TO PRAY
========================================================================

When to Pray The circumstances in which prayer is the saint’s resource, as
indicated by James, are five.

(1) "Is any suffering? let him pray." The word covers an immense variety of
painful conditions, being applied, for instance, to the manifold afflictions
endured by Old Testament prophets1 and New Testament preachers.2 it thus
includes persecutions. Under such conditions it is easy to doubt our Father’s
goodness, and to murmur; and this we shall do unless we pray. Hence our Lord,
picturing His people as a defenseless and oppressed Eastern widow, "spake a
parable to the end that we ought always to pray, and not to faint. "3 One or the
other it will surely be: either we pray or we faint. The disciples in Gethsemane
did not watch and pray, and so they succumbed to temptation, and forsook their
beloved Master. But Paul and Silas, though bruised and bleeding, and painfully
cramped in the stocks in a miserable dungeon, and with the uncertainty of the
morrow to weigh down the spirit, prayed when they could not sleep, and soon were
singing praises.4 Ah! whither could we flee for aid When tempted, desolate,
dismayed, Or how the hosts of hell defeat, Had suffering saints no mercy seat?
But prayer not only supports the heart while under trial; it is an appointed
means of deliverance therefrom, in such cases and times as deliverance is the
will of God. Herod may imprison Peter within double doors, one being of iron;
and detail sixteen soldiers to keep him; and they make escape impossible by
chaining him to two of their number; "but prayer was made earnestly of the
church unto God for him" 5 and on that occasion also prayer set in motion the
hosts above, and Peter was delivered.

Some years ago a court in a heathen land ordered a missionary to hand back to
heathen relatives a small child who had, by consent, been entrusted to her care,
and who had truly turned to Christ as her Saviour and Lord. The long legal
struggle involved ended thus in seeming defeat. But for her, as for Peter,
prayer was made earnestly and perseveringly; and by a marvellous series of
miraculous interpositions deliverance was effected.6


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 20: 02.03.     CHAPTER 03. PRAYER AND SICKNESS
========================================================================

Prayer and Sickness

(2) Whilst all suffering is occasion for praying, this scripture particularizes
one form thereof, namely, sickness, as a special opportunity for supplication.
"The prayer of faith shall save him that is sick." In a remote part of South
India a valued missionary was suddenly taken seriously ill at night. The
complaint was evidently choleric. The swift collapse, extreme coldness, and
other symptoms were Unmistakable, and just when I reached the bedside the cramps
and vomiting 1 James 5:10. 2 Timothy 2:3, 2 Timothy 2:9. 3 Luke 18:1. 4 Acts
16:25. 5 Acts 12:5. 6 See Prayer Focused and Fighting. were setting in.
Inquiring if he had at hand any remedy known to be useful, the immediate reply
was: I have the Lord to heal me; and He has been showing me to-night that I
ought not to have occupied your mind yesterday with the unprofitable things of
which I talked." Here, I thought, is that confession of fault to which James
exhorts, and so I readily joined with others in the prayer of faith for
recovery. An esteemed friend led in prayer, and asked specifically that the sick
man might go to sleep. Nothing more unlikely at that hour could have been
requested. But within fifteen minutes I saw him settle into a peaceful, natural
sleep, in which he continued for five hours, and from which he awoke well. He
rose during that day, and on the next day took his place as a speaker at a
convention. In a remote country district in Devonshire, where I once lived, I
was one evening stricken down without warning by influenza, the fourth such
seizure known. Utterly prostrate, and with severe nausea, my first thought was
to send for some brethren to pray. But this being found impracticable, my wife
and I prayed together; and faith was given to plead that there should be a
prompt raising up to fulfil a preaching engagement in a distant city the next
day but one. In particular it was asked that the distressing nausea might
subside. My wife rose, and at once left the room; but ere she had dosed the door
I recalled her to say that the nausea had instantly gone, and that I was already
well. To these sample cases numerous parallels are available. Many who adopt no
such opinions as that sickness is always from the devil, or that it is sinful to
use remedies or to consult a physician, nevertheless know experimentally the
power of the prayer of faith in severe sickness. That God does not always
immediately heal all infirmities is evident from the cases of Trophimus1 and
Timothy.2 Some bodily weakness is permanent, being for spiritual benefit, and is
cause for glorying;3 some is disciplinary, and can be relieved only by
repentance, confession, and prayer;4 some is but the unavoidable wear and tear
upon the physical machinery which is incidental to all strenuous effort. God
will instruct prayerful hearts as to the nature of the ailment, and what
measures, spiritual or medicinal, or both, are proper to each case.


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 21: 02.04.     CHAPTER 04. PRAYER AND THE WEATHER
========================================================================

Prayer and the Weather

(3) A third remarkable sphere in which prayer is able to work is that of the
weather, as instanced in Elijah stopping and restoring the rainfall. Nor is this
the only such instance in Scripture of a suspension of the workings of nature,5
nor is it without examples in later experience. A minister of the gospel upon
going to a new sphere of service, conducted the first funeral in a drenching
rain, and this in the winter. The conditions were dangerous to health, as well
as unpleasant, and were also a hindrance to exhortations being given to the
ungodly who often gather at the graveside. From that time, whenever a funeral
was in prospect, prayer was publicly made unto God by that church, asking that
rain should not fall during the interment. And during a period of nine years of
ministry in that place, and for fifty successive funerals, held in every month
of the year except the often fine month of July, that preacher never again
conducted a funeral in the rain. No other form of effort than prayer can so
work.

1 2 Timothy 4:20. 2 1 Timothy 5:23. 3 2 Corinthians 12:7-10. 4 James 5:15-16; 1
Corinthians 11:29-30. 5 See Exodus 9:23. Exodus 9:33; Joshua 10:12-14: 1 Samuel
12:17-18.


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 22: 02.05.     CHAPTER 05. PRAYER IN NATIONAL AFFAIRS
========================================================================

Prayer in National Affairs

(4) If the circumstances under which Elijah stayed the rain be considered, we
are at once brought to the matter of the place and ‘power of prayer in affairs
national. The plainest intimation is given of the power which the righteous may
exercise in public matters, and that prayer is their appointed means of
intervention. The king and people of Israel had forsaken God and turned to
idolatry. In this connection let it be remembered that covetousness is
idolatry,1 and that so a nation may as certainly turn to idolatry by the worship
of " empire" as its ideal, or by lust of territory or of wealth, as by the
worship of demon gods or of images representing these. And all idolatry denies
God His rights, and degrades men, and so falls under the severest judgment of
the Almighty, Who only should be worshipped and served, and in honoring Whom men
secure their own true good. At such a time of spiritual apostasy and grave moral
declension Elijah intervened to secure God’s blessing by securing the repentance
of the people. And the great prophet’s resource was prayer. Remonstrance and
arguments had failed; the queen had had the prophets murdered. Elijah prayed,
and prayed not for national victory, hut for national chastisement; and this
though himself and all the godly in Israel must suffer with the rest of the
people. And only when judgment had done its needed spiritual work did he pray
for temporal blessing. Sometimes stern measures are the only merciful measures.
In like manner, it was after seventy years of desolation for Jerusalem had
passed over Israel for national sin that Daniel prayed for mercies and
restoration,2 and his supplications prevailed. For almost all those seventy
years he had been at or near the head of affairs, sometimes, indeed, prime
minister of the world-empires; but not so had he been able to secure the
prosperity of his people and city. But when God’s time came, prayer prevailed
unto this end. The active agent for the rebuilding o(the city proved to be
Nehemiah; and it was after four months3 of humiliation and fasting and prayer
that his opportunity came to gain the needed permission of the king of Persia.
And even whilst standing before the monarch Nehemiah’s habit of prayer
persisted, for at that all-critical moment, while the king sat waiting for his
immediate reply, he says, So I prayed to the God of heaven; and I said’ unto the
king."4

Again, Sennacherib’s all but almighty armies had overrun Palestine, and the
capital now seemed doomed. But Hezekiah, the king, went up into the house of the
Lord and prayed, and officially urged other pious men to cry ceaselessly unto
the Lord. To this public kingly appeal God’s response was prompt: "Whereas thou
hast prayed to Me against Sennacherib, king of Assyria, I have heard thee."5 And
"The Angel of Death spread his wings on the blast, And breathed in the face of
the foe as he passed; And the eyes of the sleepers waxed deadly and chill, And
their heart hut once heaved, and for ever grew still !"

Thou hast prayed . . . I heard "—this is the all-important factor, and the
uniform and dependable principle of God’s dealings. Had Hezekiah stopped at the
military measures needed for the defense of the city, saying, "I have done all
that is in my power; now I must leave the

1 Colossians 3:5; Ephesians 5:5; 2 Daniel 3:1;;Nehemiah 1:1; Nehemiah 2:1;
Chislev was the third month of the civil year, Nisan the seventh. 4 Nehemiah
2:4-5. 5 2 Kings 19:20; issue to God," he would in reality have left the issue
to Sennacherib. It was his personal and public appeal to God against Sennacherib
that publicly, before men and angels, put the situation into the hands of the
Lord of hosts.

God’s purpose for and methods with that section of His people named in the New
Testament the church of God, are quite special, though ever harmonious with His
holiness and with equity; but His overruling of nations is as it ever has been,
and is revealed mainly in the Old Testament, in such instances as have been
cited. We notice one other case: that of the threatened overthrow of the great
city of Nineveh.

There arrives a time when heaven’s justice can no longer tolerate iniquity, and
sentence goes forth for the removal of the godless from the earth. This sentence
is pronounced in that court of angels which overrules the doings of men.1 And,
as Ahab’s case shows, no human effort can affect those decisions or retard the
due execution of a decree there issued. But the prayer of the repentant to God
can rightly influence those Courts, by making it right for the Supreme Judge to
suspend or nullify the sentence of the lower Court 2 For not punishment, but
righteousness, is His delight; and when the lawless turns from his lawlessness,
and does that which is lawful and right, he shall surely live, he shall not
die.3 This is true for the individual,4 and also for a nation; and therefore -.
was Nineveh spared upon the king, his princes and people, humbling themselves
before, and crying mightily unto, God.5 Not in armies and fleets lies a nation’s
final strength: "a horse is a vain thing for safety; neither shall he deliver
any by his great power."6 Angels can still destroy armies, and storms will yet
sink fleets.7 Much is risked when statesmen and prelates deliberately urge a
national violation of the law of the Sabbath, as during the late wars. Nor can
it be a way to the favour of the God and Father of Jesus Christ the Lord that an
empire should take under its favour the one religion, Mohammedanism, that
formally and fiercely denies to the Redeemer His personal glory as the Son of
..~. God and the Saviour of men. For the Father has decreed that all - --must
"honour the Son even as they honour the Father" ;8 and for an empire to favour
Islam, and to obstruct at all the spread of the gospel amongst Moslems, as
England does, is an -offence against God and His Son which cannot but entail
serious consequences.9’

It is for public repentance, humiliation, and supplication that God waits; but
these avail to procure mercy and favour through

1 See Job 1:6; Job 2:7; Daniel 4:13, Daniel 4:17; Daniel 4:23; 1 Kings 22:19-23;
Acts 12:23. 2 A plain instance is given in 1 Kings 21:27. 1 Kings 21:29. 3
Ezekiel 18:21, Ezekiel 18:23, Ezekiel 18:27-28. 4 Daniel 4:27. 5 Jonah 3:5-10. 6
Psalms 33:17. 7 Psalms 48:7. 8 John 5:23. 9 See World Chaos 157. the infinite
merits of the Redeemer’s Person and passion. For nations, as for persons, the
prayer of the contrite has power. Only let princes and peoples remember this
solemn word concerning an ancient monarch : Pharaoh, king of Egypt, is but a
noise; he hath let the appointed time pass by";1 and let them seek the Lord
while He may be found, and call upon Him while He is near.2


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 23: 02.06.     CHAPTER 06. PRAYER FOR BACKSLIDERS
========================================================================

Prayer for Backsliders

(5) The fifth matter that James puts in connection with prayer is the recovery
of backsliding saints. "My brethren" (the family relationship is asserted), "if
any among you" (not the outside, unregenerate men of the world) "do err from the
truth" (there’ fore the one contemplated had walked in the ways of the truth and
had wandered therefrom), "and one turn him back" (the simple force of to
convert,"3 and therefore applied not only to the unregenerate turning to God for
the first time,4 hut equally to the recovery of an apostle from a dreadful
lapse’) ; "let him know that he who turneth back a sinner from the error of his
way" (a "sinner" is one who misses the mark or the road, the one who in the
former and parallel phrase "errs from the truth," and so the cognate noun and
verb are applied to wrong conduct by saints) "shall save a soul from death"7
(for grievous sin by His children God not seldom visits with premature death ;
as witness Ananias and Sapphira cut off in the very assembling place of the
church,’ or the danger in which the incestuous Christian at Corinth stood of the
destruction of the flesh,9 but which he escaped through prompt contrition,10 and
the weakness and sickness and death of others in that church because of gross
misconduct. 11 And therefore, as a sample case for prayer, the apostle John
says"12 "If any man see his brother sinning sin’13 not unto death, he shall ask,
and God will give him life for them that sin not unto death. There is sin unto
death: not concerning this do I say that he should make request. All
unrighteousness is sin ; and there is sin not unto death." The judgment of
worldlings is, in general, deferred to the great final assize of the universe,
but God in mercy chastens His children now14) : "and shall cover a multitude of
sins" (for if a believer be thus cut off in an erring, unrepentant state, then
must he give account of the evil at the judgment seat of Christ,15 and much
shame will he then feel;16 whereas repentance and confession lead to pardon and
restoration, and his sins are thus covered up by the atoning blood of Christ,
and will no more be remembered by God).

How exceedingly blessed, therefore, shall they be who find grace to recover a
wandering brother! But this holy service requires an uncommon measure of
prayerfulness. For the heart of the wanderer oft becomes proud and hard, and
evil spirits labour zealously for his complete overthrow, and prayer alone has
energy to defeat this combined opposition.

1 Jeremiah 46:17. 2 Isaiah 55:6. 3 Matthew 9:22; Matthew 24:18. 4 Acts 11:21. 5
Luke 22:32. 6 Romans 14:23; 1 Corinthians 8:12. 7 N.B.—It does not say that it
is eternal death that is here in view. 8 Acts 5:1-42 9 1 Corinthians 5:3-5. 10 2
Corinthians 2:6-8. 11 1 Corinthians 11:29-30. 12 1 John 5:16-17 13 The
indefinite article of our versions is here really equivalent to the definite
article, and is better omitted, as in Greek. It is not some one particular sin
only that is in question. Three immoralities are covered by the cases mentioned
above: lying, incest, and gluttony. 14 1 Corinthians 11:32; 1 Peter 4:17. 15 2
Corinthians 5:10. 16 1 John 2:28. But persistent, and especially united, prayer
has such energy. It works grandly in this sphere. At a prayer conference the
case was mentioned of a young man then dying in a neighboring city. The son of
truly godly parents, he was himself drawn to Christ when eleven years of age,
and until his eighteenth year had made quite distinct progress in the Divine
life and service. An unbelieving relative then led him astray, filling his mind
with doubts concerning all things sacred, until he seemed wholly blinded by the
agnostic fog into which he had wandered.

I was greatly struck by the general, maintained, and intense prayer to God that
this case called forth, and my heart was conscious of a distinct intimation that
I was to visit this young friend. At the first interview, though we were entire
strangers, his heart was opened, and it became evident that the gracious Spirit
was rendering him dissatisfied with his state. (What honest heart can repose on
negations? How can one rest on nothing?) But his mind was simply interpenetrated
in all its processes by suspicions and uncertainty. The inspiration of Holy
Scripture, its teaching of eternal judgment, the need or value of the atonement,
the idea of a triune Deity—these, and very other item of the Bible scheme of
truth, had become as unimaginable to him as T. H. Huxley declared them to be to
himself. The simple suggestion was made that he should leave alone all the
accessory detail, and. confine his attention to the one central problem, namely,
whether Christ is indeed a living Person, and is accessible. That point settled
in the negative would necessarily dispose of all the rest; that settled in the
affirmative, the secondary questions would be illuminated. This course he took
with an honest and good heart; and the immediate and expected issue was the
fulfillment of the assurance that whensoever [the veiled and blinded heart]
shall turn to the Lord, the veil is taken away,"1 and he passed the remaining
weeks of his, life in a frame of mind as peaceful and joyful in the Lord as the
former darkness had been miserable. When sitting with him at that first
interview one was conscious that the difficulties lay wholly in himself, and
that the enveloping spiritual atmosphere had been relieved from the oppressing
influence of wicked spirits. Their obstructing efforts being restrained, it was
comparatively easy to help their captive and for him to accept help. To gain
this relief is all important2 and this prayer effects of which the following is
a further instance, only concerning an ungodly man rather than a backslider.


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 24: 02.07.     CHAPTER 07. A HARD CASE
========================================================================

A Hard Case

I was brought into contact in South India with an elderly Englishman, of long
residence in the East, one who had lived a dissolute life, and was resolutely
hostile to religious subjects. For months we occupied adjoining rooms, yet only
once did I succeed in introducing religious topics; and then, after but a few
minutes, he closured the conversation by laughingly saying, "You missionaries
are clever beggars: you deserve to succeed: I made up my mind that you should
never talk to me about these things, and yet here you are at it." On the eve of
my leaving the country, and burdened in spirit with his state, I resolved on
journeying specially to his town to make one further attempt to reach him. On
arriving, the monsoon rain was pouring steadily. When I reached the bungalow
where I was to stay it was just the breakfast hour, and an inward discussion
arose as to whether I should, as inclination

1 2 Corinthians 3:16. 2"No one can enter into the house of the Strong One
(Satan). and spoil his goods, except he bind the Strong One." (Mark 3:27.)
prompted, go in and refresh myself after the journey, or trudge on through mud
and rain and first see this man. I finally decided to go on. He met me with
unusual cordiality, and, to my great wonder and delight, in a very few minutes
we were engaged in close, personal converse as to his life and eternal
prospects. The change in his attitude was altogether extraordinary; but on my
return to the place whence I had started the explanation was found. Shortly
after 1 had .left, a lady, who also was deeply concerned as to this godless man,
had gathered twelve other praying workers, and for over two hours these had
continued in steadfast supplication for this one case and concerning my
interview with him. They had commenced praying just before I had to decide
whether to breakfast first or no, and had continued in powerful intercession
until a little after I had left him, although they had no knowledge as to what
part of the day 1 might be with him.

Such concentration of supplication may be compared to "barrage" artillery fire,
by which a desired objective is isolated from opposing forces, and thus is the
more easily relieved or captured. We would not unduly press a preposition beyond
Its normal force, but let it be remarked that when our great Advocate spoke of a
spiritual conflict in which He had intervened by intercession, He said to the
subject of that conflict, "I made supplication around thee"1 and so, though
Simon was suffered, for his own good and for his after usefulness to weak
brethren, to be severely mauled in the battle, his faith, being protected by his
Lord’s intercession, was not finally overwhelmed. A high privilege does the
Captain of salvation share with His faithful followers in enabling us to take
hold of shield and buckler and stand up for the help of the oppressed : a
blessed thing it is to be able to draw out the spear and stop the way against
those who pursue after souls for their ruin.2


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 25: 02.08.     CHAPTER 08. PRAYER IN CHURCH LIFE
========================================================================

Prayer in Church Life Did no other scripture exhort and encourage to prayer, the
foregoing passage alone should lead the same often to bend the knee: were no
other affairs than those now before us under the influence of prayer, well worth
while it is to pray: but in truth there are no matters outside of its scope and
influence.

Consider, for example, its place in the working of the corporate life of a local
church. In a certain church a large number of members had determined to change
the general tone from spirituality to carnality, by introducing secular
amusements and the like. After a long period of difficulty, a special gathering
was proposed at which this party should meet the senior brethren for discussion.
The leader and life ‘of the worldly-minded section, a naturally impetuous man,
seized eagerly on the proposal, and evidently purposed that the occasion should
be turned to the fullest advantage. But the godly gave themselves to prayer ;
and on the very day appointed a serious sickness attacked that brother’s family,
and he could not attend the meeting, which proved without him an entire failure
from his point of view.

Again, in a certain heathen land a serious difference arose in a very large
circle of missionaries. It threatened to issue in a public cleavage, and this
before the native Christians and the heathen. The center of the trouble was a
wholly sincere but very determined man, one always difficult to persuade or,
turn. For months negotiation and prayer had proceeded, in view of the annual
missionary conference before which the matter would come; but to within two
weeks thereof no sign of reunion was seen. The tension was great, and
forbearance was much taxed.

1 Luke 22:32. 2 Psalms 35:2-3. At that point three friends joined for a
half-night of prayer, seeking general reviving. About midnight their hearts were
powerfully drawn to deal with this special matter, and they found great liberty
in spreading out the whole case before the Lord. They specially committed to Him
for His definite dealing those mainly responsible, and in particular the beloved
worker who had precipitated the crisis. Nor did the spirit of intercession cease
to impel them until they were fully assured that the situation was mastered, and
that the Lord would effectually intervene. The conference duly met, and for six
long sessions, occupying two whole days, discussion proceeded, but without
result; and at the close the feeling expressed was that matters must take their
course. But one of those who had prayed that night was convinced to the
contrary. He had observed that throughout those wearying hours of debate a
remarkable restraint had been upon all, so that, in spite of the acute feeling
existing, not a speaker had said any word which hurt another. He therefore
pointed out that the Lord’s ideal for His church is a oneness that the world
would see, and be impressed ;1 and that the Lord could be trusted to bring this
to pass, if faith did not fail, but patiently waited upon Him. The next morning
the subject was unexpectedly resumed, but without any progress to agreement
being apparent. But shortly, to the amazement of nearly all, the very brother
who had brought about the crisis said that, contrary to the wishes of those who
thought with him, he bad resolved, for the sake of peace, to desist from the
course upon which he had thought it right to enter! The happy result was
restoration of harmony ; and the Spirit of the Lord, being no longer grieved by
dissension, was shortly able to the solution of the original matter of
disagreement. The following circumstances, which formed perhaps the earliest
such lesson in praying that I had, are recalled from memories of some forty-five
years ago. I was then a worker in a certain

Y.M.C.A. The Committee arranged for an address by a well-known higher critic. As
this address was to be given to the Bible Class I then led, my duty to protest
was clear. The Committee peremptorily rejected the appeal that was organized,
and the appointment was confirmed. One evening, after conversing sadly with some
friends as to the defeat of our stand for the truth, I was walking to my
lodgings, when suddenly, in the street, there was brought before me, almost as
by a voice, the promise, "I say unto you, that if two of you shall agree on
earth as touching anything that they shall ask, it shall be done for them of My
Father Vs/ho is in heaven,"2 accompanied by the direction, "Go back to Mr. M—-
and ask him and his wife to agree with you in asking that — shall not come as is
arranged." Never before had I had such an experience; but I went back, and
together we presented the request. About three weeks later there appeared in the
local papers an announcement that the ecclesiastic in question would be unable
to keep the engagements in that city; and the reason was entirely unique. An
epidemic of typhoid was raging in the assize town of his county, and the Judges
decided to hold the courts elsewhere. They fixed upon his city, and upon one of
the days when he was to have been away; and it became his duty to conduct public
worship at the customary opening of the assizes, and he could not leave.

1 John 17:21. 2 Matthew 18:19

Turning now to the details of gospel service, we remark that it seems evident
from the Bible narratives that the apostles and early pastors and evangelists
received no stipend or guaranteed income. It is equally clear that they did not
‘appeal to men for money for their own needs, neither to the Gentiles1 nor to
their converts.2 Paul at times supported himself by working at his trade; but
whence came the funds for his frequent and extensive journeyings, often by sea,
and continuing over so many years? How was the rent of his hired house paid
during the two years of his first Roman captivity?

These are the kind of matters that harass so many earnest minds, and in so many
quarters retard the work of the gospel.

First let it be remembered that those early preachers thought it part of their
lot and privilege to suffer hardship with the gospel, as good soldiers of Christ
Jesus. And for the rest of the question, let the answer be sought in the heavy
apostolic emphasis on prayer as the believer’s sufficient resource. These men
believed that the silver and the gold are the Lord’s. Their infallible
Scriptures had assured them of this.3 and that He can turn the streams
whithersoever He pleases.4 To Him therefore they applied, taking it for granted
that so faithful a Master can be relied upon to supply to His servants all that
is really needful and good. And at this late date in the church’s history there
are still found those, and they number some thousands, who go about the work of
God, in home and foreign lands, following the same plan. And we know from
observation that their work is not behind any in quality, extent, or blessing.


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 26: 02.09.     CHAPTER 09. PRAYER AND MONEY
========================================================================

Prayer and Money

Even apart from any organization whatever faith and prayer are effective. A
certain preacher of the gospel in England, one having no private means,
concluded that God had called him to service in India. He made no appeal for
funds, save unto God ; but by the time that it was needful to pay the deposit on
the passage money, enough was in hand for this, and by the day that the ticket
had to be completed, this was possible. He reached his destination in India,
among strangers, with ten pence to the good, plus the promises f God and a
peaceful heart. In a few days he unexpectedly met a business man who had been a
playmate of his boyhood. This friend, knowing nothing of his then need, asked
him to accept a sovereign. And thus from place to place he journeyed, serving
the Lord in India, Burma, Egypt, Tunisia, and other lands; almost always with a
nearly empty purse, yet always finding a well of salvation as required. For very
many years was such service continued, in addition to twenty-five years in this
land; and were the whole story, in only its financial aspect, recorded in
detail, it would be a testimony indeed to the faithfulness of God, the power of
prayer, and the feasibility of the Lord’s methods of gospel labour. But this
story scarcely needs to be written, for much adequate testimony of this kind is
available in such lives as those of George Muller, Hudson Taylor, and others.

Yet perhaps one incident may be recorded to the glory of God, and for the
encouragement of faith. This worker was in Egypt in August, 1914, at the
outbreak of war. Immediately war was declared all foreign exchange stopped.
Having but little money in hand, and the receiving of money from abroad being
all but impossible, a day soon came when his funds were reduced to the sum of
four pence halfpenny. Of this none knew but God, and to Him constant prayer was
made.

1 3 John 1:7; Acts 20:33. 2 Acts 20:34. 3 Haggai 2:8 4 2 Chronicles 25:9; 2
Chronicles 1:12. That very evening two letters were received. One of these
contained a draft for fifty pounds, the history of which, as afterwards
transpired, was as follows. Immediately war was declared, a kind friend, then in
Switzerland, thought of the probable difficulty of the one in Egypt, and desired
to send money. But shut up in Switzerland, and there likewise short of funds, it
seemed impossible to do this, since no banks would grant credit or give foreign
drafts. But this friend remembered that a gentleman then in England, had some
money at his credit with a certain commercial house in Cairo, and wrote to him
to send an order thereon. The postal delay involved at that time of
disorganization did but serve to hinder the arrival of the help till faith and
prayer had been fully tested and strengthened. But this was not all. In that
period of financial stringency it took a few days for the firm to cash the
draft, and this left no provision for those days. But this detail God had
foreseen, and had afore arranged the supply, by moving another loving heart in
England to post, so as to arrive by the same delivery, a British postal order
for five shillings. This being payable at any post office (probably the only
paper money negotiable at that time), just met the temporary need. Let not
unbelief again ask, Can God prepare a table in the wilderness?1 Nor is the
gracious readiness of our God to hear the cry of His children in matters
monetary limited to the affairs of directly spiritual work. A Christian lady was
proprietress of a dressmaking business. Having no spare capital, and her
customers being of a certain social class at almost invariably took
unjustifiably long credit, she was not seldom in straits.

One Saturday morning this lady went before breakfast to an intimate friend, to
whom she confided practically every business perplexity, to say that she found
herself without money to pay the weekly wages. She knew that her friend could
not find the eight pounds needed, but she besought his prayers. She said that
her work-hands needed their pay, that she had never before had to send them away
unpaid, and that she felt that to do so would be to the hindering of her
testimony to them concerning Christ. Prayer was very definitely offered that God
would help. And the way he did so was singularly to His own .praise. Had a local
customer come to the shop and paid an account, that would not have been at all
striking, or very clearly an answer to prayer. But this did not occur. By the
early afternoon post a customer who was away from home sent £10, and these
special features lent wondrous interest to the remittance

(1) The lady (who was afterwards the wife of a then well-known General) was one
who had always taken very long credit. This time, the goods had been only just
delivered.

(2) Accustomed not to pay promptly when at home, it was most unlikely that she
would concern herself with a, to her, small and new account when at a
considerable distance on holiday.

(3) Prayer had been offered in the early morning; the post-mark showed that the
letter had been posted shortly after that hour of prayer.

(4) Such customers generally remitted accounts by check. Had this usual practice
been followed on this occasion it would not have met the need, since the bank
was closed before the letter arrived. But she sent bank notes, which were easily
cashed. And so exactly does God work in answer to believing prayer, that the
supply came within the very hour that preceded the closing of the workroom.

1 Psalms 78:19.


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 27: 02.10.     CHAPTER 10. DELAYED ANSWERS
========================================================================

Delayed Answers

If it he said that God does not always so deliver, but sometimes delays His
help, or even allows His people to suffer need, it must be asked if there is not
a cause. The writer has had such experiences. Partly from want of funds. he was
once detained for three months in an Eastern city at which he had planned to
stay hut three days. During those month only a few shillings reached him, and
expenses went on accumulating. That detention resulted (1) in very distinct and
lasting blessing to a group of needy native Christians; (2) in developing
patient waiting for the Lord in a not too patient spirit; and (3) in a
remarkably encouraging proof that God well knows how the handful of meal can
long be kept from vanishing into nothing, and can fill the barrel to the full
when the right hour has come. Thus by the want and the delay most blessed ends
were served, and, moreover (4) God’s servant was kept from going into a Bithynia
to which he was essaying to depart.1 "And therefore will the Lord wait, that

He may be gracious unto you, and therefore will He be exalted, that He may have
mercy upon, you: for Jehovah is a God of judgment [He does not act. capriciously
and without due reason] blessed are all they that wait for Him."2 Oh learn to
trust My changeless love, Though love may seem to cease. To faith the darker of
My paths The fuller are of peace.

Yea, all My ways all-perfect are, Though stones and thorns annoy; For steep
ascents lead up through clouds To sunlit realms of joy. And if I keep thee
waiting long I have not thee forgot; And pangs of sorrow bring to birth Rich
joys earth else knew not. And know, the more I win thy love, The more I thee
shall test; For thus My best beloved friends I fit to share My best.

Mid when seasons come that we seem wholly unable to explain, let it be
remembered that such are the very best of occasions for gratifying our Father’s
heart by trusting Him in the dark. Dr. A. T. Pierson used to speak of a ladder
of prayer, up which faith ascends by the rungs of experience, and the highest
rung of which is when God does not even say No to our requests, hut leaves us in
silence and darkness. - The most awful hour that eternity shall ever know was
when He Who had never been denied a request was constrained to exclaim, "I cry,
. . . but Thou answerest not." But it was at that moment that faith rose to its
supreme height, for the Son of God, denied and forsaken, immediately justified
God for so treating Him, by declaring, hut Thou art holy."

1 Acts 16:7. 2 Isaiah 30:8.


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 28: 02.11.     CHAPTER 11. PRAYER ABOUT DETAILS
========================================================================

Prayer about Details

We are exhorted to pray concerning all things.1 The details over which we do not
pray will be ordered by our poor wisdom and be dependent upon our but limited
resources. But when affairs are definitely committed to God, and His guidance is
awaited and followed, then is secured the inestimable advantage of matters being
ordered by His perfect knowledge and power. Great is the gain of this in those
items of life which, being small, are oftentimes very fretting to the spirit. A
Christian man, needing to move to another dwelling, spent much time searching
for a house, and found none. At one that was advertised he decided not to look,
since he was well aware of the dilapidated condition of the buildings in that
district. After long fruitless searching, he decided that he could better serve
God with time and strength, saying to a friend that their heavenly Father surely
knew where was the place of His choice, and that he would now commit the matter
to the Lord, and await His promised guidance. Within one hour of this decision a
lady casually met him who also was house-hunting, and who said that she had just
looked at a new and lovely suite of rooms, and would have taken them had they
not been too many arid large. These were viewed and found very convenient. It
was the house that it had been thought useless to see

Some time thereafter it was needful again to move ; and again, at the desire of
another, time was spent in fruitless visits to houses. Once more, and earlier
than on the former occasion, it was decided definitely to commit the need to the
Lord, and count upon His promised aid. That same afternoon a friend called who
had never before done so, and who knew nothing of the need, but who knew of the
very place of the Lord’s appointment.

Again, this same household had been plagued with a succession of indifferent
domestics, a cause of long worry and friction. When ten or twelve such had come
and gone, it was resolved to risk no more trouble by leaning to thine own
understanding," but in this also to acknowledge Him," expecting Him graciously
to "direct."2 The next morning a lady introduced a servant who proved a great
and lasting comfort, remaining for years, and only leaving to be married.

How gracious is our heavenly Father to concern Himself with these items of the
lives of His children! How wise and blessed are we when we appeal to Him, and
count upon Him! And since life is so largely made up of such small and personal
matters, it is manifestly necessary that we should pray concerning everything,
for thus only can the habit of prayer become so natural as instinctively to
operate when life’s more serious affairs develop or its emergencies have to be
met. We must "in everything by prayer and supplication, with thanksgiving, make
known our requests unto God." This practice brings a deep tranquillity of
heart—and this, in time, to even a naturally impetuous spirit— by preserving a
rest-giving assurance of the presence of the Almighty One, Whose care and power
are so often shown. "The Lord is at hand: in nothing be anxious," becomes an
experience and a possibility; and so the peace of God—that calmness which is
God’s own state of mind because of His consciousness of being always equal to
every occasion—guards the heart and the thoughts in Christ Jesus.3 "0 Lord,"
said a dock laborer, "thou knowest the wicked men with whom I have to work, and
how dreadfully they do tempt me. I need Thee every hour, yes, every minute,
Lord; and I thank Thee Thou’rt always handy".

1 Php 4:6. 2 Proverbs 3:5-6. 3 Php 4:5-7. The man (I knew., him well) who thus
talked with his God, and found Him a "very present help" on the quay-side, was
one who never missed either of the two weekly prayer gatherings, and who sought
his divine Father about every detail of life.


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 29: 02.12.     CHAPTER 12. SUPPLICATION
========================================================================

Supplication But our scripture, we must specially note, lays down three primary
conditions of successful prayer: (1) it must be "supplication"; (2) this must be
made by a "righteous" man; and (3) it is the "prayer of faith" that has power.

(1) Supplication is an intense word. Of its meaning and force there are two
chief examples.

Jacob, after twenty years absence, is returning home.1 As he neared the old
regions conscience made him afraid. He had deeply wronged his brother : was Esau
still nursing that dread resolve for deadly vengeance? The messengers he had
sent to him had returned with the ominous tidings, "Thy brother cometh to meet
thee, and four hundred men with him." For what possible purpose could such a
host of desert warriors he needed save to eat him up, with all his substance?
Occupied with such gloomy thoughts, Jacob is passing the night alone, when
suddenly, out of the shadows, a form springs upon him in fierce attack. Did
Jacob imagine it to be an assassin sent in advance by his wrathful brother? He
throws himself into the struggle; and all the night the conflict rages, until at
dawn the Angel, by supernaturally crippling Jacob, reveals Who he is.

We not seldom hear of "wrestling with God in prayer." Is there warrant for the
thought? Just so long as Jacob wrestled he hindered God. It was crippled Jacob
that secured the blessing. Much of God’s dealings with us has to be directed to
reducing our strength and exhausting our self-confidence. Did not Hudson Taylor
say that when God resolved to open inland China to the gospel, He looked around
to find a man (himself) who was weak enough for the purpose? But of Jacob
crippled, halting, weeping, no more able to wrestle but only to cling, it is
said "he had power over the angel, and prevailed: he wept, and made supplication
unto him."2 What a picture! what a lesson! In imminent peril from Esau, and in
utter helplessness, he felt the situation intensely: and thus was begotten that
supplication which has prevailing strength. That night was wrought the miracle
that the next day disclosed—the thorough changing of Esau’s heart from revenge
to forgiveness, from hatred to love. It is when we feel deeply that we pray
powerfully; and herein pre-eminently is that word true, "When I am weak, then am
I strong."3 As long as we can with complaisance contemplate our friends, and
even our loved ones, going a godless road to perdition: as long as things
temporal are to us more urgent than things eternal: as long as it affects us
little or nothing that Christ’s church, for which He bled, is harried by wolves,
and paralyzed by agnostic, theosophic, and pantheistic poison-gas, let loose by
demon foes: as long as the novel and the newspaper are more attractive than the
Bible, and the office and the fireside are preferred to the prayer-closet and
the prayer meeting—so long we shall be little stirred in spirit and our prayers
will be but formal and weak.

1 Genesis 32:21 2 Hosea 12:4. 3 1 Corinthians 12:10.


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 30: 02.13.     CHAPTER 13. IT COSTS TO PRAY
========================================================================

It Costs to Pray But supplication affects the conditions on the higher plane of
the universe. We get a proportionate result to the effort put forth. It costs,
to pray effectively.

It costs time. We read of the Son of God that on special occasions He continued
all night in prayer to God," and of Samuel that he "cried unto the Lord all
night."1 On into the night the church prayed for the deliverance of Peter. Very
notable are the words of William C. Burns, who in his day opened the windows of
heaven and saw floods of spiritual blessing fall: "The great fundamental error,
as far as I can see, in the economy of the Christian life, which many, and alas!
I for one, commit,’ is that of having too few and too short periods of solemn
retirement with our gracious Father and his adorable Son Jesus Christ." Would
God that among the rank and file of church members there were more of the type
of one known to us. Poor, hard-working, with a long family, and herself but
weakly, she gained strength, bodily and spiritual, at the mercy-seat. A lady
calling at the door was informed by her small boy that his mother was at home,
but not to be seen, for, said he, "she is saying her prayers, and mother never
lets us disturb her when she is saying her prayers." "And do you think she will
be long?" asked the visitor. "I am afraid she will," was the artless answer:
"mother takes a very long while saying her prayers." A preacher of the gospel
became deeply troubled that he saw few conversions. The people of God were
growing in grace, the church life was harmonious; but souls were not added to
the Lord. Concerning this he diligently sought the Lord, Who presently said to
him: "The apostles said that they would continue steadfastly in prayer, and in
the ministry of the Word : you have given yourself to the ministry of the Word
and to prayer. Now put these things in My order, and see what I will do."
Obedient unto this heavenly instruction, the preacher rearranged his life, in
the home, in the study, and socially, so as to give practically two days in each
week to waiting upon God, with some measure of fasting. Immediately the power of
the Lord was with him. Souls began to turn to the Lord, and this from amongst
the same persons who had formerly been unmoved. And this continued a permanent
experience, so that, without any outward excitement, or even special missions,
he was never but a few weeks without some definite conversion over which to
rejoice.

"To wait on God no time is lost:

Wait on; wait on. To grind the axe no labour’s lost:

Grind on; grind on!" And to pray costs strength, whilst it renews strength. It
involves pain and strain, and this sometimes too great for words—the Holy Spirit
maketh intercession for us (and within us), with groanings which words are
unequal to expressing.2 The Lord Jesus groaned in the task of releasing a
captive from the grip of him who had the power of death3; the Spirit groans in
His desires for the will of God and the people of God: and such as know ought of
the deeper, mightier fellowship of their Lord, groan with His groaning, and
succeed with something of His success, or rather He by His indwelling Spirit,
groans and He succeeds in and through them.

1 1 Samuel 15:11. 2 Romans 8:26. 3 John 11:33-38; Hebrews 2:14. For He Himself
is the great Exemplar of that supplication which prevails. "In the days of His
flesh [He] offered up prayers and supplications, with strong crying and tears,
unto Him Who was able to save Him out of death."1 It is not said that He cried
to be saved from dying, but to be saved out of the death state into which
willingly, though with unspeakable horror, He was descending. He went down into
death; and as in Gethsemane He descended into that "pit of tumult,"2 He cried to
be ‘brought up out of it again; and small wonder was it that He was then "in an
agony" and "prayed more earnestly: and His sweat became as it were great drops
of blood falling down upon the ground." 3 This was supplication in its intensest
effort ; and the result was commensurate, even triumph over death, and escape
from Hades and the tomb—the Resurrection itself was an answer to prayer The
first that I knew experimentally of this type of prayer was upon seeing that a
beloved friend and servant of God was being subtly hurried into a course that
would have ended in open disaster and dishonour to the Lord. Deeply stirred by
the prospect, I was constrained to wait on God with a desperation never before
felt, and to persevere in prayer night after night ; and presently the intense
satisfaction was reached of feeling and seeing that the attacking tempting
spirits were being driven off, that the net was broken, and that their prey had
escaped. Not with God have we to wrestle: He is ever eager to bless. Were it our
Father alone with Whom we had to do, prayer were a pure pleasure. But our
wrestling is against wicked spirits,5 and stern is the fight to which they
compel us when we seek that the will of God be known and done. Epaphras was
driven to "agonize" with " much labour" when praying that fellow-believers might
stand fully crown and fully assured in all the will of God."6 And he who would
be strong in the Lord must consent to be weak in himself, for the Lord’s
strength reaches full display in our weakness.7 God hath chosen the weak
things.’ He has not made shift with them—taken them because there were no
others.

No! He hath chosen them." (Mrs. Booth.) The men that count for most in the great
world’s affairs, the self-sufficient and self-reliant, are, of small use to the
Lord. They cannot pray to much purpose, whereas the supplication of a righteous
man has much prevailing strength in its working.


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 31: 02.14.     CHAPTER 14. PRAYER OF A RIGHTEOUS MAN
========================================================================

Prayer of a Righteous Man

(2) And therefore we must inquire what the righteousness is that is here
demanded. And the history of the man chosen as an example of prayer shall teach
us; for Elijah was a righteous man for the purpose of succeeding in prayer. (a)
When appealing to God for blessing, he based his claim on the virtue of an
atoning sacrifice: "he built an altar in the name of the Lord."8 His attitude
was that of the tax gatherer mentioned by our Lord,9 who stood before the altar
of sacrifice confessing himself sinful and wholly unworthy to be noticed by God,
and cried, 0 God, for the sake of the victim that has made propitiation, having
bled and suffered in my place, have mercy on me! He who would be accepted by the
Holy One as righteous, must from the commencement disclaim any supposed
righteousness of his own, and must accept as a gift that righteousness of God
which is obtained by faith in Jesus Christ the Righteous One,

1 John 11:33-38; 2 Hebrews 5:7. 3 Psalms 40:1-2. 4 Luke 22:44. 5 Ephesians 6:12.
6 Colossians 4:12-13. 2 Corinthians 12:9. 1 Kings 18:30, 1 Kings 18:33 9 Luke
18:9-14.

Who, by the shedding of His precious blood, is the propitiation for our sins.
(b) Elijah was righteous because he stood rigidly for God and His rights. He
espoused the Lord’s cause against the whole nation. King, queen, princes,
priests, prophets, and people were on the one side, Baal’s side: Elijah
withstood them all, though alone as far as he knew. He would not follow a
multitude to do evil.1 The righteous enquires not whether a cause is popular.
Elijah was by no means perfect in an absolute sense. Nay; the Scripture
emphasizes that he was of like feeling and infirmities with others ; and he
failed just where others would be likely to fail under his circumstances. But he
stood publicly for God; and that put him in the right and gave him, on the
ground of atonement, a right to be heard in heaven. He walked in the light he
had of man’s duty to God, and thus the blood of atonement kept him, before God,
cleansed from sin, and he and God had fellowship together2 as to the times and
how to meet them. They who seek to serve God and go on with the world (as
Obadiah), and they who preserve a judicious obscurity (the 7,000), are the
people of God, known by Him in grace; but they do not stem the tide of sin, nor
prevail unto the mastering of dire situations. Such have but little power in
heaven by prayer or on earth by action. For evermore it is true that "if I
regard iniquity in my heart, the Lord will not hear," ;3 and equally certain it
is that "the eyes of the Lord are toward the righteous, and His ears are open
unto their cry."4 It is largely in our own power to frustrate or to secure the
answers to our prayers.

(c) Elijah was righteous, from the point of view of prayer, because he asked for
right things. "The secret of the Lord is with them that fear Him,"5 even with
the upright.6 They who walk habitually in the light with God are given to see
things as He sees them. Guided by what He says (in His Holy Word), they come to
His mind about matters. Thus their prayers, being directed by His Word and
Spirit, are harmonious with His will,7 and often more perfectly so than they at
the time perceive "And this is the boldness which we have toward Him, that if we
ask anything according to His will, He heareth us: and if we know that He
heareth us whatsoever we ask, we know that we have the petitions that we have
asked of Him."8 The Lord had plainly said that should His people turn from Him,
He would withhold the rain.9 Elijah prayed for this to be fulfilled, the
inviolate Word being his guide and warrant. But how should he, being in hiding
out of the land, get to know how far and when the judgment had sufficiently
effected the merciful purpose of humbling the people that blessing could be
restored? Of this he received secret intimation from Him Who searcheth the
hearts: And it came to pass after many days that the word of the Lord came to
Elijah. . . . I will send rain upon the earth."10 Thus do the Word of God and
the Spirit of God instruct the man of God as to the wilt of God, so that his
prayers and labours may be a co-working with God.

1 Exodus 23:2. 2 1 John 1:7. 3 Psalms 66:18. 4 Psalms 34:15. 5 Psalms 25:14. 6
Proverbs 3:32. 7 Romans 8:27. 8 Spec. 1 John 4:14-15. 9 Leviticus 26:19:
Deuteronomy 28:2. 10 1 Kings 18:1.


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 32: 02.15.     CHAPTER 15. PRAYER FOR JUSTICE
========================================================================

Prayer for Justice Our Lord’s parable of the importunate widow is highly
illuminating.1 The scene is a court-house; an earthly picture of that court of
justice in the heavens to which the Word of God so often refers. There God sits
on the throne judging righteously and maintaining the right.2 The suppliant
widow represents God’s chosen ones, on earth despised and oppressed, as was
their Lord in His day. The adversary is the Devil, as Peter tells us.3 Oppressed
by him the widow is helpless, unless she can move the strong arm of the law to
action. The church, and the individual saint, are powerless save as they secure
Divine intervention. We must pray, or the oppressor triumphs; for we are no
match for him except through Jesus Christ. But when the widow resorts to the
court, so does the adversary.4 He is "the accuser of the brethren" ; and because
he persists in his attack we must persist in our appeals against him: God’s
elect must cry day and night." And here lies the reason why the righteous only
can pray successfully. The unrighteous in life or desires defeat their own
cause. for their ways and their case will not bear investigation, but rather
give to the adversary a true ground of appeal against them. The law cannot help
the lawless. God cannot aid the elect to do what is not His holy will: they must
be able to cry, "do me justice of mine adversary." But the righteous, having
right on their side, may depend absolutely upon God’s own righteousness. Sooner
or later He will, because, being God, He must cause "judgment to return unto
righteousness,"5 and this He will more certainly do since it is His own chosen
and beloved people who cry unto Him, and this for the right to be done. "For the
Lord is "righteous; He loveth righteousness: the upright shall behold His
face,"6 that is, stand with confidence in His presence. That God is
long-suffering over His elect is true. And this is mainly (a) that the godly may
be perfected by trial;7 (1,) that godless men, and the world as a whole, may
have the longest possible respite for repentance ;8 and (c) that the vast and
complex affairs of the heavens and of the world of mankind may develop according
to His eternal foreknowledge and the unalterable laws of His justice and mercy.
The stages of the coming of His kingdom are foretold by God in His Word, and
happy are the enlightened who patiently watch the aforetold developments,
especially those proceeding before our eyes in these great times.9 But when the
court at last acts, events move quickly: God will "do justice speedily"; and
this His people who have waited for Him have constantly observed. Thus also it
will be in the world-wide judgment and purging at the consummation of this age.
That will be a period of literally unparalleled tribulation ; but for His
elect’s sake God has determined it shall be brief,10and so He will act rapidly
when once He shall arise for the salvation of His people. "In your patience ye
shall win your souls [or lives, mar.]."11

1 Luke 18:1-8. 2 Psalms 9:4. 3 anudikos. an adversary at law. Here and 2 Pet.
5:8: Matthew 5:25; Luke 12:58 only. 4 Revelation 12:10, and see again Job
1:1-22. and 2.; and Luke 22:31. Exaites isa legal term, to demand that one be
given up to punishment.	5 Psalms 94:15. 6 Psalms 11:7. 7 Hebrews 12:1-13,
etc., etc. See especially the Book of Job, and the Divine comment thereon in
James 5:10-11. 8 2 Peter 3:9, 2 Peter 3:15. 9 For example, the simultaneous
reopening of Egypt, Palestine and Assyria, as foretold by Isaiah (chapter 19.)
2,600 years ago. And this is set in connection with the coming again of the Lord
(ver. I) and the promised era of universal blessing (vv. 24, 25)..10 Matthew
24:21-22. 11 Luke 21:19.

All things rise toward crisis; whether individual matters, or those of the
church corporate, or the affairs of heaven and earth entire. And they control
the crises who pray mightily and perseveringly, and in harmony with the will of
God. For them Christ Jesus, our great Advocate before the Father, can guarantee
a truly "complete "1 salvation—from judgment deserved, from the power of sin,
and from the adversary who accuses and oppresses. But who are they for whom He
can so wondrously prevail? They are described as those who "draw near unto God
through Him that is, to praying saints who use His all-powerful name. The
parties to the case must appear in court with their advocate, or they largely
tie his bands. Christ’s high priesthood is in order that we may resort unto God,
not to render it immaterial whether we pray or not.

(3) And lastly, it is the prayer of faith that prevails—that is, the
supplication of the righteous man who expects the promised good. "George Muller
believed, and because he believed, prayed; and praying, expected; and expecting,
received. Blessed is he that believes, for there shall be a performance of those
things which are spoken of the Lord."2 That man of faith well said that faith
holds in our transactions with God a similar place to that which money has in
our dealings with men. Our neighbour passes to us that which we desire in
exchange for money; but God grants our requests if we come to Him with true
heart confidence.


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 33: 02.16.     CHAPTER 16. PRAYER AND PROMISES
========================================================================

Prayer and Promises In his celebrated Lectures on Revivals of Religion, Charles
Finney inquires when is it our duty to believe the promise that God will do that
which we ask? He replies that we ought to believe that God will do a certain
thing when we have evidence that He will do it. For man cannot believe a given
thing without having what he regards as proof thereof. Mr. Finney then discusses
the supremely important question of the various kinds of proof available by
which we may become convinced that any given thing is the will of God; and shows
that once it is known what the will of God is, we are forthwith under a positive
and inevasible obligation to believe that God will do that, in answer to our
request.

Now the ground of this faith, this assured expectation, is the promise of God,
for "faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of Christ. 3" It was by
having steadfast regard to the promise of God that Abraham’s faith grew stronger
and stronger at the same time as the unlikelihood of the event increased; so
that when the thing promised had become an entire impossibility, he had become
fully assured that it would come to pass.4

Rebels have no claim on their sovereign, nor sinners on God. Consequently we can
only expect as much as God of His mercy sees fit to promise us. But it is our
duty to expect that, and the whole of that. The supposition that God cannot be
trusted to keep His word of promise is blasphemous Faith consists in expecting
that He will keep it; and in acting accordingly. "Go thy way; thy son liveth.
The man believed the word that Jesus spake unto him, and he went his way.5"
Elijah believed that God would perform His word of judgment ; and having asked
God to do so. he forthwith announced to the king the coming drought, thus
publicly staking his whole standing and reputation as a prophet upon God’s
faithfulness.

1 Hebrews 12:25 and Luke 13:11 only. 2 Dr. Pierson, "George Müller of Bristol,"
92. 3 Romans 10:17. 4 Romans 4:20-21. 5 John 4:50.

Faith therefore (1) is created and sustained by "looking unto the promise of
God" ; and (2) being thus certain of His will, faith then ventures on God by
taking such steps as His will reqaires. George Muller learned assuredly that God
meant him to care for orphans, and he proceeded with arrangements for doing this
though having no funds at call. Hudson Taylor knew that God would have him lead
missionaries into inland China, and he took the required steps expecting that
funds would be provided as needed. Neither waited for money to be in hand before
committing himself to the God-appointed business. Had Elijah spoken thus to the
king before being sure of God’s will, presumption would have led to disaster.
But had he timidly or prudently refrained from speaking to Ahab, true faith
would have been wanting. For faith does not at its own will embark on a sea of
adventure, but faith does venture to walk on the sea at the call of God. Faith
ventures all, hut risks nothing; for there is no risk in performing the will of
God. "By faith Abraham when he was called "1—not before, but then—" went out,"
on an errand seemingly very risky, but actually wholly safe.

Since faith arises from and depends upon the promises of God, they who deny the
authenticity and veracity of Holy Scripture render vital faith impossible. Any
question as to the authenticity of a bank-note, or any ambiguity as to its
words, forbids trading therewith. Who of the destructive critics of Scripture
has been renowned for ventures of faith? Who is so bold as to say in one breath:
"I deny or doubt that these words are from God, but I shall claim that He stand
to and fulfil the promises they give"?

Further, true faith disowns any title drawn from supposed merit of our own. But
then it finds a holy boldness, proportionate to its humility, by basing its
appeal for blessing upon the prevailing merit of Christ Jesus, the Son of God.
The saint finds no reason in himself why God should regard his prayer, but he
perceives abundant reason in what Christ is to the Father. "For how many soever
be the promises of God" (and they are "precious and exceeding great," and cover
every possible contingency of human experience, present and eternal), "in Christ
is the Yea "—that is God looks on Christ, and says, Yea, for the sake of My
all-worthy Son I can and I will fulfil every promise I ever have given:
"wherefore also through Him is Amen —the suppliant too looks on the Son of God,
and sees in Him such abundant merit that he is able to say, Amen! that is, it
shall be so!2 And this confident expectation works out "unto the glory of God
through us."3

1 Hebrews 11:8. 2 Genesis 15:6, Abraham "amened God." So David, speaking of his
house, "Thou, 0 Jehovah, hast blessed, and it is blessed for ever" 1 Chronicles
17:1. 3 2 Corinthians 1:20. It is worthy of remark that the R V. renderings
enrich each of the chief passages here considered. E.g., Luke 18:1, the "they"
in place of "men" fixing the application to disciples, who only can pray
powerfully; and the margin "Do me justice" (ver. 3) showing that one who prays
must have right on his side. Luke 22:31, the word "asked to have you" in place
of "desired" showing that Satan had actually ‘applied to God. We do not always
ask for what we may desire. And the margin. "obtained you by asking," is even
more illuminating. 2 Corinthians 1:20 above: "how many soever" hints at the vast
number of the promises, as "all the promises" fails to do whilst the rest of the
verse is made singularly intelligible. James 5:16, "supplication" suggests at
once the parallel with Hosea 12:4 and Hebrews 5:7, and the addition of "in its
working" greatly strengthens the thought. Romans 4:20-21. Abraham not only did
not "stagger," he did not even "waver," and he "waxed strong.. in faith, that
is, grew ever stronger. until he reached "full assurance."

Thus every favour comes to us as Christians on precisely the same, condition as
first secured us God’s pardon. "Your sins are forgiven you for His name’s sake
"1 is the initial assurance that faith grasps. And all further blessings which
await our acceptance we are to acquire on the same ground, even as our Lord, ere
He left His followers to face life and service and peril without the comfort and
protection of His visible presence, seven times over said, "Ask in My name, and
ye shall receive, that your joy may be full.2" He who presents another man’s
check, asks for payment in the name of that other. And the bank cashes the check
according to its own estimate of the value of the name at the foot, and without
regard to the financial status of the person presenting the draft.


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 34: 02.17.     CHAPTER 17. PERSONAL EXPERIENCE
========================================================================

Personal Experience

It should be stated that the writer can personally guarantee every one of the
incidents of answered prayer before given. More striking examples could
doubtless have been gathered from published sources, but the course followed has
been taken advisedly, so that (1) the facts may be unquestioned and recent; and
(2) that these pages may add somewhat to the ever-increasing volume of testimony
to the faithfulness of God and the efficacy of prayer. And he has ventured to
use some personal experiences, principally that every reader, however humble and
consciously unworthy, may be emboldened freely to use the name of the Lord
Jesus, and expect and secure the interposition of God. For none who shall pray
will exceed in utter unworthiness him who here magnifies God for His mercy and
faithfulness, unreservedly adopting as his own the words of Jacob : "I am not
worthy of the least of all the mercies, and of all the truth, which Thou hast
showed unto Thy servant."3 and if such things as are before set down may be
gleaned from the experience and observation of but one believer, what
extraordinary power must needs reside in the whole church of God by means of
supplication!


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 35: 02.18.     CHAPTER 18. LET US PRAY
========================================================================

Let us Pray Prayer therefore, to be successful, must be—

(I)	That of a righteous man: one who is living habitually in conformity with
all that he knows of the will of God, and who is ever seeking fuller knowledge
thereof as revealed in the Word of God.

(2) It must be of that type which is termed "supplication," and which involves
earnest insistence, such as that of the man who went to his friend at midnight
seeking bread,4 and would not be denied; and resolute persistence, like that of
the widow urging the court to act.

(3) It must be the prayer of faith, even that which confidently expects the
answer. This faith is gained by asking for that which God has indicated as His
holy will, since He has promised that this shall be done; and it is maintained
in energy by paying steadfast regard to the merits of Christ and to the
faithfulness of God to His promises. May God grant that to reader and writer
there may be hence’ forth fuller meaning in the familiar call. Let us pray!

1 1 John 2:12. 2 John 14:13-14; John 15:16; John 16:23-24 (twice, once by
implication as above), 26. 3 Genesis 32:10. 4 Luke 11:5.

They who believe that to pray is to work will not neglect other godly efforts,
but they will put the first and final stress upon the effort of praying. Such
shall surely find that our God is verily the One "Who worketh for him that
waiteth for Him,1" the "God that doeth wonders,2" "the living God, Who now, as
well as thousands of years ago, listens to the prayers of His children, and
helps those who trust in Him."3 For has He not said, "Call unto me, and I will
answer thee, and will show thee great things, and inaccessible, which thou
knowest not,4 and shall He not make it good? (Numbers 23:19) The margin "fenced
in" suggests a strongly stockaded camp, or a well-defended city, as Petra the
rock city of Edom, which was deemed impregnable, and concerning which the
soldier-king cried, "Who will bring me into the strong city? Who will lead me
into Edom ? "5 God Who led David thither in triumph, causes other trustful,
prayerful hearts to reach the inaccessible goal toward which He leads. He can
always do something greater than the greatest we have known, but He wills that
We inquire of Him that He should do it.6.

"Now unto Him that is able to do exceeding abundantly above all that we ask or
think, according to the power that worketh in us, unto Him be the glory in the
church and in Christ Jesus unto all generations for ever and ever. Amen."8 1
Isaiah 64:4; 2 Psalms 77:14. 3 George Müller. 4 Jeremiah 33:3. 5 Psalms 60:9. 6
Ezekiel 36:37. 7 Ephesians 3:20


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 36: 03.00. ATONING BLOOD  - WHAT IT DOES AND WHAT IT DOES NOT DO
========================================================================

ATONING BLOOD - WHAT IT DOES AND WHAT IT DOES NOT DO by George H. Lang
(Brethren) All Scripture quotations are from the R.V. (1881 revision).

Copies of this book are available from: Schoettle Publishing Co., U.S.A.

Summary: In this 13 chapter book by Lang (Brethren), he does an excellent study
of the biblical concept of the atoning blood. He examines what the blood does,
and what it doesn’t do,

CONTENTS

Part One 1. What the Blood Does?

2. Blood Protects from Vengeance.

3. The Blood Gives Access to God.

4. Why the Blood Saves?

5. Who’s Blood Saves?

6. Whom Does the Blood Save?

7. Benefits Secured by Atoning Blood.

Part Two 8. What the Blood Does Not Do.

9. Blood Does Not Take the Place of Food.

10. Blood Does Not Do the Work of Water.

11. Blood is Not Oil and Does Not Serve the Purpose of Oil.

12. The Blood Does Not Dispense with Discipline.

13. Blood Does Not Do the Work of the Sword.

GEORGE HENRY LANG - A TRIBUTE By DOUGLAS W. BREALEY

Having known Mr. Lang for nearly sixty years I am glad to be given the
opportunity of paying a tribute to his memory; in doing so I desire only to
’magnify the grace of God’ in him.

First, I would say, that over the years I have been growing conscious of his
deep spirituality; he was one of those rare souls who really lived in heaven; he
found himself truly to be a ’stranger and pilgrim on the earth’. His ’city home’
was in heaven from which he saw himself to be sent to this world as an
ambassador for Christ. He was completely devoid of any earthly nationalism - it
mattered little to him where he was down here, except that he should be in the
place of Christ’s choosing for the moment; so from time to time he was found in
many countries on the service of his Lord, now enduring the scorching heat of
Arabian deserts, now the freezing cold of Russian steppes; he was equally
content to be posted by his Sovereign in some primitive village of ’the pensive
East’, or in some great city of the West with all its modern amenities. Thus he
roamed the world, Christ’s ’ambassador at large’, beseeching sinners to be
reconciled to God.

He was essentially a man of faith, never looking to man for the means of his
subsistence, but only to his heavenly Father, and faith grew with its exercise.
In this school, like his great predecessor, he learned in whatsoever state he
was therewith to be content; he learned the secret of how to run low and how to
run over. And he was such a man of faith because he was such a man of prayer;
his prayers were always unusual and as inspiring as they were unique; he spoke
with an intimacy to his heavenly Father as one who knew God, but whose intimacy
was the very soul of reverence.

I think I may truthfully say that he was the most apostolic man I have ever met;
perhaps for that very reason he was a very controversial figure; a correspondent
suggested to me that he was the most controversial figure in brethren circles
since J. N. Darby; yet it would be true to say that he himself was not a
controversialist. A very close student of the Word, and an independent thinker,
he was not prepared to take traditional interpretations unless he was personally
convinced that they were right. Though completely convinced of the eternal
security of the believer, many of his views on prophecy led him into avenues of
thought and teaching where a great number of us felt unable to follow.
Unfortunately this closed doors to his otherwise extremely valuable ministry.
Perhaps one of the greatest teachers of his time, multitudes could testify to
the great help they have received from him, either from his public utterances or
from his numerous writings.

It was only to be in his presence to realise that one was in the presence of a
true saint of God whose holy life gave weight and authority to all he taught.
From our midst has gone ’a prince and a great man’; he has been an ensample to
the flock. If we cannot follow all he taught, we may well follow his faith, and
like him, come the Scriptures with an open mind and teachable heart, ever
keeping before us that day, quickly coming, when differences of judgement will
have disappeared for ever and when ’we shall know even as we are known’.

F. F. Bruce, Sheffield, writes: "Another well-known teacher who influenced him
(Lang) still further was G. H. Pember. In 1900, Mr. Lang read Pember’s ‘The
Great Prophecies’, and wrote to him about some questions which that book raised
in his mind. Pember answered him at length, and thereafter sent him a copy of
each book he produced. From these books Mr. Lang tells us that he ’soon saw two
things: first, that he (Pember) did at least endeavour to deal thoroughly with a
large class of solemn passages of Scripture which most others let severely
alone, or misapply to the unregenerate, or pervert to teach that a child of God
may be finally lost; and then, that if his views thereon were correct, it
involved a further revision of yet other opinions in which I had been reared and
which I had held tenaciously’. But it required more than Pember’s arguments to
make Mr. Lang revise his earlier opinions. One day, however, when he was about
to preach on the text ’Follow after peace with all men’ (Hebrews 12:14), he
studied the context (as every good expositor must do) and considered more
carefully what the firstborn rights’ were which Esau forfeited by his folly, and
why the case of Esau is presented there as a warning to Christians. This passage
in Hebrews was not one to which Pember had drawn his attention, but as he
studied it he became convinced that Pember’s interpretation of other scriptures
provided the key to this one - namely, that believers because of unfaithfulness
might forfeit the privilege of reigning with Christ in the Millennium. Such
Christians, if they died before the end-time, would remain in their graves until
the second, post-millennial resurrection. As for Christians who were alive at
the end-time, unfaithfulness could deprive them of a share in the ’selective
rapture’ of the ’firstfruits’ of Revelation 14:14, but the ensuing great
tribulation might purify them sufficiently to be eligible for participation in
Christ’s royal glory. Hence our Lord’s warning to his disciples to pray that
they might ’prevail to escape all these things that shall come to pass, and to
stand before the Son of man’ (Luke 21:36).

... Having reached this position, he made it the centre around which his
interpretation was organised. While he fully accepted the doctrine of the
believer’s eternal security, he held that there were great and precious
privileges which might be forfeited by unfaithfulness, and this served in his
eyes as an added incentive to personal holiness - a leading theme in his
ministry. ...”

Referring to Mr. Lang’s literary work, F. F. Bruce continues: "By all these
writings, his spoken ministry and private correspondence and conversation, he
has proved to be for many of us ’an interpreter, one among a thousand’. But we
think of him even more as a humble and warm-hearted man of God, whose personal
holiness and ’cheerful godliness’ were an inspiration to us. Harold St. John,
who had a great affection for him, said to me once with a twinkle in his eye, ’I
agree with him completely so far as the past is concerned’; but added with sober
emphasis : ’He is a man whose prayer-life I envy!’ Such an appraisal from a man
of Mr. St. John’s spiritual calibre speaks volumes. And if anyone wishes to
learn the secret of Mr. Lang’s spiritual power and personal influence, he may
find it in three pamphlets from his pen - Praying is Working, Prayer Focussed
and Fighting, and Divine Guidance."

G.H. Lang - A modern Caleb ‘He hath followed me fully’ Numbers 14:24.

Two courageous men were born in 1874; Churchill and G.H. Lang. November 20th
will mark the Centenary of that lucid and powerful Bible teacher - G.H. Lang. He
was never called before kings or judges, but he was that rarity - a man who
taught what he really believed, and lived by what he taught regardless of
consequences. This simple courage was to him but simple common sense. God was
his father, and father’s wisdom is always good. I commend the idea to us all. It
saves a lot of heartaches if you refuse to look at the hazards, and look simply
to God. His childhood was spent in a christian home at Greenwich, Bennondscy and
Sidcup. At the age of seven and a half he trusted the Saviour; of that
experience he wrote ‘it was so real that it is as vivid after 70 years as if it
had just happened.’ The first of many adventures in guidance occurred when about
13 years old, he was attacked by a bullying gang from Bexleyheath. He recounted
later ‘I was about to answer cheekily when something arresting happened. There
rang in my heart words I had no recollection of having heard before’ "A soft
answer turneth away wrath" I changed my tactics, answered quietly, and was
allowed to go home without damage. That experience has been a determining factor
for more than 60 years. I have taken for granted that God will work, speak,
guide and help and that the Bible is the medium he chooses to use for his
messages. I have heard his Voice in the Book not once, but many times.’ By 1899
he was an insurance assessor’s clerk with very good prospects but one day he was
given an assignment which touched his conscience. He set out to ask a friend’s
advice, when a voice said ‘I will instruct thee.’ (Psalms 32:8) He returned home
and waited some days; on 27th. May the Voice said ‘Whatsoever ye do, do all in
the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God the Father through Him.’
(Colossians 3:7). He saw at once he could not do the business called for. On 1st
June he wrote his resignation, without having any other job to go to. I remember
him telling me. ‘The ink wasn’t dry on that letter, when a deep peace filled my
soul.’ He promised the Lord to take whatever job he was led to; ‘until then’ he
told me ‘I said I would devote all my time to his service.’ His eyes twinkled as
he continued ‘I am still waiting for that job.’ So for 54 years he served God in
many lands: Britain, India, Burma, Egypt, Tunisia, Palestine, Syria,
Scandinavia, Germany, Poland, Rumania, and elsewhere. He laboured in teaching,
writing and most valued of all by a great circle of friends personally
counselling hundreds of believers to lives of total devotion to Christ.

Almost his last journey was to the wedding of our friend George Patterson in
1953. In 1954, at 80 years of age, he told me that the Lord had said to him that
his journeys were ended, but he began to publish a new magazine, ‘The Disciple’
given free to all who would read it prayerfully, each edition published only
when the Lord had sent the money for it. I have a full set, 22 numbers, more
that 950 pages; close on half a million words, more than half as long as the
Bible, mostly from the pen of an ailing man in his 80’s.

George Lang wrote 14 major books, and innumerable booklets, 3 of which were
published by the Enfield Christian Bookshop! I recall him saying ‘No man should
write a book until lie is 40. He needs to prove his theories in practice before
publishing.’ All but 9 of his many writings were published after he was 50. His
views on prophecy and the hereafter did not win universal acceptance: his views
on the Church, the most lucid and scriptural expositions I have ever come
across, are unacceptable to denominational Christians and most clergy. He
trusted his reputation to God, and when doors were closed he found others opened
by the Lord! He very strictly maintained silence before men on the subject of
financial needs. He truly lived by faith.

Probably his most influential books were his biography of Anthony Norris Groves
(1939) and The Churches of God (1928). In my view, all believers should read
both before their 25th birthdays, they would avoid having to unlearn so much in
later life.

Lang’s quiet, gracious, determined spirituality stemmed from a love for Christ
which valued more than anything else the great gift which the risen Saviour had
given him, the personal anointing of the Holy Spirit, which he said took place
in the 30th year of his life. The titles of some of his best pamphlets are
evidence of this great preoccupation; ‘The Rights of the Holy Spirit in the
House of God.’ (1938) ‘God at work on his own lines.’ (1952) ‘The personal
indwelling of the Holy Spirit.’ (1954) ‘Praying is working.’ (1918). The same
theme runs through his biographies ‘A.N. Groves’, ‘Aroolappen’, ‘E.H.Broadbent’
and his autobiography ‘Pages from an ordered life.’

F.F. Bruce concludes his Epilogue to the posthumous edition of Lang’s Biography
thus:- ‘He takes his secure place in the ranks of those whom we are bidden to
bear in mind: Remember your guides, who spoke to you the Word of God, consider
the outcome of their life, and imitate their faith.’ (Hebrews 13:7).

I have been lucky to have known several people utterly devoted to Christ. G.H.
Lang was one of them. I thank God for his memory.

M. Collier By kind permission.


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 37: 03.01.     WHAT THE BLOOD DOES?
========================================================================

PART I The taking of life in the service of God and to the advantage of man
began immediately after man sinned. It appears that the Creator Himself
originated the practice. That the fallen pair might not be always exposed to His
indignation as naked, and thus unsuitable to His eye, and that their nakedness
might be hidden from each other, “Jehovah God made for Adam and his wife coats
of skin, and clothed them” (Genesis 3:21). It is presumed that this involved the
death of victims to provide the skins.

While the basic instinct to worship the Deity is inherent in man it could
scarcely have been otherwise than by Divine instruction that Abel slew a
firstling of his flock and offered this, including the richest element, the fat
(Genesis 4:4). When the judgment of the Flood had swept away the wicked, and a
new era opened for the cleansed earth, Noah consecrated all to God by offering
clean beasts and birds, and these must die and be burned in fire on an altar.
This distinction between living creatures, that some were “clean,” suitable to
and acceptable to the Deity, and some were not, continued in the remembrance and
observance of the race, even after mankind had again revolted from the only true
God. Of early Babylonian sacrifices Sayce says:“It is noticeable that it was
only the cultivated plant and the domesticated beast that were thus offered to
the deity. The dog and swine, or rather wild boar, are never mentioned in the
sacrificial list.*

[* A. H. Sayce, The Religions of Ancient Egypt and Babylonia, 466, 467. The
learned author showed various other parallels between that earlier Babylonian
religion and the Mosaic ritual. Ch. ix, “The Ritual of the Temple” is of great
interest, but his conclusion is wrong:The Mosaic Law must have drawn its first
inspiration from the Abrahamic age.” Rather was the human religion a debased
survival of the original God-appointed arrangements by which man could approach
Him, and the Mosaic system a revival and extension by Divine instruction of that
original system of worship.], This essential distinction was revived and
amplified by Moses. In the same way Abraham drew near to God at altars he built,
and God’s covenant with him was ratified by the sacrifice of clean animals and
birds (Genesis 12:7-8; Genesis 13:4; Genesis 15:9-10). This ground of approach
to God culminated in the offering of Isaac his son on an altar and the
substitution of a clean animal, a ram, for the deliverance of Isaac (Genesis
22:1-24). Isaac and Jacob similarly drew near to God at altars (Genesis 26:25;
Genesis 35:3; Genesis 35:7). During that same period Job likewise offered
burnt-offerings on behalf of his family, in case their hearts had failed in
reverence to God (Job 1:1-22, Job 5:1-27).

All this is Biblical and historical evidence that from the very beginning of
man’s history God had taught him that, being a sinner, he could draw near to God
only upon the basis that a death had taken place to redeem him from death as the
consequence of his transgression of the Divine law.

Death as the penalty of sin cannot be remitted but must be exacted; only it may
be exacted by means of an innocent substitute dying instead of the culprit.

Down to this stage the Divine records have summarized two and a half thousands
of years of man’s history, and no mention has been made of the blood of the
sacrifices. But it were wrong to infer from this that the use of the blood in
sacrificing was unknown in earliest times and that the emphatic use of the word
is a later addition not warranted by primitive usage. When writing this brief
summary of the salient events of most ancient times Moses knew well (1) that the
sacrificialuse of blood was practised universally and known by his hearers and
readers; (2) that he had already, before writing his records, explained and
enforced this usage upon Israel; and (3) that in the next following sections of
his history (Exodus and Leviticus) the theme would be enlarged.

Thus no one of those times would make the false inference suggested, or would
regard the extensive use of the blood as an innovation. This leads to our first
topic, WHAT THE BLOOD DOES. But before considering its atoning virtue it is most
necessary to notice first its opposite power, as the background of its atoning
power.

1.- BLOOD CRIES FOR VENGEANCE. This God had sternly emphasized in the earliest
years when He said to Cain:“the voice of thy brother’s blood crieth unto Me from
the ground. And now cursed art thou from the ground, which hath opened its mouth
to receive thy brother’s blood; when thou tillest the ground, it shall not
henceforth yield unto thee its strength” (Genesis 4:10-12). This, as other first
events in man’s history, must have been well known to Noah, seeing that for 600
years he was contemporary with Methusaleh who had been contemporary with Adam
for 243 years, and that during that period the race formed but one society in
one region. The memory of those words of God to Cain would, it may be taken for
granted, be fresh in Noah’s mind when, directly after the Flood, God added this
declaration fundamental to human society:“Every moving thing that liveth shall
be food for you; as the green herb have I given you all. But flesh with the life
thereof, which is the blood thereof, shall ye not eat. And surely your blood,
the blood of your lives, will I require; at the hand of every beast will I
require it:and at the hand of man, even at the hand of every man’s brother, will
I require the life of man. Whoso sheddeth man’s blood, by man shall his blood be
shed:for in the image of God made He man” (Genesis 9:3-6. R.V.).

These early Divine statements are basic to the affairs of earth and man as
viewed by God. They have never been abrogated but rather amplified. These
essential points are to be observed, 1. That blood shed unrighteously brings
Divine judgment on the very land it stains. This was incorporated into the
Mosaic law. Speaking of murder Moses said:“blood it polluteth the land” (Numbers
35:33). Considering the torrents of blood that have been shed without Divine
warrant how defiled this earth must be before God, and what judgments must hang
over it. How heavy must be the wrath of heaven accumulating against, say, the
United States of America with over 11,000 murders annually, and only a few
punished, and 21,000 suicides.

2. Blood is the vehicle of bodily life. This also forms the basis of sin being
atoned by blood, which will be considered later from Leviticus 17:1-16. Life is
the gift of God alone. No one else can impart it, though one may rob another of
it. To take life therefore is to rob God. He sets upon human life such value
that He exacts reparation from the man who takes it and even from the beast
which takes it. Such is the control of the Creator over every creature, even the
wild creatures. What an awfully solemn title of God is this. “He that maketh
inquisition for blood” (Psalms 9:12). It is said that when Metternich urged
Napoleon to agree to peace and to spare human life, the Emperor replied by
cursing human life.”He that maketh inquisition for blood” could not overlook
this.

3. The penalty of shedding man’s blood, so taking his life, is that the
murderer’s blood must be shed. Capital punishment is by express Divine command.
It is not simply a deterrent against murder, though it is this:much more it is
demanded by equity. Life is of higher value than anything else; as Satan truly
said, “all that a man hath will he give for his life” (Job 2:4).

Therefore nothing else could be accepted from the murderer in place of his life,
for nothing else could be equivalent to the other man’s life he had taken
(Numbers 35:33).

4. Hence arises the prohibition against eating blood, or flesh with the blood
undrained from it. It is self-appropriation of an article which belongs
exclusively to God, its only Giver, its permanent and solitary Owner. The
prohibition was heavily enforced upon Israelites (Leviticus 17:10 : Deuteronomy
12:16; Deuteronomy 12:23), and duly re-enacted upon Gentile Christians (Acts
15:20; Acts 16:4; Acts 21:25). The ground for it admits of no exceptions. In its
highest aspect war is a Divine judgment upon peoples for their sins (Ezekiel
14:21). Yet even so, David, the God-fearing soldier who executed this judgment
on the surrounding nations, and was supported by God in his campaigns, was
disqualified from the honour of building God’s house at Jerusalem because he had
shed much blood (1 Chronicles 22:6-8). Let the soldier who is a Christian ponder
this. It emphasizes the value that God sets on human life, and that, even when
war is viewed ideally, it is a lower service that disqualifies for the highest
service. Suppose that the extermination of some degraded tribe or nation be a
Divine judgment, required for the general moral good of mankind, yet clearly a
Christian soldier who, by order of his superiors, carries out that extermination
cannot build up God’s spiritual house, the church, among that people he
destroys.

Thus does blood shed defile man and land and cries aloud for vengeance, which
cry God hears. This being the case when any common man is murdered, how much
louder must be the cry for vengeance of the holy blood of the murdered Son of
God. What an incubus of guilt and penalty His murderers accepted when they
shouted in a frenzy of rage “His blood be on us, and on our children” (Matthew
27:25). That penalty is not yet exhausted because, as a people, the descendants
maintain the attitude to Christ of their ancestors. The observant sojourner in
Palestine can note how the above cited curse upon the soil is in force, for the
nearer one gets to Jerusalem the more sun-scorched and barren is the land.


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 38: 03.02.     BLOOD PROTECTS FROM VENGEANCE.
========================================================================

2. - BLOOD PROTECTS FROM VENGEANCE.

Some fourteen centuries B.C. God was dealing judicially with the richest and
dominant nation on earth, the Egyptians. The visitor to the monuments of that
period can see the damning records the people left of their vileness and
cruelty. These make fully credible the account of Moses in Exodus of the
enslavement and bitter oppression of Israel by Pharaoh, with the order to kill
all infant boys. This is the judicial background for the severe penalties
exacted from them by the Judge of all the earth. The culminating crime of
Pharaoh and his people was this:The supreme and only God, the Creator of all
men, had seen fit to choose one race to be to Him among the nations what a
firstborn son is to the father of a family, even the senior member of the circle
under the father. Pharaoh was enslaving that chosen race and had designed their
absorption into hispeople, by killing the boys and marrying the girls to
Egyptians. To this tyrant Jehovah sent the message:“Israel is My son, My
firstborn:and. I have said unto thee, Let My son go that he may serve Me; and
thou hast refused to let him go:behold, I will slay thy son, thy firstborn”
(Exodus 4:22-23). The haughty monarch of the ruling nation on earth was not
prepared to see his supremacy pass to this hated race of slaves and he doggedly
rejected the demand. After much patience, and when it had become evident that
the king and his people would not yield, the execution of the Divine decree was
ordered, which Moses announced in these words, “Thus saith Jehovah, About
midnight will I go out into the midst of Egypt:and all the firstborn in the land
of Egypt shall die, from the firstborn of Pharaoh that sitteth upon his throne,
even unto the firstborn of the maidservant that is behind the mill; and all the
firstborn of cattle.” (Exodus 11:4-5).

1. God acts personally. It is to be noted that:A judgment so extensive and
terrific was superintended by God personally:“I will go out into the midst of
Egypt.” This had been the case at four earlier crises recorded:(a) God had
Himself dealt with Cain:(b) “Jehovah sat as King at the Flood” (Psalms
29:10):(c) when at Babel the whole race was set on its own exaltation, “Jehovah
came down to see the city and tower which the children of men builded” (Genesis
11:5), before He confounded their speech and scattered them:and (d) when two
great cities were to be destroyed by fire from heaven jehovah said:“I will go
down and see whether they have done altogether according to the cry of it
[angelic report concerning it, with application for judgment], which is come
unto Me; and if not, I will know” (Genesis 18:21).

Lesser situations on earth might be left to angel or human rulers in the
execution of powers entrusted to them by God as the universal Sovereign, but on
such solemn and fearful occasions He personally superintended for the securing
of strict and impartial justice. See further Joshua 5:13-15; Joshua 6:1-2;
Ezekiel 8:8; Ezekiel 8:9, esp. 3, 4: Revelation 5:5; Revelation 6:1; Revelation
19:11-16; Revelation 19:20; Revelation 19:11 :etc.

2. The Destroyer acts. The recognition of this personal presence of God is
essential to a true understanding of the events in Egypt that fateful night,
even as Jehovah said:“I will go out into the midst of Egypt,” and as Moses
added, “Jehovah will pass through to smite the Egyptians,” but he adds, “Jehovah
will pass over the door, and will not suffer the Destroyer to come into your
houses to smite you” (Exodus 11:4; Exodus 12:23). This great Destroyer is a
distinct figure in Holy Scripture.

He acts here; he smote Israel in the days of David (2 Samuel 24:15-16 : 2
Chronicles 21:14-15); he destroyed I85,000 Assyrian soldiers in one night
(Isaiah 37:36); and in Revelation 9:11, in connection with one of the appalling
judgments of the End days, his very name is given in its Hebrew and Greek forms,
Abaddon and Apollyon, both meaning Destroyer. All the ancient world knew of him
and dreaded him. To him they attributed the unexpected deaths of men, as the
Greeks said, “Apollo has shot him with his arrow.” Abaddon is here described as
the angel ruler of the Abyss, the world of the dead. The word is found at Job
26:6; Job 28:22; Job 31:12: Psalms 88:11: Proverbs 15:11; Proverbs 27:20 only.
In each case it is associated with Death and Sheol, the world of the dead; and
the passages range from about 1000 B.C. to 1700 B.C, which includes the period
of the Exodus.

It was therefore a terrible threat that this mighty Angel of Destruction should
be let loose on Egypt and kill in every house. All the preceding plagues had
been inflicted by angels, as it is said of God:“He cast upon them [the
Egyptians] the fierceness of His anger, wrath and indignation and trouble, a
sending of angels Of evil “ (Psalms 78:49); not merely “evil angels,” as A.V,
but as R.V, “angels of evil,” angels who because evil by nature would eagerly
inflict evil. This last judgment would be the culmination of the dread work of
the Destroyer and his hosts.This is not past history only. Pharaoh and his
servants had hardened their necks, and had not obeyed the truth as to the true
God, Jehovah, and His will, brought to their knowledge by Moses. On the contrary
they had obeyed unrighteousness; upon them had been poured out God’s “anger,
wrath, indignation, and distress.” Romans 2:8 denounces against all in every age
who so defy God “wrath and indignation, tribulation, and anguish,” the same
solemn terms with which the Psalmist described the judgments on Egypt of old.
And the agency is the same; for when the Lord comes down again for the judgment
of His foes who have not acquainted themselves with God, nor obeyed the good
tidings of the Lord Jesus, nor received the love of the truth that they might be
saved, then shall the same supreme judge who dealt with Egypt be accompanied by
“the angels of His power in flaming fire, rendering vengeance” (2 Thessalonians
1:7-9; 2 Thessalonians 2:9-12); even as He said, “so shall it be at the
consummation of the age; the angels shall come forth, and sever the wicked from
among the righteous, and shall cast them into the furnace of fire:there shall be
the weeping and the gnashing of teeth.” It was thus in Egypt that awful night of
old when “there was a great cry in Egypt; for there was not a house where there
was not one dead” (Matthew 13:41-42; Matthew 13:49-50 : Exodus 12:30).

3. Justice distinguishes. The words of our Lord just quoted from Matthew show
that when God executes judgment His wrath is guided with strict discrimination.
He distinguished between Abel and Cain:He saved Noah and his family:He delivered
righteous Lot from the overthrow of Sodom. In the days of Ezekiel He set a mark
upon each who sighed and cried over all the abominations that blighted
Jerusalem, and He forbade the destroying angels to touch these, though no others
were to be spared (Ezekiel 11:1-25). It must always be thus, and it was to be so
that night in Egypt. But upon what ground in Divine law could the Israelites be
rightly exempt? Morally and religiously they were no better than the Egyptians.
The strict laws and severe penalties which Moses had to impose on them after
their deliverance from Egypt show that their moral life was in general as low as
that of their Egyptian tyrants. Slavery ever debases. Ere Joshua left the next
generation, which he had led to victory in Canaan, he reminded them that their
first ancestors had originally served false gods in Chaldea and that their
immediate ancestors had worshipped the gods of Egypt. For a time there were
exceptions, such as the parents of Moses and Moses himself (Hebrews 11:23-26).
But forty years after his flight he had to remind the God of Abraham that the
patriarch’s descendants in Egypt did not even know the name of Abraham’s God
(Exodus 3:13). It is a natural tendency with slaves to accommodate themselves to
the opinions and practices of their oppressors, if they may thereby gain a
lightening of their lot. From Ezekiel 20:7-9 we learn the same:for God tells the
Israelites of that time that, in the day when He made Himself known unto their
fathers in Egypt, He had been obliged to say to them “Cast ye away every man the
abominations of his eyes, and defile not yourselves with the idols of Egypt,”
but that at first the people rebelled against the moral deprivations and the
change of religion. Therefore they were legally under sentence of death with the
Egyptians, and on what ground could they be justly spared?

4. The Passover Blood. The answer given in the famous account found in Exodus
12:1-51. is that for each house a lamb without blemish was to be killed, and
“they shall take of the blood, and put it on the two side posts and on the
lintel, upon the houses wherein they shall eat it... And the blood shall be to
you a token upon the houses where ye are:and when I see the blood, I will pass
over you, and there shall no plague be upon you to destroy you when I smite the
land of Egypt... 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 of the door of his house until
the morning. For Jehovah will pass through to smite the Egyptians; and when He
seeth the blood upon the lintel, and on the two side posts, Jehovah will pass
over the door, and will not suffer the destroyer to come into your houses to
smite you” (Exodus 12:5-7; Exodus 12:22-23).The term “pass over” in Exodus 12:13
is distinct from the “pass through” of Exodus 12:12 (A.V.), which distinction
the R.V. indicates by its rendering “go through.” The latter means to go through
in judgment; the former to pass over and preserve. Yet “passover” obscures the
picture and the manner of deliverance. The real sense is found in Isaiah 31:5,
which speaks of a deliverance of Jerusalem yet to come. Here Jehovah compares
Himself and His preserving action to a mother bird fluttering over her young,
darting to and fro, to defend them from some beast or reptile that would attack
them:“As birds hovering, so will Jehovah of hosts protect Jerusalem; He will
protect and deliver them, He will pass over and preserve” (A.S.V.); or as
Darby:“As birds with outstretched wings, so will Jehovah of hosts cover
Jerusalem covering, He will also deliver, passing over, He will rescue”; or
Delitzsch:“Like fluttering birds, so will Jehovah of hosts screen Jerusalem;
screening and delivering, sparing and setting free,” on which this learned
commentator writes:“The word pasoach recalls to mind the deliverance from Egypt
(as in ch. 30, 29) in a very significant manner. The sparing of the Israelites
by the destroyer passing over their doors, from which the passover derived its
name, would be repeated once more... Jehovah’s attitude [is]... one resembling
the action of birds, as they soar round and above their threatened nests.” Upon
this Hebrew word Canon Cook (Speaker’s Commentary in loco) says:“In Egyptian the
word Pesh, which corresponds to it very nearly in form, means to ‘spread out the
wings over,’ and ‘to protect’; see Brugsch, ‘D.H.’ p. 512. This gives
significance to the phrase in verse 23 above that “Jehovah will not suffer the
destroyer to come into your houses to smite you.” That great Destroyer, being an
evil angel prince, would have gone into every house blood or no blood, but God
Himself restrained him as to the houses sprinkled with blood. Hence the prophet
as he recalls the past says of Jehovah, “So He was their Saviour” (Isaiah 63:8).
And He spared and saved solely out of regard to the blood.

It must not be supposed that this striking method of preserving a house from
danger of death was new at that time. On the contrary it was practised in early
Babylonia, whence both the Hebrew and Egyptian races had migrated. Prof. Sayce
writes, “Still more interesting it is to find in the ritual of the prophets
instructions for the sacrifice of a lamb at the gate of the house, the blood of
which is to be smeared on the lintels and doorposts, as well as on the colossal
images that guarded the entrance.” And he shows that the most ancient customs
may persist the ages through, long after their meaning may have been lost, by
adding, “To this day in Egypt the same rite is practised, and when my dahabiah
[sailing boat on the Nile], was launched I had to conform to it. On this
occasion the blood of the lamb was allowed to fall over the sides of the lower
deck.” (Religions 472).

It is evident that neither Moses, nor a supposed later redactor or imposter,
invented this story to serve some imagined religious end. God on this occasion
was reviving, purifying, and applying a primeval rite, one which we must presume
had formed part of an original body of instructions given by Himself as to how
sinful men could be granted Divine mercy without dereliction of Divine justice.
This means of grace was that life must be sacrificed that life might be spared,
an unblemished substitute dying in place of the death-doomed sinner. And in this
history of the Passover there comes the heaviest possible emphasis upon the use
of the blood as the agent of salvation:“When I see the blood” I will spare and
preserve.

Thus in the one case the blood cries for just vengeance, yet in the other case
protects from just vengeance.Abel’s blood for vengeance Pleadeth to the skies,
But the blood of Jesus For our pardon cries. (E. Caswell). On July 21st, 1914,
with the Egyptian summer sun at full blaze, I stood alone, in the stillness of
the desert, amid the roofless, ruined houses of Pithom, the treasure city built
by Pharaoh’s cruelly oppressed slaves of Israel. One could somewhat estimate the
severity of their work in such heat; and also, gazing at the broken doorway of a
small brick house, one pondered whether perhaps that was a lintel that had been
splashed with blood and where Jehovah arrested the steps of that fierce
Destroyer. Does my reader know in personal heart experience the meaning and
power of the events of that far off stirring night? or is it all to him but one
among other curious items of antiquity?


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 39: 03.03.     THE BLOOD GIVES ACCESS TO GOD.
========================================================================

3. - THE BLOOD GIVES ACCESS TO GOD.

Before morning dawned the whole redeemed people of Israel, with their cattle and
chattels, were on the march to freedom. At the Red Sea their old tyrant was
destroyed and they went through into the life of liberty, to walk with God in
the desert. Yet, though redeemed and liberated, in themselves they were very
much what they had always been; vices and habits, stiff necks and hard hearts,
were still there. How then shall their holy God be able to bear with and bless
them?

How shall their sins in the desert be pardoned? By precisely the same process as
they were forgiven that night in Egypt. God appointed a permanent institution of
worship and service, and this too had atoning blood as its legal, sacrificial
basis. Innocent substitutes were perpetually to forfeit life to redeem the human
lives forfeited by sin, and their blood was to be sprinkled openly on the altar
of sacrifice where God and the sinner met. But as yet the time and the people
were not ripe for open unrestricted access to the immediate presence of God in
the Most Holy Place of the building where He graciously dwelt among them. This
defect would one day be rectified, even when a Sacrifice should have been
offered adequate to the putting away of sin for ever. Yet once in the year there
was provided a foresight, an anticipation of that better thing which was to
come. There was appointed in Israel an order of priests, and the head of this
privileged order, the high priest, was the official religious representative of
the whole nation. Annually he was privileged to draw aside the veil behind which
Jehovah dwelt in glory and to enter that sacred Presence. Yet as a sinner he was
liable to die there; the Presence of God is a fatal spot for a sinner. But he
took there precious atoning blood, sprinkled it before and upon the golden cover
of the ark above which shone the Glory, and thereby he was rendered safe from
destruction. In him all whom he represented were kept secure. The need for and
benefit of that annual atonement, as distinct from and in addition to the daily,
weekly, and monthly sacrifices, was this:These latter provided forgiveness for
all sins of which individuals were conscious, which they confessed and forsook,
as well as for general corporate guilt and defilement. But over and above such
acknowledged transgression there remained the accumulated guilt of the
multifarious sins and failures which God alone detected and which Hemust punish.
This guilt and defilement would have prevented Divine favour being upon the
people:but God in grace made provision for removing it by the atonement of this
chief day of the year. The Chief Priest laid his hands upon the head of the goat
that was to bear away the sin, and confessed “over it all the iniquities of the
children of Israel, and all their transgressions, even all their sins... and the
goat shall bear upon it all their iniquities unto a solitary land” (Leviticus
16:22; Leviticus 16:21). And the blood of accompanying sacrifices was taken into
the holy Presence and sprinkled. But this plenary atonement did not permit an
Israelite to commit sin wilfully and conceive that the annual sacrifice would
protect him from penalty incurred. No, he must do all that he knew of the will
of God, must avoid conscious transgression, must offer every personal atoning
sacrifice prescribed for failure recognized, and only so would his unrecognized
transgressions, iniquities, and sins be held covered by the annual atonement.
For us today this is the truth stated in 1 John 1:6-7 :“If we say we have
fellowship with Him, and walk in darkness, we lie, and do not the truth:but if
we walk in the light, as He is in the light, we [we and God] have fellowship one
with another, and the blood of Jesus, His Son, cleanseth us from all sin.” But
when we know that we have sinned it is vain and wicked to presume that the full
atonement of Calvary renders it needless for us to desist and be humbled, for
the Scripture goes on in verse 9 to assure us that it is “if we confess our sins
He is faithful and righteous to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all
unrighteousness.” The plenary virtue of the death of Christ is not available
that the Christian may be careless and presumptuous. In all times and for all
persons the holiness of God demands this inflexible rule:“He that covereth his
transgressions shall not prosper; but whoso confesseth and forsaketh them shall
obtain mercy” (Proverbs 28:13). This subject will be enlarged later.


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 40: 03.04.     WHY THE BLOOD SAVES?
========================================================================

4. - WHY THE BLOOD SAVES.

Even if we did not or could not know the reason for any command of God it were
still our duty and safety to obey it; but God desired men to be intelligent as
to His requirements and appointments; therefore when He ordained in Israel the
sacrifice of blood He explained the ground of His orders. This is found in
Leviticus 17:1-16. Giving to Noah the ancient prohibition against eating flesh
with the blood in it God had said that the blood is the life of the flesh. This
prohibition was repeated to Israel by Moses seven times.* They as a people were
to maintain the rights of God by keeping His laws, which the other nations had
long since rejected, and this law against eating blood was prominent and its
re-enactment was emphatic. It was again solemnly stated that God Himself would
exact the penalty of death:“I will set My face against that soul that eateth
blood, and will cut him off from among his people” (Leviticus 17:10). **

[*Genesis 9:4 : Leviticus 3:17; Leviticus 7:26-27; Leviticus 17:10-14; Leviticus
19:26 : Deuteronomy 12:16; Deuteronomy 12:23-24; Deuteronomy 15:23.], [** This
shows that the phrase to “be cut off from his people” meant death, for this was
the penalty of eating blood, as before announced to Noah (Genesis 9:5-6).], The
basis of this is now declared in three concise sentences (Leviticus 17:1-16)
“For the life of the flesh is in the blood” (Leviticus 17:11); “the blood
thereof is all one with the life” (Leviticus 17:14);”the life of all flesh is
the blood” (Leviticus 17:14).

After 3000 years man’s investigations have informed him that what the Creator
said to Noah and Moses was fact, even that the blood and the life are
inseparable. There is therefore physical reality under the notion of the savage
that by drinking the blood of his slaughtered foe he becomes possessor of his
vigour and courage. Blood transfusion is further proof that the blood and the
life are one.

Therefore, when on that dread night in Egypt blood was seen all round the door
of a house, that was visible proof that death must have occurred to provide so
much blood; therefore life had been taken, the sentence of death had been
already executed in that house, and justice did not permit that the Destroyer
should exact the penalty again.

It was essential that there should be proof indisputable that Jesus, the Son of
God, the sinner’s Substitute, had really died. Without positive certainty of
this there could be no assurance that the penalty of sin had been met and
deliverance from eternal death secured. The Gospel narratives of the crucifixion
supply distinct proofs of His actual death, leaving no possible ground for any
such suggestion as that perhaps the Sufferer sank into a coma, was taken down
only apparently dead, and later revived in the tomb. Had this been so there had
been no atoning death and no life-imparting resurrection:we should all be still
in our sins. But the details given exclude this notion. (1) At the moment of His
death the Lord was still strong and conscious, for He “cried with a loud voice”
(Matthew 27:50 : Mark 15:37 : Luke 23:46). (2) He dismissed His spirit by His
own act, saying, “Father, into Thy hands I commend My spirit” (references as
before). (3) He bowed His head of His own will:it did not sink helplessly as in
a faint or coma (John 19:30). It was when the centurion saw that the Crucified
“so gave up the spirit” that he was convinced that somewhat supernatural was
involved. He had seen many die, but never a death like this (Mark 15:39). But
(4) the final proof that the Saviour had literally died was that, upon the
piercing of His side there flowed out a stream of blood and water (John 19:34).
John most explicitly asserts that he saw this take place and gave true witness
to the fact; and on another occasion he emphasized that “Jesus Christ came not
in [the power or virtue of] water only, but in [that of] the water and in the
blood” (1 John 5:6). Of course, God the omniscient did not need visible proof
that the lamb had been slain in the houses of the Israelites or that Jesus had
really died. As to the latter fact, He had received back the surrendered spirit,
devoid of which the bodily life of man cannot be maintained. But the Supreme
Ruler carries on the administration of the universe under the scruting of men
and angels, and of these many are His enemies and critics. No ground must be
allowed for these to complain that His government is not always and wholly just.
Fallen man and fallen angels are ready so to complain. Adam promptly hinted that
God was to blame that he had been tempted, “The woman that THOU gavest me” led
me astray (Genesis 3:12). Adam’s descendants are still all too eager to blame
the Almighty as to His ordering of affairs. Satan did not hesitate to suggest
that God had been unduly favourable to Job, making life too easy for him (Job
1:9-11). In particular, Satan, as the chief executioner of the Divine sentence
of death against the sinner (Hebrews 2:14 :“the one having the power of death,
the devil”), must be left no right to complain that some are withdrawn from his
sphere of action without warrant in law and against justice. And even as in
Egypt the blood was the proof of sentence having been executed and that the
Destroyer had no right of entry, so the blood of Jesus delivers the believer on
Him from the jurisdiction of the Devil. They are translated out of the sphere of
authority of the Prince of darkness into the kingdom of the Son of God’s love
(Colossians 1:13).

Thus by means of death Christ annulled the power of Satan over those who rely on
Him anddelivers them from fear of death; for these “fall asleep through Jesus”
(1 Thessalonians 4:14) and are in His charge and company as was the repentant
thief (Luke 23:43), for they “die in the Lord” (Revelation 14:13). Of this real
and blessed deliverance by death the blood of the Victim is the justification,
being proof that death, the penalty of sin, had been exacted, for Jesus on the
cross had made Himself answerable (Isaiah 53:7, Lowth, Newberry). When the debt
is paid the court bailiff loses right of entry and execution. If by a
miscarriage of justice an innocent person was executed for a crime, and later
the real culprit should confess or be discovered, the latter would escape
execution. The law would hold that its full penalty having been actually paid
another could not be made to meet it. And “God will not payment twice demand,
First at my bleeding Surety’s hand, And then again at mine.” The blood is the
proof of death, and death delivers from death. As an epitaph reads, “Unless the
death of death Had given death to death By His own death, The gate of eternal
life had been closed.”


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 41: 03.05.     WHO'S BLOOD SAVES?
========================================================================

5. - WHOSE BLOOD SAVES? In the moral grading of creation a beast ranks lower
than a man. If a murderer were to offer to redeem his life by the slaughter of a
thousand sheep or bullocks justice would reject the proposal.

Therefore “it is impossible that the blood of bulls and goats should take away
sins” (Hebrews 10:4). The sacrifices from Abel onward had no inherent saving
virtue. They did indeed secure a real benefit to the devout offerer:“Jehovah had
respect unto Abel and to his offering” (Genesis 4:4). On the basis of such
sacrifices He made an eternal covenant with Abraham (Genesis 15:1-21). Out of
regard to the blood of the lambs He spared the firstborn in Egypt (Exodus
12:1-51). The burnt offering was accepted by God as atonement for the offerer
(Leviticus 1:4), and the sin-offering was accompanied by the guarantee of
forgivenness (Leviticus 4:20; Leviticus 4:26; Leviticus 4:31; Leviticus 4:35;
Leviticus 5:10; Leviticus 5:13; Leviticus 5:16; Leviticus 5:18).

Yet because the life offered was not a just equivalent for the life forfeited
the former could not provide for the latter a complete redemption, and the
offender, though pardoned for that offence, did not attain a permanent
righteousness before God. Hence those sacrifices needed to be constantly
repeated, because the worshipper did not acquire consciousness of having been
completely cleansed from sin (Hebrews 10:1-4). The inadequacy of those
sacrifices could have been justly inferred from God’s declaration to Noah that
nothing less than the shedding of the murderer’s blood could expiate his guilt
for having shed a neighbour’s blood (Genesis 9:5-6); human life could be
balanced only against human life, for man having been made in the image of God
transcends in dignity the lower creatures, the death of which cannot therefore
in law correspond to his death which that law demands against his sin. This was
made specially clear under the law of Moses by there being a long catalogue of
major crimes for which no sacrifice could be accepted to deliver the culprit
from the capital penalty. Murder, adultery, idolatry, blasphemy, and sabbath
breaking were among these crimes.The holy God could grant that former measure of
pardon without dereliction of justice because He foreknew that in due course a
Sacrifice would be offered which would carry that inherent saving virtue which
all other sacrifices lacked. These were but anticipatory of that, and derived
from it what benefit they brought. Any discounting of the future by man is of
necessity a speculation since he cannot guarantee the future; but this is not so
with God, for He can certainly bring to pass the event on which He counts and in
anticipation of which He acts. His lamb was foreknown before the foundation of
the world (1 Peter 1:20). The absolute certainty of His atoning death justified
God in “passing over sins done aforetime,” that is, before the sacrifice of
Christ at Golgotha (Romans 3:25). On this principle David, upon repentance and
confession, was pardoned for adultery and murder and the capital penalty was
remitted (2 Samuel 12:13). This forbearance of God was justified solely, but
fully, by the atoning death of His Son. From the same declaration of God to Noah
it could have been further inferred that the substitute needed for the sinner
must himself be man, since only human life could answer for human life. This had
been announced by God in Eden when He promised that the foe of man should be
crushed by “the seed of the woman” (Genesis 3:15). Yet no mere man could
suffice, for only one human life could be redeemed by a life which was only
human; by strict justice one man could be the substitute for but one man. It was
therefore a necessity in Divine law that the promised Substitute should be of a
moral rank and worth that should surpass the worth of all mankind, not of one or
a few or even many sinners, but Who should be a “propitiation for the whole
world” (1 John 2:2). This demand could be met only by the Creator in person,
since He alone transcends in moral dignity His whole creation and could alone
offer the indispersable plenary sacrifice.

Therefore God in love assumed humanity in the person of His Son, and was born of
a woman, becoming Jesus Christ the Son of God. But as no sinner could offer his
life to redeem another sinner, his own life being already forfeited by his own
sin, therefore this Redeemer-Man must be without sin, inherited or committed.
This necessitated such a birth as should prevent the transmission to Him of a
sinful nature and grant to Him a pure nature which, being without sin, could
live without sinning. His birth of a virgin by the direct act of the Spirit of
God was a necessity. Without deity the Substitute could not act for all the race
of man; without humanity He could not represent mankind at all; without
sinlessness He could not atone for sinners. To deny either of these features is
to leave the human race without a Saviour, exposed to the inflexible justice
that demands death as the inescapable and just penalty of sin.

There was no other good enough To pay the price of sin, He only could unlock the
gate Of Heav’n and let us in. (C. F. Alexander).

“But now once at the consummation of the ages hath He been manifested to put
away sin by the sacrifice of Himself” (Hebrews 9:26). Whose blood saves? “Ye
were redeemed... with precious blood, as of a lamb without blemish and without
spot, even the blood of Christ,” “in Whom we have our redemption, through His
blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses according to the riches of His [God’s]
grace” (1 Peter 1:19 : Ephesians 1:7).


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 42: 03.06.     WHOM DOES THE BLOOD SAVE?
========================================================================

6. - WHOM DOES THE BLOOD SAVE?

(a) In the possibility, the whole human race, indeed the whole creation. It is
declared distinctly that the sacrifice of Christ cleanses the heavenly things,
defiled by the sin of angels (Hebrews 9:23), and that the whole creation is to
be relieved from the curse which sin has brought (Romans 8:18-25). This defiling
of the heavenly regions where God dwells by the sin of angels has its earthly
counterpart, in that the Holy Places of Tabernacle and Temple, where God dwelt,
had to be purified annually on the day of Atonement from the defilement
occasioned by the sins of Israel (Leviticus 16:16 :etc.).

It is shown beyond doubt that the love of God, which provides eternal life for
sinners, is toward “the world” (John 3:16), and that the Righteous One is the
propitiation not only for such as have already believed on Him, but “for the
whole world” (1 John 2:2). It is false dealing with the Word of God to make this
last passage mean that He is the propitiation for the world of the elect. In 1
John 5:19 of the very same Epistle the same Apostle uses again the same contrast
between believers and others when he says, “We know that we are of God, and the
whole world lieth in the Evil One.” Evidently the “whole world” is all of the
human race in contrast to those who have been born of God. Who would think of
adding here that it is the whole world of the elect that are in the sphere and
power of Satan?

It is contrary to the infinite dignity of the Divine Substitute to imagine that
He could offer a limited redemption; it is derogatory to the divine virtue of
His precious blood to attach any restriction to its scope. Since the Creator
transcends the creation, so must His sacrifice transcend its need.

Therefore that His saints should intercede for “all men... is good and
acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour, Who wishes [thelo] all men
[emphatic] to be saved;” unto which end the one Mediator between the one God and
men, Christ Jesus, Himself man, “gave Himself a ransom for all” (1 Timothy
2:1-6). As Anselm, in a passage to be given later, long since argued, a payment
which more than covers the debt must needs justify complete remission of it.

Words could not be more explicit. Salvation through the blood of Christ is
available for all men. He who knows this has strong confidence as he announces
the good news to every man, and he feels also that he is “debtor” to all men,
for he holds a treasure intended for every man (Romans 1:1-32, Romans 14:1-23,
Romans 15:1-33). (b) But this universal possibility can become effective to
those only who repent of sin and are willing to be delivered from its power and
penalty, and who for this purpose accept personally the benefit of the atoning
blood of the Lamb of God. “He pardoneth and absolveth all them that truly repent
*and unfeignedly believe His holy gospel.” God has not changed His mind as to
the gifts and calling bestowed on man (Romans 11:29). Therefore He uniformly
respects the grant to angels and men of freedom of action. Man sins willingly
and therefore must repent and believe willingly.

God constrains but does not coerce. He persuades but does not force. The essence
of the faith that saves is seen in the action of the man in Egypt who splashed
the protecting blood around his doorway. He accepted the declaration of God that
(1) death was due as the punishment of sin, (2) that it would be executed, (3)
that the death of the substitute would be accepted for deliverance. His godly
fear and his faith were displayed in his obedience to the direction to shed and
sprinkle the saving blood. By doing this he publicly declared his danger and his
faith, and God attested his faith by granting deliverance. In our case also it
is thus:“if we confess our sins He is faithful and righteous to forgive us our
sins” (1 John 1:9), “because if thou shalt confess with thy mouth Jesus as Lord,
and shalt believe in thine heart that God 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
onHim shall not be put to shame” (Romans 10:9-11). This shows that obedience is
of the essence of faith. Therefore the gospel requires “obedience of faith,” and
“a great company of the priests were obedient to the faith” (Romans 1:5 : Acts
6:7).

Salvation includes of prime necessity deliverance from the unsubdued will.
Obedience alone can prove saving faith. God commands all men everywhere to
repent, to believe on His Son, and to love one another (Acts 17:30 : 1 John
3:23).


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 43: 03.07.     BENEFITS SECURED BY ATONING BLOOD.
========================================================================

7. - BENEFITS SECURED BY ATONING BLOOD.

(1) Atonement. The principal, because the basic, benefit of atoning blood is
that it atones. Of it God said:“I have given it to you upon the altar to make
atonement for your souls [lives]:for it is the blood that maketh atonement by
reason of the life,” with which it is all one (Leviticus 17:11). The Hebrew word
translated “atonement” has the picture “to cover.” Thus the ark was covered with
pitch (Genesis 6:14), where the same noun and verb are used as “atonement” and
“atone.” That which is covered is hidden from sight, and true here is that
saying “out of sight, out of mind.” The same thought is expressed by another
word meaning to smear over, and so erase a record. It is used negatively and
positively as a term of judgment:positively, “let their name be blotted out”
(Psalms 109:13-14). In Nehemiah 4:5 :“let not their sin be blotted out” is
parallel with another word meaning “to cover... cover not their iniquity.” This
word for “to cover” has the picture of clothing which covers, and so conceals,
the person of the wearer. It is therefore similar in meaning to the former word
for “to cover,” to render unseen, and it is used in Isaiah 44:22 in connection
with yet another picture of hiding from sight:“I have blotted out, as a thick
cloud, thy transgressions, and as a cloud, thy sins:return unto Me, for I have
redeemed thee.”

Thus there is a triple picture of the hiding of sin from sight, the pitch hid
the wood of the ark, the substance smeared on the book hides the record of the
offence, the cloud hides the earth from the view of one on the mountain top. By
words and pictures God has taken pains to encourage the repentant and believing
sinner to be assured that He removes the guilt which hinders fellowship and
demands punishment. It is the atoning blood which effects this saving change of
status Godward. The first of the words for “to cover” has an unique application.
One form of it is used exclusively of the golden lid that covered the ark of the
covenant in the Most Holy Place. It hid from sight the tables of the law which
man had broken and which cried against him for vengeance. This covering is
called “the mercy seat” (Exodus 25:17, and twenty six times later). In the Greek
translation of the Old Testament (LXX), used by Christ and the apostles, this
word is rendered by hilasteerion, which word is shown in the New Testament to
point to “Christ Jesus, Whom God bath set forth to be a propitiation, through
faith, in His blood” (Romans 3:24-25); and a cognate used in 1 John 1:2 says
that “Jesus Christ, the Righteous, is the propitiation for our sins.” Therefore
the true covering that really hides from view the outraged law of God is His
Son, Whose divine nature was typified by the pure gold of which the lid of the
ark was made. That the Hebrew word “to cover” is the equivalent of the Greek
word “propitiate,” used in the Septuagint and the New Testament, shows that the
truth of atonement is in the New Testament though the word is not.But though
that golden covering sufficiently hid from sight the tables of the law, this did
not by itself secure the sinful people from the judgment of God, for not gold
but blood is that which shows that death, the full penalty of sin, has been
executed and the broken law repaired.

Therefore that golden lid had to be sprinkled annually with the atoning blood
that erased the record of the sins of the people and hid these from the sight of
God as a thick cloud blots out the landscape, being proof visible that the sins
had been expiated by equivalent penalty. The divinity of our Lord could not by
itself save sinners, it being no equivalent whatever for the forfeited life of
men. It was indispensable that He, being God, should become man so as to meet
the whole legal demand of God that death must follow sin. Therefore, as the
passage quoted from Romans 3:25 says, “God set Him forth to be a propitiation...
in [the virtue of] His blood.”

Israel’s high priest could only stand safely in that holy place by virtue of the
blood that covered the sins of the people. So Christ, having in grace assumed
legal responsibility for our sins, was while bearing them debarred the presence
of God and constrained to cry “Why hast Thou forsaken Me?” But His death
discharged the penalty for both Him as well as us; His blood shed proved that
the penalty has been met, and it is in the virtue of His own blood that He
entered once for all into the holy place in heaven itself, having by death
obtained a redemption of eternal validity and virtue (Hebrews 9:12). That
precious blood covers for ever the sins of those who truly repent and
unfeignedly believe.

Upon this their submission God puts His laws in their hearts as the rule of life
and writes them in their minds as moral light and the instinct of duty. Of such
He says, “their sins and their iniquities will I remember no more” (Hebrews
10:15-18). Blessed, indeed, is he whose transgression is forgiven, and whose sin
is covered (Psalms 32:1), being hidden from the eye of God, as the body is
hidden by clothing. Precious, indeed, is the atoning, covering blood of Christ,
which only can hide ought from Omniscience and cause the Infinite Mind to
forget.

ATONEMENT includes other features connected with salvation. (2) Propitiation.
This word is not used in the English Old Testament to translate any Hebrew word
connected with atonement. It is used in the New Testament to render certain
Greek words with the same meaning, and these Greek words were used by the
Seventy to translate Hebrew words.

Thus the truth expressed by the word “propitiation” is found everywhere in the
Bible. This truth is that, on the ground of atoning sacrifice, the Holy One is
propitiated, is warranted and enabled to take a favourable attitude to the
culprit He must otherwise have rejected and punished. Our Lord described a
tax-gatherer coming to the entrance of the temple, standing in humility some
distance back, expressing contrition by smiting his breast, acknowledging his
utter wickedness, and appealing for Divine mercy by crying, “God, be propitiated
to me the sinner” (Luke 18:13). On the brazen altar before him, and between him
and the holy God, there was consuming away in the fire of judgment the innocent
victim which had died on his account, and the meaning of his prayer was, “0 God,
out of regard to the death of my substitute be favourable to me!” The choice of
the word “propitiated” showed that his prayer was intelligent. The appeal was
granted because the lamb spoke to God of His Lamb Who would shortly die for the
tax-gatherer’s sins, and Who would do so by express provision of God, for it was
He Who sent Christ forth to be “a propitiation, through faith, by His blood”
(Romans 3:25). Thus the Son of God “became a merciful and faithful high priest
in things pertaining to God, to make propitiation for the sins of the people”
(Hebrews 2:17). “He is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only, but
also for the whole world,” and “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 2:2;
1 John 4:10). He is the divine reality typified bythe propitiatory, the
mercy-seat, in the tabernacle and temple, where of old the atoning blood was
sprinkled to secure the safety of Israel and the continued favour and presence
of God. (3) Reconciliation. The tax-gatherer’s prayer “God, be propitiated to
me” was an appeal for a change of attitude on the part of God. Propitiation
brings reconcilisation. The Greek noun and verb (katallagee, katallasso),
translated in the New Testament “reconciliation,” are not used in the Septuagint
in connexion with atonement, but in the New Testament are very definitely so
connected. The passages are: (1) Romans 5:10-11 :“For if, while we were enemies,
we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son, much more, being
reconciled, we shall be kept safe (Moule) in His life... through Whom we have
now received the reconciliation.” (2) 2 Corinthians 5:18-19 :“But all things are
of God, Who reconciled us to Himself through Christ, and gave unto us the
ministry of reconciliation; to wit, that God was in Christ reconciling the world
unto Himself, not reckoning unto them their trespasses, and having committed
unto us the word of reconciliation.”

These statements make evident that (a) God is the Reconciler; (b) Christ is He
Who effects the reconciliation; (c) It is by His death that He effected this;
(d) The scope of the reconciliation is universal, cosmical (kosmon
katallassown); (e) The gospel is the proclamation and appeal of this
reconciliation; (f) The individual must personally avail himself of it by
responding to the changed attitude in God made possible by the death of Christ.
The meaning of the Greek word is certain. In 1 Corinthians 7:11 it is directed
that a Christian woman living away from her husband is to remain unmarried “or
else be reconciled to her husband.” A change of heart is indicated in the
Septuagint at Jeremiah 48:39 :“how has he changed! How has Moab turned his
back!” - the former bold, courageous spirit has given place to fright and
flight. The Greek word is the equivalent of the Latin permutatis (English
“permutation”), which included a change of sentiment, an altered attitude of one
person to another. Similarly God and man are changed in heart toward each other
by the mediatorial action and death of the Son of God.

Apprehension by man of such divine love and grace by God changes his distrust to
confidence, his enmity to love, his rebellion to obedience. And on God’s part,
the satisfaction rendered to His law by Christ on behalf of man removes the just
displeasure and holy rejection of the sinner which was the inevitable reaction
of the Holy One against his sin.

Such change in man is easy to grasp but some refuse to admit of such a change in
God, for they stress that He is ever well-disposed toward man and loves the
sinner in spite of the sin which He hates. It is certain that the Greek word can
include such a change in God. It is used four times in the Greek of the
Apocrypha in 2Ma 1:5 :“May God be at one with you v. 20:The great Lord being
reconciled 7:33:“He shall be at one again with His servants” 8:29; “They
besought the merciful Lord to be reconciled with His servants.” Nor was such a
change in God a new conception or limited to Hebrew, Greek, or Latin thought. In
early Egyptian times a suppliant, Mes-em-Neter, turned in heart from false gods
and prayed thus to the God of Right and Truth:Behold, the god hath shame of me,
but let my faults be washed away and let them fall upon both hands of the god of
Right and Truth. Do away utterly with the transgression which is in me, together
with [my] wickedness and sinfulness, O god of Right and Truth. May this god be
at peace with me! Do away utterly with the obstacles which are between thee and
me... grant thou that I may bring to thee the offerings which will make peace
[between thee and men] whereon thou livest, and that I also may live thereon. Be
thou at peace with me and do away utterly with all the shame of me which thou
hast in thy heart because of me.*

[* See The Book of the Dead, trans. Budge, 32.], This remarkable prayer descends
from within a measurable period after the Flood. It shows how there lingered
among men recollections of the true God, His character and demands. The
suppliant was aware of his own wickedness and sinfulness and that these were
obstacles to fellowship with God; but he knew that there were sacrifices which
could remove these, and create peace between God and men. He knew also that the
God of Truth was ashamed of him the sinner, and he longed that this shame on his
account might be removed from the heart of God; yet this could be effected by
the act of God alone.

Thus did this suppliant of ancient times in a vile heathen land know well that
there must be induced a change in God toward himself, the sinner, and that
offerings were requisite which could remove utterly his wickedness and
transgressions. How parallel is this to the statement concerning Jehovah that,
as He contemplated the corruption and violence of men before the Flood, He
changed His mind as to having created man and was grieved in heart (Genesis
6:5-6). This was a change of heart indeed from the day when He had seen that
everything He had made was very good, and it was a change which resulted in the
destruction of the unrepentant race. The seeming mystery is resolved by the
statement “if ye call on Him as Father” remember that “without respect of
persons He judgeth according to each man’s work” (1 Peter 1:17). God is both
father and judge. In the highest relationship He is the heavenly Father of those
who have been born again of His Spirit upon faith in His Son:in the creatorial
sense He is the father, the cause of existence, of all spirits (Hebrews 12:9 :
Ecclesiastes 12:7). This includes all orders of beings, heavenly as well as
earthly, for from Him “every fatherhood in heaven and on earth is named”
(Ephesians 3:15), which fact Paul kept in mind when approaching Him in prayer.

Now in the former sense God, the Father of all, loves with Divine affection all
souls that He has made; it is His nature to do so. On the other hand, as the
Ruler and Judge of all, and for the well-being of all, “God is a righteous
judge, yea, a God that hath indignation every day” (Psalms 7:1-17, Psalms
11:1-7). It cannot be otherwise as to either attitude; neither excludes the
other, a truth which Peter pressed upon the children of God in Christ to whom he
was writing. Cases have been known where human judges magnified the law and made
it honourable by fining culprits according to law, and then gratified their
innate instinct of mercy by themselves paying the fine. As humane, such a judge
is merciful at heart; as righteous, his mind is set against the criminal. His
own payment of the penalty changes this latter and just attitude and liberates
the quality of mercy, so that without failure of justice he can discharge the
offender. The satisfaction of law made by the voluntary payment reconciles him
as judge to the law-breaker against whom his heart as judge was definitely
antagonistic. The fact mentioned above (d) that the reconciliation affects the
cosmos, “God was in Christ world-reconciling unto Himself,” must surely imply
that the change meant here is on God’s part, since the cosmos, whether fully
universal or the whole of mankind, is not a corporate entity with a single heart
capable of a collective change of feeling towards God. But the sacrifice of
theGod-man, being of universal validity, gives to the universe collectively a
new aspect before God and warrants a change of treatment from strict justice to
the offer of mercy. Yet as before remarked under 6, “Whom does the blood save?”
this universal opportunity of mercy benefits each individual only upon
individual faith. The Scripture says that the Lamb of God “taketh away the sin
of the world” (kosmos). If this is not universal then that region of the
universe not affected must remain for ever defiled and unreconciled. Apart from
the blood of Christ the heavens must, in that case, remain for ever unclean in
God’s sight, which is contrary to Hebrews 9:23. That typical Most Holy Place in
Israel, the dwelling of God, was cleansed by sprinkled blood.

We must indeed keep in mind R. B. Girdlestone’s words, “When we speak of Christ
reconciling His Father to us (see the second article of the Church of England)
we are not to picture up an angry judge being propitiated by a benevolent Son -
this would be an entire misrepresentation of the Christian Faith. Rather we
should regard the Son as sent by the Father to die for the sins of the world, in
order that He might remove the bar which hindered the free action of Divine love
on the heart of man.” (Old Testament Synony.MS, 217.) Therefore Griffith Thomas
rightly says, “There is practical unanimity among scholars that reconciliation
in St. Paul means a change of relation on God’s part towards man, something done
by God for man, which has modified what would otherwise have been His attitude
to the sinner. Thus, reconciliation is much more than a change of feeling on
man’s part towards God, and must imply first of all a change of relation in God
towards man. It is this that the Article [No. II] was intended to express by the
phrase, “To reconcile His Father to us.” If it should be said that such a change
in God is unthinkable, it may be answered that even in forgiveness, if we are to
understand it aright, there must be some change of attitude, for God cannot
possibly be in the same attitude before as after forgiveness (The Principles of
Theology, 53).

Upon the passage quoted above from 2 Corinthians 5:18, Alford wrote, “Observe,
that the reconciliation spoken of in this and the next verse, is that of God to
us, absolutely and objectively, through His Son:that whereby He can complacently
behold and endure a sinful world, and receive all who come to Him by Christ.
This, the subjective reconciliation - of men to God - follows as a matter of
exhortation”, ver. 2o. On Romans 5:10 Moule says, “When we were hostile to His
claims, and as such subject to the hostility of His Law, WE WERE RECONCILED TO
OUR GOD THROUGH THE DEATH OF His SON (God coming to judicial peace with us, and
we brought to submissive peace with Him); [and in a Note he adds], Katallassein,
Katallagee. It is sometimes held that these words denote “reconciliation” in the
sense of man’s laying aside his distrust, reluctance, resistance towards God,
not of God’s laying aside His holy displeasure against man... But Katallagee
(and its verb) is as a fact used in the Greek of the Apocrypha in connexions
where the thought is just that of the clemency of a king, induced to pardon.
[Two of the passages cited above from 2 Maccabees are given]... And there is no
place in the New Testament where the meaning, conciliation of an offended party,
would not well suit katallassesthai, etc. The present passage (Romans 5:10-11)
would be practically meaningless otherwise. The whole thought is of divine
mercy, providing a way for accepting grace.” (Expositor’s Bible, Romans, 138,
141.)The passages in 2 Maccabees support Moule’s statement that the Greek words
can carry the thought of God being reconciled to the sinner. His remark that
this is implied in Romans 5:11 seems just; for reconciliation is not presented
in this verse as something wrought in man but as something that man “receives,”
as a benefit offered for faith to accept. In the preceding verse the other
aspect may be in view:“we were reconciled to God,” though this can mean that we,
His enemies, were made acceptable to God “through the death of His Son.”

Upon the Greek words katallagee, etc, H. P. Liddon wrote that they must be taken
passively, not merely or chiefly actively The reconciliation is accomplished,
not only in the hearts of men, but in the Heart of God. Men are reconciled with
God in Christ, in such sense, that God, seeing them in union with His Beloved
and Perfect Son, abandons His just wrath which their sins have kindled, and
admits them to His favour and blessing. This, the constant faith of the Church,
was scientifically worked out by S.

Anselm of Canterbury in his Cur Deus Homo [Why was God made Man?], [The
conclusion of Anselm’s demonstration is given in his chap. 20.

So, the mercy of God, which whilst we were considering God’s justice and man’s
sin, seemed to you to vanish away, we now find to be so great and so perfectly
consonant with justice as that neither greater nor juster could be conceived of.
For what can be understood as being more merciful than that God the Father
should say to the sinner who was condemned to eternal torments, and who had
nothing wherewith to redeem himself Take My Only-Begotten Son, and offer Him for
thyself”; and the Son Himself [should say]:“Take Me, and redeem thyself?” But
they do, as it were, speak thus when they call and draw us to the Christian
faith. And what can be more just than that he [God the Father], to whom is given
[by the Son] a payment greater than all that is owing to him, should, if this be
given in payment of what is wrong, remit the whole debt?], Liddon adds, Now
although it is true that the essential nature of God is unchangeable Love, yet
the living action of God’s love in the human world has been hindered and impeded
by sin. In reality God’s Love is identical with His Righteousness. But sin has
produced an apparent antithesis between these Attributes. Although God eternally
and unchangeably loves the world, His actual relation to it is one of
opposition, because the Unity of His Attributes is disturbed and the action of
His Love adextra [to that which is outside His own being], is restrained by
sins. The orgee tou Theou [wrath of God] is an expression which implies, that in
virtue of the Eternal necessities of His being, God’s relation of Love to the
human world is unsatisfied, owing to the agency of sin, since sin contradicts
His essential nature. It is not then His unchangeable Character, but His
relation (produced by sin) to the world of men, that is really affected by the
katallagee [reconciliation]. No mere man could affect that relation by his
personal conduct. Jesus Christ, the Eternal Son of God, Who also as the Pattern
or Ideal Man represented the whole human race, could, and did, by the consummate
expression of His obedience on the Cross, establish a new relation between the
active manifestation of the Love of God and all those who by faith are
associated with His own supreme self-sacrifice. (Explanatory Analysis of St.
Paul’s Epistle to the Romans, 101, 102.) Blessed indeed is he who knows from his
own joy in God that he has been reconciled to Him by the death of His Son; happy
is the man who can exultingly sing Wesley’s ecstatic lines 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. A further element in
salvation is described by the term (4) Forgiveness. The old covenant repeated
often the guarantee of God to the offender that, upon the appointed sacrifice
having been offered, and its blood sprinkled, “the priest shall make atonement
for him, and he shall be forgiven” (Leviticus 4:20; Leviticus 4:26; etc.). Under
the new covenant, written for the assurance of the believer, it stands that “in
the Beloved we have our redemption through His blood, the forgiveness of our
trespasses, according to the riches of His [God’s] grace.” (Ephesians 1:7). Now
the criminal whom the king pardons is not executed. But the atoning blood of
Christ secures more than pardon, even (5) Justification. “We are justified
freely by God’s grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, whom God
set forth to be a propitiation, through faith, in His blood,” in order that God
“might Himself be righteous, and the Declarer righteous of him that hath faith
in Jesus” (Romans 3:24-26). A judge may declare that the man before him was
justified in law in doing the deed in question, that is, that in doing it he
acted within his legal right and is righteous before the law. But the judge
cannot declare a man righteous who has broken the law, riot until he shall have
rendered full satisfaction to the law by meeting its full penalty for his
trespass. Thus a bankrupt may secure discharge from further proceedings to
recover debts, but the record that he failed to meet his liabilities stands
against him and his character is thereby impaired before the law. He is let off
payment because he has no resources that can be passed to his creditors, but the
law does not justify him for having failed to pay twenty shillings in the pound.
But should he later pay the debts in full, with interest, the court record
against him is withdrawn, the former failure is cancelled, and thenceforth he is
regarded by the law as a righteous man, as if he had not before failed. And this
will be the case just as completely should another have provided the payment in
full. Thus the adverse record is “blotted out,” and the former default is no
more remembered officially. This is justification; the acquiring by the bankrupt
of a new and perfect standing in law. Plainly it is more than simple
forgiveness. A debt may be forgiven, and the creditor suffer the loss; but this
does not put the debtor upon the same morally satisfactory footing as if either
he had never defaulted or that he or a mediator or surety for him, had satisfied
the creditor by payment in full. The sacrifices offered under the law of Moses
could not provide for the sinner more than forgiveness. They did not in
themselves adequately compensate the Divine law that had been infringed, and
moreover the more heinous crimes were not within the range of that sacrificial
system. Only the blood of the Son of God could meet fully the claims of God; but
He having died, the glorious proclamation could be made, “Be it known unto you
therefore, brethren, that through this man is proclaimed unto you remission of
sins:and by Him every one that believeth is justified from all things from which
ye could not be justified by the law of Moses” (Acts 13:38-39). Against one that
the law has declared righteous no proceedings can lie. (6) Remission. The text
last quoted speaks of remission of sins. The force of the word is seen in the
commercial phrase “to make a remittance,” to send something away to another
person and place. On the day of the annual atonement in Israel, the live goat,
to which ceremonially the sins of the people were transferred, was sent away
from the camp into the wilderness, and “the goat shall bear upon him all their
iniquities into a solitary place” (Leviticus 16:21-22). Thus, in the
fulfilmentof the type, did the holy Sin-bearer go out into the darkness of being
forsaken by His God and take away our sins into that solitude. “Apart from
shedding of blood there is no remission” (Hebrews 9:22), but in Christ “we have
redemption through His blood, the remission [same word] of our trespasses”
(Ephesians 1:7); for He is “the Lamb of God that taketh away the sin of the
world” (John 1:29), because He “put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself”
(Hebrews 9:26).

Sometimes an estate owner knows that his tenants are unable to pay their rent
and he decides to bear the loss himself. He therefore “remits” all or part of
what is due. He suffers loss and they escape payment. Thus did God in Christ
suffer for our sins and these are remitted. By faith in God’s announcement of
this remission we receive assurance of salvation, for the messenger of the Lord
is sent “to give knowledge of salvation unto His people in the remission of
their sins” (Luke 1:77).

Another vast benefit secured by atoning blood is (7) Redemption. An Israelite
might mortgage his house, land, or crops, but the law gave a right of
redemption. Or he might even have dedicated a field unto Jehovah, but right of
redemption was granted. Or he might have mortgaged his liberty and labour, and
become a bondservant. In some cases his nearest kinsman was required by law to
redeem him. The regulations are found in chaps. 25. and 27. of Leviticus, and
the proceedings as to redeeming land are shown in the pleasant history of Naomi
and Ruth. The relative who thus intervened was known as the goel, the
kinsman-redeemer, and was a forerunner of Him Who became man that He might
redeem men. The essence of all such transactions, ancient and modern, is that a
person or article was under some control, had passed under bondage to another,
and the redeemer released him or it from that control, and restored freedom. And
further, this liberation could be effected only by payment of an adequate price.
The chief New Testament word for this transaction (lutroo) meant originally to
release captives, taken in war or by robbers, by means of a ransom, and then to
manumit a slave. Thus did Christ, having by incarnation become our kinsman, act
as our Kinsman-Redeemer, and “give His life a ransom for many” (Matthew 20:28 :
Mark 10:45). No less price could redeem our forfeited life; no more could be
demanded. Man is in a threefold bondage:(a) to his sins, which enslave him; (b)
to the law of God that condemns him for his sins; (c) to death, their penalty.
From this bondage Christ sets free the believer in Him. (a) Titus 2:13-14 :“our
great God and Saviour, Jesus Christ; Who gave Himself for us, that He might
redeem us from all iniquity,” that is, from the iniquities themselves, not only
from the consequences. This is the point of the first statement regarding Him
found in the New Testament, “thou shalt call His name JESUS; for He is the one
that shall save His people from their sins” (Matthew 1:18). (b) Galatians 3:13
speaks of the curse of the law pronounced upon all who break its precepts, even
the sentence of death:but “Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law having
become a curse for us; for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a
tree.” Through sin each man was fallen under this dread condemnation of the law
of God, but Christ in wondrous grace and condescension, consented to be “born
under law, that He might redeem them that were under law” (Galatians 4:4-5).
There is here no article; simply “under law”; not “the law,” as if meaning the
Mosaic law; Christ was “born under law, that He might redeem them that were
under law;” and ver. 8 shows that the passage is directed to Gentiles,
idolators, not only to Jews:“ye were in bondage to them that by nature are no
gods.” All men are liable to the law of God that death is the penalty of sin.
(c) A different word for redeem is used here exagorazo. It carries two thoughts;
(1) the publicity of the transaction, for the root agorazo meant to buy in open
market (agora, market place); and (2) the completeness of the purchase, for the
prefix exgives the emphasis of our phrase “I bought him out, I acquired all his
holding in the Company;” and therefore the sacrifice made by Christ sets the
believer wholly free from the grip of the outraged law by completely satisfying
its demand on the sinner. This verb is found elsewhere in the New Testament at
Ephesians 5:16 : Colossians 4:5, “redeeming the time.” At whatever cost of care
and sacrifice the believer, being himself redeemed completely from sin and doom,
is himself to redeem completely every minute from being mis-spent and wasted. He
is to buy up every opportunity to do the will of God. This leads us to notice a
fourth sphere and aspect of redemption. (d) 1 Peter 1:18 :“ye were redeemed
(lutroo) not with corruptible things, with silver, or gold, from your vain
manner of life, handed down from your fathers, but with precious blood, as of a
lamb without blemish and without spot, even the blood of Christ.” Men everywhere
have thought it natural and sufficient to live as did their forbears. Nor is
there virtue in change for its own sake. But the Christian is under a sacred and
imperious obligation to remember that man’s ways are not God’s ways (Isaiah
55:8-9); that nothing that originates in the world’s system of life is of God (1
John 2:16); so that to follow the way our fathers took is surely to miss the way
of God. And this is a “vain manner of life” - it produces no true satisfaction
now and its vanity will be fully evident when the world passes away and sinners
have only to say My days are in the yellow leaf, The flowers and fruits of life
are gone The worm, the canker, and the grief Are mine alone. (Byron). To save us
from this lamentable fate the Son of God shed His precious blood. He bought us
out of that wretched enslaved condition that we should live worthily for Him and
eternity. The redeemed slave who continues in bondage is false to himself and
his Redeemer.

Thus in redemption there are bondage, purchase, and freedom, and naturally the
chief emphasis is on the last. It was by no means the thought of God that the
blood of the passover lamb should merely deliver from the Destroyer yet leave
the delivered still slaves in Egypt. His message ran:“I am come down to deliver
them out of the hand of the Egyptians, and to bring them up out of that land
unto a good land and a large, unto a land flowing with milk and honey” (Exodus
3:8). At the time, this last sentence was a proverbial phrase for abundant
fruitfulness, the exact and full opposite of a desert. It is upon the goal,
rather than upon the price and process of redemption that Scripture enlarges.
The infinite cost is indeed declared - the precious blood of Christ; but the
stress falls upon the full outcome of the redemption.

Thus our Saviour Jesus Christ redeemed us from all iniquity (the past life) in
order that a present effect may flow out, even that He may “purify unto Himself
a people for His own possession, zealous of good works” (Titus 3:14). And Peter
teaches that our redemption by the blood of God’s Lamb demands that we shall
gird up the loins of our mind, be sober, and “set your hope perfectly
[undividedly] on the favour that is being brought unto you [the divine process
is already in movement] at the revelation of Jesus Christ” (1 Peter 1:13).
Present holiness is the pathway to future glory, which they shall reach who
press through the wilderness to Canaan.

Moses was sent by God to Israel to be their ruler and redeemer (lutrotees). They
who submittedto him as ruler, by obeying his directions and following his lead,
were delivered and liberated. The redemption which brings first the forgiveness
of transgressions is with a view to the day of redemption, and demands that we
shall not grieve the blessed Spirit Whose indwelling is the seal of God’s
proprietory rights with a view to redemption. Thus redemption is a past fact as
to the matter of purchase, but also a future hope as to full development
(Ephesians 1:7; Ephesians 1:14; Ephesians 4:30). It may be that Paul meant to
recall to the Ephesians the custom at their port that a merchant or builder
could buy timber, paying the price that freed it from the ownership of the
vendor and himself acquiring that right; whereupon he sealed each plank with his
seal, and in due time he or his agent upon producing the seal could remove the
timber. The payment of the purchase price was vital, but the object of the buyer
was personal possession and use.

Similarly in Romans 3:24, redemption is connected with our justification, but
chap. 8:18-25 looks on to the goal, when the body also shall be emancipated from
present frailty and pain, and in heavenly liberty and glory shall be a house
suitable to the sons of God. Of this sublime consummation the indwelling Spirit
of God is firstfruits and gives foretastes, but we still groan, waiting for and
expecting our “adoption, the redemption of our body.” Thus Christ Jesus is made
unto us from God wisdom on all the chief necessities of our case, and the means
of fulfilment of all the great and gracious desires of God; He is our
righteousness before God, our justification; He is our sanctification, in
present liberty from the tyranny of sin; and He is our redemption, the Fulfiller
to the utmost of God’s purpose that men of faith shall be glorified (1
Corinthians 1:30). For Christ is “the Mediator of a new covenant, that a death
having taken place for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the
first covenant, they that have been called may receive the promise of eternal
inheritance” (Hebrews 9:15). The purchase price of this glorious programme and
prospect was His own blood, and as this effected a redemption that is eternal
(Hebrews 9:12), He rests for ever from that work, but carries out and develops
its results unto their full completion. The pathway to this lies through many
tribulations (Acts 14:22), and we must suffer with Him if we would be glorified
with Him (Romans 8:17); but when, as this age draws to its end, these sufferings
for His sake reach their greatest intensity, then may we “look up” hopefully,
and “lift up our heads” with joy and confidence, for then will our redemption
have drawn nigh (Luke 21:28). This mighty scheme, proposed by Divine love,
devised by Divine wisdom, based upon Divine sacrifice, will be consummated by
Divine power. Its climax will be the glorifying of the church of God with the
Son of God in His proper heavenly realm; but there is included a repentance,
recovery, and re-establishment of Israel in their land and honour as God’s
chosen people for the earth. For this “redemption of Jerusalem” the pious in
Israel were looking and of it they spake often one to another (Luke 1:68; Luke
2:38; Luke 24:21), as the prophets had done before them. Nor shall only the
church, Israel, and other nations benefit, but the whole creation shall at last
“be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the liberty of the glory [a
liberty proportionate to the glory] of the sons of God” (Romans 8:19-21). For,
as before shown, the redeeming virtue of the blood of Christ has no limits,
except in those who reject its saving grace and refuse to be reconciled to God.
For that grace constrains but does not compel (Luke 24:23 contrast R.V. and
A.V.). (8) Sanctification. Genesis 2:3 states that “God blessed the seventh day
and hallowed it.” Exodus 13:2 tells that God said “Sanctify unto Me all the
firstborn.” In the Hebrew “hallow” and “sanctify” are the same word, as in the
A.V. The force of the word is seen in Leviticus 26:1-46, which refers to the
sanctifying unto the Lord a house (14), or land (16), that is, it was devoted to
the service of God and could not be used for a secular purpose while so devoted.
Conversely, no one could voluntarily so devote the firstling of a beast or the
tithe of his produce because these were already, by statute, the Lord’s
property. The meaning therefore is that the person or thing sanctified was set
apart from common use to be devoted to God, it ceased to be common,profane,
secular and became sacred.

It is to be observed that this primary meaning of the term is irrespective of
the inherent quality of the object sanctified. The firstborn child or animal
might prove healthy or weakly, the produce of the consecrated field might be
rich or poor, but the law of the consecration read “He shall not alter it or
change it, a good for a bad or a bad for a good” (vers. 10, 33), under penalty
that both should be deemed sanctified. The Hebrew word and its cognates come
some 260 times. In the Greek Old Testament they are represented by Greek words
of the same primary meaning, and which are used in the New Testament in the same
sense. In the setting apart unto God for sacred use something that had before
been common the atoning blood took a primary place. It is written of the altar
of burnt offering that “Moses took the blood, and put it upon the horns of the
altar round about with his finger, and purified the altar, and sanctified it, to
make atonement for it” (Leviticus 16:15); and of the person of the priest
likewise we read in the same chapter that “Moses took of the anointing oil, and
of the blood which was upon the altar, and sprinkled it upon Aaron, upon his
garments, and upon his sons, and upon his son’s garments with him, and
sanctified Aaron, his garments, and his sons, and his son’s garments with him”
(ver. 30).

Thus the spot where in grace the Holy One met the guilty with pardoning mercy
was sanctified for the purpose by the blood that atoned for guilt. The cross of
Christ would not have become the meeting place in peace for God and man had not
the Redeemer there atoned for sin by the blood He shed to cover sin. Therefore
it is said that “Jesus sanctified the people by His own blood” and that “we have
been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all”
(Hebrews 13:12; Hebrews 10:10). He who has accepted the atoning blood of Christ
is to remember that, not only has he thereby received pardon for his sins, but
he has thereby consented to regard himself henceforth as set apart unto God as a
vessel dedicated wholly to sacred use, as it is written, “Whatsoever ye do, do
all to the glory of God” (1 Corinthians 10:31, and see Colossians 3:17).

Here it is necessary to recall what has just been mentioned, that this setting
apart unto God does not depend upon the personal condition of the one thus
sanctified. At his consecration as priest Aaron was not altered in actual
character by that solemn ceremony. He was the same man, still “compassed with
infirmity” (Hebrews 5:2); but he had been set apart entirely for God, which very
fact must itself have conduced to greater watchfulness over his heart and
conduct, in order that he might walk worthily of his high and priestly calling.
For he bore upon his forehead a golden plate inscribed “Holy [set apart] to
Jehovah” (Exodus 28:36). The believer is not to wait until he feels some marked
change in his nature before dedicating himself unto God; he is to accept the
searching and ennobling fact that, by having accepted atonement by the blood of
Christ, he has already been set apart to God to do His holy will.

Himself, his garments, his surroundings are to be regarded in detail as sacred,
as belonging to God. It is in this sense that all believers are called “saints,”
dedicated ones. Of this sense of the word “sanctify” the highest and quite
unique example is that of the Son of God. He said of Himself that the Father had
sanctified Him and sent Him into the world, and added, “Sanctify them in Thy
truth... And for their sakes I sanctify Myself, that they themselves also may be
sanctified in truth” (John 10:36; John 17:17; John 17:19). It was clearly no
question of His personal character being purified, for He was inherently without
sin or imperfection. The sense is that the Father had set apart the Son for a
definite service on earth and the Son had correspondingly set Himself apart to
render that service. The thought is that of consecration anddedication, and He
prayed that the truth He had taught His disciples might work effectually unto
their dedication of themselves to God and His service.

There is yet more. Atoning blood is the basis of and preparation for the
anointing oil. When the backslidden leper in Israel had been pardoned and healed
his renewed fellowship with God, His people, and his family was secured by
ceremonial cleansing. In this three elements were employed, blood, oil, and
water. Blood and water commingled were sprinkled upon him. The part played by
the water we shall notice later. The blood was put upon his ear, hand, and foot,
to signify that his mind, work, and walk were now dedicated to God:the ear to
fill the mind with thoughts of God, the hand to serve Him in every act, the feet
to walk in His ways. But what son of Adam can assure such undivided devotion to
God? The oil was then put where the blood already was, to signify that the grace
of the Holy Spirit of God would be available to make actual what the blood had
made possible (Leviticus 14:1-57). The same ceremony formed part of the
consecration of the priest, oil being put upon the blood and poured upon the
head (Leviticus 16:1-34). A national fulfilment of this type awaits Israel in
the day when they shall repent of their national backsliding from God, with its
culminating wickedness in the murder of their Messiah, for thereupon God will
sprinkle upon them “clean water” (Leviticus 14:1-57: Numbers 19:1-22), that is,
water by which the blood will be applied, the Spirit bringing home to the
conscience the saving virtue of the death of Christ; and then will God put
within them His Spirit, Who will cause them to listen to God’s commandments with
an understanding mind and ready heart, so that by the Spirit’s strength they
will do the will of God, and will walk gladly in His ways (Ezekiel 36:24-27).
But a present fulfilment is available already for such as repent of their sin,
abandon it, and accept the cleansing of the conscience, so having the heart
sprinkled from a consciousness of evil because of appreciating and appropriating
the atoning virtue of the blood of Christ. Pentecost follows Calvary; the Spirit
is granted to the believer who devotes himself unreservedly to Him Whose blood
has redeemed him from all iniquity. This was the attitude of heart of the
hundred and twenty upon whom the Spirit was poured on the day of Pentecost; and
ever since then God has given the Spirit to them that obey Him (Acts 5:32). Such
show that they have been anointed with the Spirit by witnessing for Christ,
talking of Him with the tongue and displaying Him in their spirit and ways.

Thus is there not only sanctification by the blood of Christ but a further
“sanctification of the Spirit” (1 Peter 1:2). He it is Who so presents Christ to
the heart that the obedient find every spiritual need met, every godly desire
satisfied in Him; with the consequence that in the power of the heavenly
anointing the dedication to Him which is demanded by the atoning blood is
rendered out of love and gratitude. The oil was put only where blood had first
been put. Pentecost did not precede Calvary, could not do so. No one can receive
the Spirit who has not first received Christ as Redeemer by His blood. But by
the indwelling Spirit of holiness the believer can fulfil the just demand of God
“Ye shall be holy, for I am holy,” a call given four times to Israel in the book
of Leviticus (Leviticus 11:44-45; Leviticus 19:2; Leviticus 20:7, Leviticus
20:26), and repeated to Christians in 1 Peter 1:15-16. The atoning blood is the
basis of holiness, of a life fully consecrated to God, and the Spirit, typified
by oil, is its power. (9) Access. This subject is now resumed. The dignity of
the king, as superior to all his subjects, has caused it to be regarded as a
special honour to have access to his person, especially on State occasions. From
the book of Esther we know that in Persia it was at risk of death that one
should approach the king’s throne in the inner court of the palace without
having been first invited(Esther 4:11). So far did this seclusion rule in that
Persian empire that there were only seven princes who had almost unrestricted
right of access to the sovereign, they “saw the king’s face and sat first in the
kingdom” (Esther 1:14). From Herodotus we learn that the original seven of these
acquired this honour by special devotion to his cause. They had risked all to
drive an usurper from the throne and secure it for the true heir. The same
principle of seclusion ruled in Israel in relation to entering the inner
sanctuary of the tabernacle where God was present in a ray of glory. As before
noted, even the consecrated high priest was forbidden to enter more than once a
year, on the day of atonement (Leviticus 16:2). The high and heavy veil screened
that Presence from all beholders, “the Holy Spirit this signifying, that the way
into the holy places hath not yet been made manifest, while the first tabernacle
is yet standing” (Hebrews 9:6-8). “The holy places,” not here only the most holy
place, because while the priests and Levites could enter daily the courts, and
the priests the outer room of the sanctuary, the rest of the people, being the
vast majority of the nation, were forbidden even this measure of approach to
God. It was under penalty of death that any one of them ventured to draw near to
God (Numbers 1:51; Numbers 3:10 :etc.). Even Levites forfeited their lives when
they presumed to act as priests (Numbers 16:1-50), and later the king himself
was stricken with fatal sickness when he entered the holy place to offer
incense, a priestly act (2 Chronicles 26:1-23).

How striking is the difference revealed in the New Testament. The people of God
of this age are exhorted to “draw near with boldness unto the throne,” to find
it a “throne of grace,” where they can obtain mercy as to failures and grace to
help as may be, needed (Hebrews 4:16). Of this mighty change the rending of the
veil of the temple at the death of Christ was the public notice, the Holy Spirit
signifying thus that from that hour the way into the holy places is made
manifest, is thrown open to every believer.

Two principal facts contribute jointly to this marvellous change and mighty
privilege:the Mediator and His precious blood. Jesus stated an unchanging and
universal fact when He said:“I am the way; no one cometh unto the Father but
through Me” (John 14:6). No one can have access to the sovereign of England at a
court function unless provided with an invitation issued by the Lord Chamberlain
of the Household. This official might say, “I am the way; no one comes unto the
Queen but through me.”

Moreover, even the high priest in Israel durst not enter the Presence of God
unless he took with him the blood that removed the guilt that debarred man
access to God; without atoning blood he would have died there, paying the
penalty of sin. “Christ also suffered for sins once, the Righteous One for the
unrighteous ones, that He might bring us to God” (1 Peter 3:18); not only that
He might bring out to us the pardon of God, but that He might take us in to God.
“Being therefore justified by faith let us have peace with God through our Lord
Jesus Christ; through Whom also we have had our access into this state of favour
wherein we stand before God” (Romans 5:1-2), and “have boldness to enter into
the holy places in [the virtue of] the [atoning] blood of Jesus” (Hebrews
10:19-22). The veil is rent; Lo! Jesus stands Before the throne of grace, While
clouds of incense from His hands Fill all that glorious place. His precious
blood He sprinkles there, Before, and on the throne; And His own wounds in
heaven declare His work on earth is done.Within the holiest of all, Cleansed by
His precious blood, Before Thy throne Thy children fall, And worship Thee, our
God.

Boldly our heart and voice we raise, His name, His blood, our plea; Assured our
prayers and songs of praise Ascend by Him to Thee. (J. G. Deck) Blessed is he
who can thus sing, not merely as recital of privilege, but out of real heart
experience of the presence of God. It was one who, though a king, could not act
as priest, who envied that honour and exclaimed Blessed is the man whom Thou
choosest, and causest to approach, That he may dwell in Thy courts. (David,
Psalms 65:4).

David could only visit the great public court:priests could dwell before God. It
is possible that prayer may be only like the sending of a petition to the king,
instead of talking with him in his very presence. “Let us draw near;” let us
learn how to realize this as a genuine experience of the spirit. Being asked if
he knew the way to heaven a plain man replied, “I lives there!” (10) Victory.
And when this becomes fact, what then? Then, of course, the spiritual
anticipation and counterpart of pearly gates and golden streets and golden
harps! Then peace like a river and joy like a fountain, because, “The Father’s
face in radiant grace Shines now in light on me.”

Yes, and of this we might and ought to know much more. We ought to be able to
sing with ecstasy And oh, to know this place is mine!

Though yet by faith, in measure small, To breathe its air, to sip its wine, To
dwell where God is all in all- This, this is LIFE, before the throne, And all is
death save this alone.

Yet this is only one aspect of being seated with Christ in heavenly places. The
same epistle that early lifts us there, closes by dwelling upon the dread fact
that in those same heavenly places we wrestle against wicked spirits (Ephesians
2:6; Ephesians 6:12); and he who most abides there in Christ knows most of this
conflict. In Egypt Israel did no fighting:they were slaves. During forty years
in the desert they fought only two battles with outside foes:in the one they
conquered by faith and prayer in the other self-confidence brought defeat
(Exodus 17:8-15 Numbers 14:39-45). In those years their own fleshly lusts were
their entanglement. The devil does not need to bother much about Christians who
live after the flesh. But as soon as Israel crossed the Jordan (typical of our
passingout of the flesh into life in the Spirit), on those uplands of Canaan
they must needs fight for their promised land and dispossess by force the giants
and others who disputed possession. Ours is no sham fight, no mimic warfare. The
Greek word palee, translated “wrestling” in Ephesians 6:12, pictures antagonists
locked in deadly embrace, swaying hither and thither as each strives to throw or
kill the other. This is its only place in the New Testament, which lends
strength and vividness to the passage. I must defeat Satan or be defeated. To
say that every believer is a conqueror is false and foolish, a help to being
defeated. Nor is this warfare located only in the inner man of the Christian; it
has also the character of legal proceedings in Court, the Court of heaven. It is
the throne to which we draw near. In Bible times the king sat thereupon as the
supreme judge. It was the final Court of appeal (1 Kings 2:12; 1 Kings 3:16).
From very early times we see this High Court of heaven in action (Job 1:1; Job
1:2. 2 Chronicles 18:18-22: Daniel 4:4; Daniel 7:9-10; Daniel 7:26 : Luke
22:31-32). This situation continues on till the close of this age, for
Revelation 12:7-12 tells of the casting of Satan out of that heavenly realm,
until when he continues as the Accuser of God’s people, even as he was of Job.
This casting down is to be a little before Christ establishes His kingdom on
earth. Of this continuing reality few believers are aware, or few teachers
either. It means that Satan, the Adversary of God’s church (Luke 28:1-8 : 1
Peter 5:8-10), is the ProsecutorGeneral of the universe, and either invents
calumnies, as he did against Job, or bases charges on the sins of believers. If
he carries the day in that Court, then, as Peter and the other disciples found,
the Christian is left to him to be disciplined, as corn is tossed in a sieve.
The end intended and permitted by God is the removing of the chaff, but the
tossing will be severe (Amos 9:8-10).

How urgent therefore is the question of how the attack of the Prosecutor is to
be defeated and the character cleared before that Judge and Court. A main object
of Satan in tempting the believer into sin is to stop his mouth, to prevent him
witnessing of Christ and his salvation. The battle on earth is therefore mainly
that the Christian shall so live that he shall be able consistently to talk of
Christ and invite Satan’s slaves to secure their liberty from his thraldom and
doom; as it is written:“they overcame him... because of the word of their
testimony,” in giving which they were prepared even to die, “they loved not
their life even unto death” (Revelation 12:11). But how are they, or their
Advocate before that Court on high (1 John 2:2 : Luke 22:32 : Hebrews 4:14), to
defeat the Accuser’s plea that the failures of Christians ought to be punished.
In that Court they must rely solely upon the argument that the due penalty of
their sins as believers has been already met by the death of their
Substitute:“they overcame him because of the blood of the Lamb” (Revelation
12:11). The Lord’s words to Peter, “Satan obtained you by asking” (Luke 22:31,
mgn.), represent a technical legal word (exaiteo) meaning to demand that a
culprit be punished. If a Court orders that a certain sum be paid by a given
date and it be not paid, a demand can be made that the defaulter be punished for
having disobeyed the Court. The answer in law would be to show that the order
had been obeyed and the sum paid. This would be an equally valid answer
irrespective of who had made the payment, the debtor or a surety.

There is no other possible way of overcoming the Accuser than to plead the blood
of Christ; but this plea, when presented by the repentant believer, and endorsed
by the heavenly Advocate, cannot fail. But it must be remembered that this plea
cannot be urged or accepted so long as the sin remains unrepented, unforsaken,
unconfessed. Our Advocate is not there to enable us to continue in any sin, but
to deliver us from the Accuser if we walk in the light of God’s will. This has
been shown in section 3. above on 1 John 1:6-7. On this condition victory is
assured through the blood of the Lamb. (2) A Kingdom of Priests. Deliverance
from the Destroyer by the blood of the Passover lambopened the door for Israel
to enter upon the life of freedom marked by faith and obedience. God could now
go on to train them for the purposes which He had in mind for the sons of
Abraham His friend. One of the earliest of these purposes to be made known, and
the highest of them, was declared in these words:“Ye have seen what I did unto
the Egyptians,” which shows that with Me nothing is impossible; “and I bare you
on eagles wings,” showing My love, and strength, and care; “and brought you unto
Myself,” so that I should have one people of the earth as My possession from
among the apostate nations of the world. “Now therefore, if ye will obey My
voice indeed, and keep My covenant, then ye shall be Mine own possession from
among all peoples:for all the earth is Mine.” Thus this first great promise to
persons already redeemed was prefaced by a condition, and its fulfilment
demanded their obedience and faithfulness. This was not under the law of Sinai,
for it preceded that event. It did not in the least alter their past redemption
and deliverance from both the Destroyer and Pharaoh, but it did affect their
future, which was “ye shall be unto Me a kingdom of priests, and a holy nation”
(Exodus 19:4-6).

“A kingdom” - that is, a governing body, as it was said of a queen, “thou art
come to the kingdom” (Esther 4:14), and of a king, “Darius the Mede received the
kingdom” (Daniel 5:31). But these rulers were to be also a body of priests, thus
royal priests. This was not a new idea. It was the general practice of the
nations that the king should be the chief priest of his people. Melchizedek was
a fairly recent instance from the time of their father Abraham. It was therefore
the grand privilege of Israel to be a royal nation to rule all the earth for
God, and a priestly people to instruct the rest of mankind in His law, to
minister to them His grace, and to lead them in His worship. Thus should they
serve the promise made to their first father that in him all the families of the
earth should be blessed (Genesis 12:3). This would be the restoration of the
Divine purpose in the creation of Adam, for he also had been appointed to rule
the earth for God, but had broken down. But beyond this lay the nobler thought,
that this programme would bring Israel into close association with the Son of
God, Who Himself, from the beginning of creation, had been its appointed
Sovereign and the Priest through Whom God held relations with all His creatures,
heavenly and earthly. A Royal Priest, combining both offices in one Person, is
the ideal to which God works, and which He will restore in heaven and on earth.
For though Israel failed at that time in obedience, and the dignity offered has
never been realized, yet it shall find fulfilment in the day of their national
repentance and recovery. For the prophet saw and declared Israel’s national
supremacy, saying, “the nation and kingdom that will not serve thee shall
perish,” and their priesthood, saying, “ye shall be named priests of Jehovah;
men shall call you ministers of our God.” But this can be fulfilled only when
that also shall be true of them which the same prophet said, “My people also
shall be all righteous” (Isaiah 60:12; Isaiah 60:21; Isaiah 61:6).

Yet even so, this will fulfil the plan of God for the earth only. But He has
said that He has put all things under man’s feet (Psalms 8:6). Truly, as it is
said in Hebrews 2:8, we “see not yet all things subjected to him,” man, although
in His purpose God has “left nothing that is not subject to him” (man:ver. 7).
But we do see the promise receiving fulfilment in one man, the man Jesus,
already on the throne of God. And God is now working by His Spirit through the
truth to “bring many sons unto glory” (ver. 10), to share the glory and
authority and royal priesthood of His Divine Priest King. And this shall include
authority over the heavens as well as the earth, for “know ye not that the
saints shall judge the world?... Know ye not that we shall judge angels?” (1
Corinthians 6:2-3). For the church as for Israel the realization of this supreme
dignity and service is conditional, for it is “if so be that we suffer with Him
that we may be also glorified with Him” (Romans 8:17), and “if we endure we
shall also reign with Him,” and obtain, not only salvation, but “salvation with
eternal glory” (2 Timothy 2:10-13). As the salvation of Israel from temporal
death in Egypt was not affected by their failure to reach God’s later ideal for
them, so neither is our salvation from eternal death affected by failure to
attain to God’s higher ideal for us. And the reason is this, that salvation
issecured by faith, and is granted on the ground that life answers to life,
death for death; and the deliverance thus effected is irreversible in law. It is
atoning blood that rescues completely from doom, and so it is the door that
opens into the way of life, with its noble possibilities. Therefore this royal
priesthood is connected with redemption, as it is written, “Unto Him that loveth
us, and loosed us from our sins in His blood; and He made us to be a kingdom,
priests unto His God and Father; to Him be the glory and dominion for ever and
ever. Amen!” (Revelation 1:5-6).

Every royal priest in that heavenly company will declare “I stand upon His
merit, I know no other stand, Not e’en where glory dwelleth, In Immanuel’s
land.” And the four and twenty Elders, the present royal priests, who will then
give up their crowns, when the Conqueror and His fellow-conquerors shall take
the throne (Revelation 3:21), will endorse that declaration and will say to Him,
“Worthy art Thou to take the book, and to open the seals thereof:for Thou wast
slain and didst purchase unto God with Thy blood men of every tribe, and tongue,
and people, and nation, and madest them to be unto our God a kingdom and
priests; and they reign upon the earth” (Revelation 5:9-10).

Thus the atoning blood of God’s Son, Jesus Christ our Lord, is the eternal basis
of all God’s gracious work with a sinner, from its commencement in salvation
from doom to its crown and completion in the glory of heaven. Rightly do we
sing, Precious, precious blood of Jesus, Shed on Calvary; Shed for rebels, shed
for sinners, Shed for me.

Precious blood that hath redeemed us, All the price is paid; Perfect pardon now
is offered, Peace is made.

Precious blood! by this we conquer In the fiercest fight, Sin and Satan
overcoming By its might.

Precious blood, whose full atonement Makes us nigh to God!

Precious blood, our song of glory, Praise and laud! (F. R. Havergal).


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 44: 03.08.     WHAT THE BLOOD DOES NOT DO.
========================================================================

PART II 8. WHAT THE BLOOD DOES NOT DO. IN the matter of deliverance from the
Destroying Angel in Egypt the atoning blood sufficed by itself. The repentant
tax-gatherer “went down to his house justified” solely by the virtue of the
sacrifice on the altar (Luke 18:13-14).

Thus for the redeemed Israelites the blood was the commencement and basis of all
future relations with God, it was the doorway out of estrangement into a life of
faith and communion.

Moreover, all through the life thus entered there continued various sprinklings
of blood, showing that it remained perpetually the basis of intercourse with
God. Nor is the place and efficacy of atoning blood at all diminished by the
abrogation of repeated sacrifices and sprinklings through the one complete and
final sacrifice of the cross, because the virtue of that death, and of the blood
of Christ there shed, is eternal and is the perpetual basis of all communion
with God.

Nevertheless the door is not the road or its goal, the foundation is not the
superstructure, the blood by itself serves its ends but not all ends;
deliverance from the judicial penalty of sin is not the same as deliverance from
the practical power of sin, freedom from servitude in Egypt must advance to
conquest in Canaan, turning from idols is to develop into service to a living
and true God. For the numerous phases and necessities of this developing life
the blood is ever the basis but is not by itself sufficient. There are things
which blood cannot do and does not do, which it is not its function to do. In
particular, as all histories and types show, it does not (1) dispense with the
obedience of faith, or (2) with need of bread, or (3) do the work of water. or
(4) take the place of oil, or (5) act as fire and serve the ends of discipline,
or (6) do the work of the sword.

1. Blood does not dispense with faith and obedience. The sprinkling of the
passover blood opened the door to escape from Egypt, but the redeemed people had
to take the next and immediate step of faith by obeying the order to march off
that same night. If they had not so acted they would not have escaped from
thraldom into freedom, though delivered from the Destroyer by the blood. Pharaoh
would have held them still. It was no small faith that strengthened them for
their hasty and complete flight. Pharaoh was active and angry, his chariots and
cavalry were at hand, they had no unity or arms to resist an attack; but faith
obeyed and set forth, trusting that God would protect, and make the enterprise
successful.

How many there are today who have rested their hope of safety from eternal death
upon the precious blood of Christ, but have failed to break with the world, and
so they continue entangled by its pleasures and enslaved by its Prince. Either
they never heard the call and command to break every yoke with unbelievers, or
they have lacked the energy and decision of faith to do this.

Protected by the blood they yet remain enslaved by the world, the flesh, and the
devil. The apostle rejoiced greatly in the continuing faith of his children in
the faith (Ephesians 1:15 : Colossians 1:4; 1 Thessalonians 1:3), and gave
thanks to God when he knew that it “grew exceedingly” (2 Thessalonians 1:3). He
was keenly aware of the practical dangers attendant upon a failure of faith in
children of God. He stressed heavily that the disasters that overwhelmed Israel
in the wilderness, though they were the redeemed of the Lord, can have
counterpart in the experience of Christians, for, he says, “these things
happened unto them by way of example [Greek, figure]; and they were written [put
into God’s historical records] for our admonition upon whom the ends of the ages
are come” (1 Corinthians 10:1-13). These disasters befell “most of them” that
had been redeemed by the blood of the lamb and brought into liberty and
fellowship with God. They were sufficiently spiritual to know thatmanna and
water had spiritual counterparts and to partake of these latter:“they did all
eat the same spiritual food; and did all drink the same spiritual drink:for they
drank of a spiritual rock that went with them:and the rock was Christ.” In the
face of these explicit assertions of Scripture as to the spiritual state of
those concerned, and in the face of the direct application of their experiences
to Christians in Corinth, it is wholly without warrant to say that they were not
real believers and that the application here made is to mere professors of this
age, not to true believers. Such treatment of Scripture would mean that all but
a very small number of the Corinthian Christians were either hypocrites or
self-deceived, for of those who were examples for them only three or four of the
men who left Egypt did not die in the desert. Jude refers to the same ancient
events and says, “I desire to put you in remembrance, though ye know all things
once for all, how that the Lord, having saved a people out of the land of Egypt,
afterward destroyed them that believed not” (verse 5). This is exactly how Paul
warns us in the passage cited, saying, “Neither murmur ye, as some of them
murmured and perished by the destroyer” (verse 10).

Therefore there is such a thing as being saved from the Destroyer in Egypt and
yet falling under his power in the desert. The blood saves from being condemned
at the same time as the world, but did not prevent carnal Christians in Corinth
from losing their present life under the chastisement of the Lord (1 Corinthians
11:29-32). To have received eternal redemption from eternal doom by the blood of
Christ does not dispense with the need of continuous faith and obedience by the
redeemed, if such are to enjoy present communion with their holy Father and
escape severe chastisement. To exactly the same effect are the solemn warnings
in the parables of Christ and those in Hebrews. The whole Word of God emphasizes
the urgent need of a continuous faith and ceaseless obedience in the redeemed of
the Lord. Hence the force of the continuous tense in “eth”:heareth, believeth,
eateth, drinketh, and the like words. See John 4:13-14; John 6:54; John 6:46
:etc. No backslidden Israelite or backslidden Christian ever has escaped loss
and chastisement through redemption by the blood.


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 45: 03.09.     BLOOD DOES NOT TAKE THE PLACE OF FOOD.
========================================================================

2. Blood does not take the place of food. The same night that Israel sprinkled
the blood they strengthened themselves for the coming hard trek by eating of the
lamb and the unleavened bread. Nor did this initial meal suffice for long:they
took dough to make bread for the next meals (Exodus 12:7-11; Exodus 12:34). Nor
could this provision last for all the journey; shortly, bread out of heaven was
given. Nor was one supply of this heavenly food adequate:the manna had to be
gathered and eaten repeatedly and unfailingly. For us Christ is the Lamb and the
unleavened bread and the manna, to be appropriated by faith as the soul’s vital
force (1 Corinthians 5:6-8 : John 6:1-71); and he who would run and not be
weary, walk and not faint, mount above obstacles on eagles’ wings, must nourish
his soul daily in the words of the faith, even the words of the Lord Jesus,
whether spoken by Old Testament prophets, or Himself when here, or by apostles
and prophets who spake by the Spirit. One may be sincerely relying upon the
blood of Christ for salvation from perdition, yet be feeble and sick spiritually
by not feeding upon Christ in the Word.


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 46: 03.10.     BLOOD DOES NOT DO THE WORK OF WATER.
========================================================================

3. Blood does not do the work of Water.

It may be thought needless to argue something so self-evident. In fact there is
the most urgent need to do so and at length, for Evangelical theology and belief
are almost universally false on this point. This is to be seen especially in
hymns, though also in many competent writers.

“There is a fountain filled with blood Drawn from Emmanuel’s veins; And sinners
plunged beneath that flood Lose all their guilty stains. The dying thief
rejoiced to see That fountain in his day; And there have I, as vile as he,
Washed all my sins away.”

It is to be asserted categorically, and with the utmost emphasis, that no such
fountain or flood of blood exists, that to be plunged in blood is a purely pagan
idea, and that no person or his sins ever have been washed in blood. The whole
conception is both obnoxious and mischievous. The heathen had a most offensive
rite, the tourobolium, in which the man was deluged with blood from above, but
God never sanctioned any such ceremony nor does His Word admit even the idea.
The one verse that could be fairly quoted for the conception was Revelation 1:5
in the A.V, “Unto Him that... washed us from our sins in His blood.” The
Revisers, following the better Greek text, read “loosed us from our sins,” set
us free, liberated us from our sins, as a debtor is freed from his debts by the
payment of them. The difference between the two Greek words is only one letter.
To free is luo, to wash is louo. Whether the introduction of the first “o” was
the accidental mistake of a copyist, or a conscious correction by him to
accommodate the verse to a popular conception which he thought true, or a
deliberate perversion to inculcate error it had the baneful effect of forcing
this verse into plain contradiction with the whole typology and theology of Holy
Scripture and of hiding indispensable truth.

There is one other statement, also in Revelation (Revelation 7:14), often
misread and misused to the same effect:“they washed their robes, and made them
white in the blood of the Lamb.” This does not say that these washed and
whitened their robes in the blood:there are here two separated verbs describing
two operations, “they washed their robes, and whitened them in the blood,” the
“and” being disjunctive as well as conjunctive; the two operations belong
together but the latter is additional to the former. This is indicated by the
comma after “robes.” We shall see the force of this when considering certain
types, and that the washing was with water and the blood was applied by
sprinkling.* [* Revelation 1:5; Revelation 7:14. “The idea of washing or
whitening robes in blood is therefore not present, whether ento haimati tou
arniou [ ‘in the blood of the Lamb’] goes with eplunan... kai eleukanan
[’washed... and whitened’] or with eleukanan [’whitened’] only.” - F. F.
Bruce.], The passage from the Old Testament upon which the hymn quoted is
doubtless based is Zechariah 13:1 :“In that day there shall be a fountain opened
to the house of David and to the inhabitants of Jerusalem, for sin and for
uncleanness.” This does not say “a fountain of blood.” “In that day” looks
forward not backward:it points to the future when Messiah shall return to
deliver Jerusalem and Israel from Antichrist - see the paragraph preceding and
the whole context. Is Calvary to be then re-enacted? Is the blood of Christ to
be shed again? Must not the meaning be other than this? An Old Testament figure
must be interpreted in harmony with previous Old Testament types, pictures, and
teaching. (1) When Israel was redeemed from the Destroyer it was by blood alone.
The people were not required to wash their persons or garments. The taxgatherer
“went down to his house justified” (Luke 18:14) by virtue of the altar and the
blood alone; he did not have to wash at the laver. Thus the blood by itself
saves from damnation and justifies the penitent believer. This is the Scriptural
denial of the doctrine that eternal salvation depends in part upon outward
sanctification, so that no one can be assured of salvation until he has
persevered in holiness to the end of life. The point is stressed by both the
type and the express statement of Christ. (2) But no sooner had the people
redeemed by blood entered the life of fellowship with God in the desert than the
necessity for water arose:they went three days in the wilderness and found no
water (Exodus 15:22). Anyone who has tramped the desert for one day, under the
Egyptian sun, will know how hard it was to go three days without water, and will
not throw stones at them for murmuring. And the first water they reached was
bitter (Exodus 15:23). The type teaches that something more and better than
earth’s supplies is needed for spiritual refreshment. God changed that bitter
water and made it drinkable and healthful. God has skill to turn life’s bitter
experiences into soul-refreshment, health-giving and vivifying; for still He
uses such occasions as He did then, to grant “precious and exceeding great
promises, in order that by means of these we may become partakers of divine
nature” (2 Peter 1:4). This will bring us, as Israel, to an Elim, where the
heart may encamp and repose (Exodus 15:27). But in a desert the need of water is
perpetual and the lack of it easy occasion for a grumbling spirit (Exodus
17:1-7). Oh, how readily the redeemed soul reaches its Massah and Meribah,
testing God instead of trusting Him, chiding instead of praying. But as has been
noticed above, their gracious God provided henceforth water from the Rock which
accompanied them the rest of their journey (1 Corinthians 10:4). That Rock was
Christ, smitten on the cross once for all, water of life being thus made
permanently available and free. Now the blood that had redeemed had been shed
once for all in Egypt; the water that slaked their thirst flowed constantly.
Blood did not flow to quench their thirst. Only a pagan savage would offer his
friend blood to drink. The Lord Jesus is He Who shed His blood to redeem: He it
is Who also gives the living water. In John 3:1-36 we hear Him tell Nicodemus
that it is Himself lifted up on the cross to whom the sinner must look in order
to receive the gift of eternal life. To Nicodemus He spoke of the cross, for He
was showing that the source of eternal life lies in His own death; but in the
next chapter (4), when showing a sin-parched thirsty soul how this need could be
met, He did not speak of blood but of water. They are many who have reached John
3:1-36, having experienced the new birth by faith in the death of Christ, but
who have not advanced to John 4:1-53, for they have no experience answering to
the Lord’s rich promise, “whosoever drinketh of the water that I shall give him
shall never thirst” (John 4:14). The promise is emphatic:“for ever shall in no
wise thirst,” and the reason is notable, “the water that I shall give him shall
become in him a spring of water always welling up unto eternal life.” Here is an
inward experience that never could have been possible had the blood not covered
our sin but which manifestly is something additional to this latter, and which
many never reach though knowing they are redeemed and pardoned. And they will
remain thirsty and weak as long as their attention is confined to the blood; it
is water they need. What water typifies, wherever it is spoken of figuratively,
is shown in the Lord’s words spoken in the temple, as explained by John “Jesus
stood and cried, If any man thirst, let him come unto Me, and drink. He that
believeth into [vital union with] Me, out of his innermost being shall flow
torrents of living water” (Variorum Bible). “ “But this spake He of the Spirit
which they that believed on Him were to receive” (John 7:37-39).Better class
houses in the East are frequently built as a square, with windows and doors
opening only on to an interior court, save perhaps in some cases a door into a
walled garden, and the heavy door leading to the street. If now a tumult arises
in the town the occupants can retire into their house, bar the stout door, and
stay within till quiet returns. Only they must be well stocked with food, and
still more must have their own well in the inner court. Thus can the believer be
inwardly secured and fortified against the tumults that disturb the outer
life:by the indwelling Spirit he can have his full supply of peace and joy
springing up in his own heart, and so copiously that the streams will overflow
to others, as Jesus promised. Only those redeemed by blood can experience this;
nor will such know it save by drinking continually of the water, by living
constantly in communion with the Holy Spirit. (3.) The second principal use of
water is for washing. Both the person and the clothing require this. For this
purpose water is the natural and only suitable agent. (a) Leviticus 14:1-57. The
leper in Israel was a redeemed man under Divine chastisement for his sin. It was
distinctly guaranteed to them that if they would obey the commandments and keep
the statutes of their God the diseases of Egypt should not touch them (Exodus
15:26). Therefore the healing and cleansing of a leper in Israel pictures the
penitence, pardon, and restoration of a backslidden believer. In this
restoration the first act was by God; He healed the leper of the disease. The
second act was that “living,” that is, running water, not stagnant water, was
brought, a bird was so killed that its blood dropped into the water, and this
mixture of water and blood was sprinkled upon the healed man. These two
operations have spiritual counterpart, (1) “By His stripes we are healed”
(Isaiah 53:5), not simply forgiven but healed. The defiling, weakening effects
of sin are cured; its outflow is removed, its display restrained. Then (2) there
is the further stage that the heart is sprinkled from an evil conscience
(Hebrews 10:22). This means that the Holy Spirit brings home to the conscience
the saving power of the blood of Christ, and the believer has no more
consciousness of being guilty, defiled, banished. When the leper had been
sprinkled the stain of the blood in the water would be visible on his garments.
That would assure him and show to others that he had been forgiven and was being
restored to fellowship with God and His people.

He would now have no feeling that he must flee to outside the camp, nor could
any other command him to do so. The blood stains set him free; the setting free
of the living bird, also stained with the blood, was the symbol (verse 7). But
(3) there was a third stage in the restoration. Cleansing was not yet complete.
The man had now to wash his clothes, shave off all his hair, and bathe himself
in water. Every external sign of defilement, the whole output of sin, had to be
removed. The blood was sprinkled upon him by another, the priest; the washing he
had to do himself. God supplied the water; the man had to use it, to apply it to
himself. The Lord gives the Spirit; the believer has to receive and apply His
empowering grace.

It is obvious that the clothing is not the man. Garments are articles we make,
and put on or put off. They represent those qualities of character and practice
which we form and wear; they are the externals which both reveal and conceal our
real self. They must be kept unspotted (James 1:27), they must be washed when
necessary (Revelation 7:14); it is possible, and far better, to keep them
undefiled (Revelation 3:4). This making clean and keeping clean of our outer
life is wrought by the grace of the Spirit of holiness, the heavenly “Water.” To
the formerly grossly immoral heathen at Corinth who had believed on Christ Paul
wrote:“Such were some of you:but ye washed yourselves (R.V. mgn), but ye were
sanctified, but ye were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and in the
Spirit of our God” (1 Corinthians 6:9-11). And later he exhorted them thus:“let
us cleanse ourselves from all defilement of flesh and spirit [of outer life and
inward state], going on perfecting holiness in the fear of God” (2 Corinthians
7:1). The formerpassage shows that continued action of the Redeemer and the
Spirit pictured by the commingled water and blood sprinkled on the leper,
preceding the man washing and bathing himself. The latter verse cannot point to
this initial step in the cleansing, because the participle “perfecting holiness”
points to a ceaseless process to be continued perseveringly till its perfection
is reached.

It is to this that we are called to attend, for if the sprinkled man had not
gone on to wash his clothes and bathe his person he would have blocked his own
progress and debarred himself reunion with the family circle and also approach
to God. Though penitent, pardoned, healed, and sprinkled with the blood, he
could not resume communion with God or the godly, save by diligent use of the
water. The Scripture solemnly and repeatedly warns believers that if the marks
of the old life are not removed, if they continue to allow the old defiling
practices, they will thereby forfeit any inheritance in the kingdom of God. The
leper, though healed, could not re-enter upon his inheritance in Israel merely
because of the sprinkled blood, but only after the additional washing with
water. An inheritance is not a man’s life; a living man may forfeit an
inheritance (1 Corinthians 6:6-10 : Galatians 5:19-21 : Ephesians 5:5). The
solemn repetition of this warning in three epistles shows that it was a regular
theme in apostolic ministry. It were well if it regains this place.

All this shows the vast and important part water has in the life of the
redeemed. The atoning blood has its indispensable initial place and work, but it
cannot do the work of the water. Calvary leads to Pentecost but cannot
substitute it. Pentecost itself is the initial act of bathing, but it does not
dispense with daily washing. Therefore to even the inner circle of faithful
followers the Lord said, “He that is washed all over needs not save to wash his
feet, but is wholly clean” (that is, by keeping his feet washed. Darby, New
Translation, John 13:10 and note (a). The force of this will be seen in
Leviticus 8:1-36, the consecration of a priest. (b) Leviticus 8:1-36. The
Priest. The tax-gatherer was justified by the blood through faith without the
use of water; but he went down to his own house, he could not go up into God’s
house, for he was not a priest. The banished leper was healed and cleansed,
first by blood and water, the former applied to him once for all, by sprinkling,
the water by himself and repeatedly. This restored him to intercourse with God
and His people. But he also could not go into God’s house and serve there. He
was not a priest. To the priest were granted the higher dignities of entering
the house where God dwelt, of presenting the showbread and feeding upon it, of
burning the incense of worship, of interceding for the people without, and of
going forth from that sacred Presence with power to bless others (Numbers
6:22-27). The perfect sacrifice having provided eternal redemption, the Great
Priest over the house of God being permanently before Him, the veil is rent,
that Holy Place is open to every believer and its heavenly privileges are
available to all. Such is the essence of the exposition in Hebrews. Yet what
proportion of Christians are experimentally in the power of this? A clerical
caste of clergy and ministers, reserving to themselves the conduct of Christian
worship, is a terrible and devastating hindrance to general priestly growth and
experience. But even in spheres where this barrier is not allowed, where liberty
to function as priests is found, there are all too many who are not in their
very soul conscious of the immediate nearness of God, they do not in spiritual
experience “draw near unto the throne of grace.” Every British subject has the
right to submit a petition to the Crown, but not every subject has access to the
Sovereign in person. Many send prayers up to God, and are heard, but this is not
the same as drawing near to God in the power of the Spirit. In Israel all the
devout could stand at the gate and look beyond the altar to the house; they
couldall present, their petitions and secure God’s answer, as did Solomon (1
Kings 8:1-66), or Hanna who there prayed and praised (1 Samuel 1:1; 1 Samuel
1:2.). And this is as far and as near as many Christians get. They attend public
worship and never open their lips to lead it. They say Amen to prayers but do
not pour out intercessions for others; they sing hymns but do not offer their
own praise; nor do they go forth from the realized presence of God to distribute
His bounties to needy hearts, saved or unsaved. Moreover it is, alas, sadly
possible for one to engage publicly in all these outward functions of the house
of God without being in His presence in heart consciousness and without leading
others there. Priests by position, such are not priests by practice. Why is
this?

It is principally because though they know the sprinkling of blood they do not
regularly wash with water. They have received Christ but not the Spirit, they
have reached Calvary but not Pentecost, they stand at the altar and stay there.
And a principal reason for this arrested progress is that, by sermons, books,
and especially hymns, they have been taught that at the altar and by the blood
they have secured all that can be known on earth. The function of the water has
been attributed to the blood, and they seek no more. The necessity and the
blessedness of the laver they do not discern. This has conduced to permanent and
lamentable impoverishment of soul, so that only few of the saved act as priests.

Leviticus 8:1-36 shows the first stage of the remedy. The priest to be
consecrated was 1. Stripped of his former clothing.

2. Bathed in water.

3. Clothed with priestly garments, the crowning item of which was a golden plate
on his forehead inscribed “Holy to Jehovah” (verse 9: Exodus 28:36).

4. He was anointed with oil.

5. Sacrifices followed and the blood was sprinkled. At the cleansing of the
leper (Leviticus 14:1-57) the sprinkling of blood came first and washing with
water later; at the consecration of the priest, water and oil were used first,
and afterward the blood. Why this difference? Because Aaron and his sons, the
priests, were already on a right footing before God as His redeemed people:but
for access to His holy presence in priestly service a right standing by blood
was not all that was demanded; they must also be thoroughly clean outwardly,
attired suitably, wholly dedicated to God, and empowered by His Spirit, the holy
anointing Oil.

Peter wrote to his fellow-believers as a “royal priesthood” (1 Peter 2:9). He
says they had already “obtained a like precious faith with us in the
righteousness of our God and Saviour Jesus Christ” (2 Peter 1:1). Their standing
as justified was secured; but addressing them as priests he says that they have
been chosen by God “in sanctification of the Spirit, unto obedience, and
sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ” (1 Peter 1:2). Here is the same
order:first, sanctification by the Spirit; second obedience (as signified by the
engraving on the high priest’s forehead); and then the sprinkling of blood.
Unless this order, in its present spiritual significance, is known
experimentally by the power of the Spirit of God the man may be saved and safe
because of the atoning blood, but he will not be really a priest unto God.

One may be a clergyman, minister, elder, deacon, evangelist as to position in
the church of God, he may be a teacher, preacher, Sunday School worker, but he
will not be a priest unless he has “put off the old man with his doings, and has
put on the new man, which is ever being renewed unto knowledge [experimental,
not merely theoretical knowledge, epignosis] after the image of Him that created
him” (Colossians 3:9-10). In the sight of God the “old man” is morally ugly and
deformed, his clothes are filthy rags, and he cannot be tolerated before the
throne on high, where nothing that defiles can enter. A believer who displays
the tempers, cravings, conduct of the “old man” has not begun to be a priest
unto God, for he has not stripped himself of his old garments,nor been bathed
and purified outwardly, nor put on the new garments, the “new man,” on which
person and clothes alone the holy Oil can be poured. But why must there be still
the sprinkling of blood even though there has been that stripping, purifying,
clothing, and anointing? The reason is a rebuke to the unwarranted notion that
practical sanctification can ever reach absolute perfection in this life and the
Christian be sinless in heart and ways. Though the believer has once and for all
disowned his “old man” by reckoning that he died on the cross with Christ
(Romans 6:6), and constantly reckons himself dead unto sin; though he has once
for all turned his back on the world as his moral sphere of life, as Israel
forsook Egypt; though he is living daily and carefully and usefully in the
communion of the Spirit of God; yet he has to remember that the all searching
eye of the Searcher of hearts sees iniquity in even the holy things of His
people; not only in their unholy ways and works (Exodus 28:38). Hence the strong
words of George Whitefield:“you must be brought to see that God may damn you for
the best prayer you ever put up;” or that saying of the godly Thomas Boston:“My
Sabbath day duties were enough of themselves to damn me.” These expressions may
be thought too severe, but such keen perception of the degree to which sin can
permeate and vitiate even our holy exercises is all too rare. It is only because
of our High Priest that we can ever be “accepted before Jehovah,” as the verse
just cited shows. Paul’s words are to be pondered:“I know nothing against
myself” - his conscience was clear:this is the possible standard beneath which
no Christian should live - “yet am I not hereby justified:but He that judgeth me
is the Lord,” and He may know something against me of which I am unconscious (1
Corinthians 4:4). This explains the statement as to the “great multitude coming
out of the great tribulation,” standing before the throne of God arrayed in
white robes (Revelation 7:14). They had not lived as cleanly as those at Sardis
who had not defiled their garments (Revelation 3:4). The garments of the former
had been defiled, and needed to be washed. This they had done betimes:“they
washed their robes” - they had used the purifying “water” and their garments
were now clean; but not so absolutely clean as to pass the scruting of the Holy
One before whose throne they were to stand.

Therefore the blood of the Lamb was added to their imperfect labour to make
their garments perfectly clean before the throne; “they whitened them in the
blood of the Lamb.” The homely counterpart may be mentioned that the housewife
first washes the clothes in water and then adds the bluebag or a chloride to
impart lustre to the Whiteness. The only other New Testament use of this word
for whiten is in Mark 9:3, where it is said that the transfigured garments of
Christ were “exceeding white,” which degree and type of whiteness is described
by the accompanying word “glistering;” which last word in its turn is explained
in Luke 9:29 by the word “dazzling,” to gleam as lightning, to be “white as the
light,” as Matthew expresses it (Matthew 17:2).

Such brilliance of holiness, such resplendence of character is beyond the utmost
effort of the most diligent saint:but the blood of Jesus “cleanses from all
sin;” it removes the faintest trace of the “old man” still lingering upon the
believer who walks in the light. But this application of the blood, that is of
the virtue of the atoning death of Christ, is after the diligent washing of the
leper’s clothes, after the bathing and robing of the priest. It is not that
initial attributing of the redeeming virtue of the atonement by which the sinner
or the backslider is reckoned justified. The legal righteousness thus obtained
secures safety before the law:to this must be added the actual, external
holiness by the Spirit and the Word if the justified man is at last to stand
before the throne. And there is a yet higher privilege than “to stand before the
throne.” Those who had not defiled their garments are promised by the King that
“they shall walk with Me in white; for they are worthy.” “The conqueror shall
thus be arrayed in white garments,” and be a constant, intimate companion of the
Sovereign of the universe (Revelation 3:4-5). For that King of glory has
“fellows,” or more exactly “companions” (Hebrews 1:9). Therefore “take heed,
brethren, lest haply there be in anyone of you an evil heart of unbelief... lest
any of you be hardened by the deceitfulness of sin:for we are become companions
of the Messiah if indeed we hold fast the beginning of our confidence firm unto
the end” (Hebrews 3:12-4). The beginning of our confidence in Christ secured our
eternal standing as righteous in law; but it is the final stage, the end of our
confidence, that will secure the dignity of being the personal companions of the
Lord in His glory; and this stage demands the diligent use of the water as well
as of the blood. This is most firmly declared by all the types, prophecies, and
promises. It arises from the very holiness of God. (c) The Laver. This last is
the pre-eminent lesson of the laver in tabernacle and temple. The directions as
to its construction and use are as follows:“And Jehovah spake unto Moses,
saying, Thou shalt also make a laver of brass, and the base thereof of brass, to
wash withal:and thou shalt put it between thetent of meeting and the altar, and
thou shalt put water therein. And Aaron and his sons shall wash their hands and
their feet thereat:when they go into thetent of meeting, they shall wash with
water, that they die not:or when they come near to the altar to minister, to
burn an offering made by fire unto Jehovah:so they shall wash their hands and
their feet, that they die not:and it shall be a statute for ever to them, even
to him and to his seed throughout their generations” (Exodus 30:17-20). (1) Its
position was between the altar of burnt offering at the entrance gate and the
house itself where God dwelt, so that to reach the laver one must first pass the
altar. (2) Its use was for priests, that they might habitually keep clean their
hands and feet, their practice and walk. (3) The frequency of this washing was
striking. On every occasion without exception when a priest was about to enter
the house to serve God or to go to the altar to serve man he was to wash his
hands and feet. (4) The penalty of non-observance was death, twice denounced
against non-compliance with the regulation to wash. On the very day of their
consecration as priests Nadab and Abihu dared to enter the house to burn incense
using fire not taken from the altar of atonement and therefore not sanctified by
the atoning blood. They were slain by fire from Jehovah (Leviticus 10:1;
Leviticus 2:16:12). Thus was solemnly emphasized that blood is indispensable to
acceptable worship. At the beginning of this dispensation Ananias and Sapphira
dared to enter the present house of God, the church, with defiled hearts and
unclean hands, and they too fell dead in the presence of God (Acts 5:1-11). Thus
was solemnly emphasized that the sanctification secured by “water” is
indispensable to acceptable service.

Under the Old Covenant it was asked “Who shall ascend into the hill of Jehovah?
And who shall stand in His holy place?” And the searching answer was, “He that
hath clean hands, and a pure heart” (Psalms 24:3-4).

Under the New Covenant the apostle says, “I desire therefore that the men pray
in every place, lifting up holy hands, without wrath and disputing [a pure
heart]”(1 Timothy 2:8). The Corinthian Christians ere carrying on the public
gatherings of the church, but with hearts impure by strife, jealousy, and
selfishness, and with bodies defiled by immoralities and greed; andthey were
sick, ill, and dying prematurely under the judgments of God (1 Corinthians
11:26-32). That place of blessing, the table of the Lord, is a dangerous place
to the carnal believer, as was the altar of incense to Nadab and Abiliti.

Here then is the inexorable condition of priestly standing and service. Does
this explain why, though the saved are many, priests are few? (d) Water. What
then is the “water” so indispensable to communion, worship, and service? What
enables the believer to be a saint? By what means may person and garments, the
inward man and the outer life, be kept clean? The answer is given in Ephesians
5:25-27 :“Christ also loved the church, and gave Himself up for it; that He
might sanctify it, having cleansed it by the washing of water with the word,
that He might present the church to Himself a glorious church, not having spot
or wrinkle or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish.”
This teaches (1) That the love of Christ is the fountain of every blessing for
all His people. (2) That His sacrifice of Himself unto death is the ground of
His redemptive right, His ownership of the church. (3) That the goal He has set
before His heart is to present the church to Himself as a bride to a husband.
The whole context is of this relationship, and it would be helpful in
translating, and would display the figure used, to follow the feminine gender of
the Greek word “church” and render, “gave Himself up for her... that He might
sanctify her... that she should be holy and without blemish.” At present His
people are as a betrothed virgin (2 Corinthians 11:2-3); but in due time the
heavenly hosts will rejoice because “the marriage of the Lamb is come, and His
wife bath made herself ready” (Revelation 19:7). But (4) unto this great end it
is needful that she shall be completely perfect, so as to be pleasant to her
royal Bridegroom. She must be glorious, not having spot or wrinkle or any such
thing, but so holy as to be without blemish. All these terms refer to external
appearance, to visible beauty.

How is this perfect condition to be attained by the bride? The answer here is
that Christ Himself sanctifies her. Not otherwise were it possible, but He can
bring her to this height of beauty and glory. But by what process does He do
this? It is by the use “of the laver [composed of] water in the word.” The
brazen laver of old pointed to the words of God, now preserved for us in Holy
Scripture. The water in the laver spoke of the Holy Spirit of God. He who obeys
what the Lord says receives the purifying energy of the Spirit that abides in
the word. The Lord’s instructions direct us to holiness, but we must obey those
commands if we are to be sanctified. A command disobeyed cannot benefit but only
condemn; a command obeyed removes the moral blemish against which it is directed
or supplies the virtue lacking.

Obviously the picture is of a slave girl upon whom a prince sets his heart. He
thereupon redeems her and acquires all rights in her. His purchase price
completely releases her from her former bondage but at the same time makes her
entirely his property. But he cannot take her direct from the slave market to
sit with him on his throne. She must be bathed, clothed, adorned, trained for
regal glory, and in this she must co-operate by obedience to his requirements
and acceptance of the training appointed. All she will ever have her prince
supplies, but she must use it so as to render herself correspondent to him and
suitable for her noble calling. It were vain for her to argue that the
redemption price alone sufficed for every requirement. It would not:it sufficed
to set her free from the old life and introduce her to her new standing and
relationship, but it would not take the place of and render needless the water,
the royal garments, the ornaments, and fragrant ointment. These she must accept
and employ with all diligence, as did Esther. Hence the two statements,
complementary to each other, that Christ sanctifies the church, but she makes
herself ready and arrays herself for the marriage. And therefore while Paul says
of his converts that he espoused them as a chaste virgin, that hemight at last
present them unto Christ on the marriage day, yet he feared lest any of them
should prove faithless in heart to the heavenly Lover, and be corrupted and
defiled, and thus unready. For as Satan seduced Eve from God, so he will seduce
the Christian from Christ if he be unwatchful as to heart and ways (2
Corinthians 11:2-3). And then O grief for words too sore! The bridal day is
nigh, The virgin, that no more, Is left to weep and sigh, All sullied by the
foul embrace, She lost for aye her queenly place. (James 4:4 : Php 3:13-14) This
use of the water is shown in many Scriptures. David, recovered from moral
leprosy, his sin put away by God, his sentence of death annulled, prayed, “Purge
me with hyssop and I shall be clean:Wash me, and I shall be whiter than snow”
(Psalms 51:7). The hyssop was used to sprinkle the blood (Exodus 12:22 :
Leviticus 14:6-7; Hebrews 9:19-21); the washing was with water, not with blood.
No hymn to the contrary should be used. It fixes in the mind the false idea that
all that God requires is gained at the altar, so that the laver is neglected and
holiness retarded. Of every thousand allusions by preachers to the altar and the
blood is there more than one mention of the laver? Again, Hebrews 10:22 shows
that the water is as requisite as the blood for full assurance of faith:“let us
draw near with a true heart in fulness of faith, having our hearts sprinkled
from an evil conscience, and our body washed with pure water;” the inward
consciousness relieved by faith in the blood of Christ, the “body,” the outward
conduct, purified by obedience to the Word and the Spirit.

It was to a justified believer and sincere follower that the Lord said, “If I
wash thee not thou hast no part with Me;” and emphasizing this need of practical
cleansing, under the figure of a branch in a vine having been stripped of dead
bark and other impurities which hinder fruitfulness, He added, “Already ye are
clean because of [by the effect of] the word which I have spoken unto you” (John
12:8-10; John 15:3). This external cleansing requires to be maintained and
advanced by diligent washing of the feet at the laver, and only so will the
pilgrim through this squalid world (2 Peter 1:19) arrive at length at the bridal
hall “clean every whit.” The application of this last phrase to cleansing by the
blood at the altar is in utter disregard of the words as spoken by Christ to
Peter.

It was while He was graciously washing his feet with water that He said, “He
that is bathed has no further need than to wash his feet.” This being done he is
“clean every whit;” but obviously a guest will not be clean every whit so long
as his bare and sandalled feet are soiled by the dust and mire of the street. Of
the first bathing of the priest at his consecration baptism is an appointed
figure, “the laver of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Spirit” (Titus 3:5),
but baptism is not in view in the main passages on holiness and priestly
service, such as Ephesians 5:25-27 and Hebrews 10:22.

Let no Christian beguile himself, or be beguiled by erroneous teaching, into
thinking that he acquires by the sacred blood what can only be gained by the
equally sacred water. He needs both equally; the blood to secure his standing
before God, the Spirit to cause his state to correspond to his standing. It is
by water that the thirst of the heart is quenched, the soul refreshed, the life
made to overflow with grace; it is by water that the practice of daily life is
cleansed and kept clean. And God be praised that this heavenly Water is ever at
hand; the spiritual Rock goes with us through the desert; Christ accompanies His
people and gives the Spirit to them that obey Him.

Therefore from His riven side there flowed both water and blood, and therefore
rings out His gracious promise “I will give unto him that is athirst of the
fountain of the water of life freely,” andtherefore “blessed are they that wash
their robes” (Revelation 21:6; Revelation 22:17; Revelation 22:14).


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 47: 03.11.     BLOOD IS NOT OIL AND DOES NOT SERVE THE PURPOSE OF OIL.
========================================================================

4. Blood is not oil and does not serve the purpose of oil. In the process of
cleansing the leper, after the blood of atonement had been put upon his ear,
hand, and foot, oil was sprinkled before Jehovah, was put upon the blood on the
ear, hand, and foot, and poured upon the head of the man being cleansed. It was
the last act but one of the ceremony and without it cleansing was not complete
(Leviticus 14:16-18). The same features found place in the consecration of
priests (Leviticus 8:1-36). The king was consecrated by anointing with oil (1
Samuel 10:1; 1 Samuel 16:13 : 2 Samuel 5:3). Elisha was to be anointed as
prophet (1 Kings 19:16). The Son of God was anointed at His baptism. Peter
intimates what the oil signified and effected when he said of Jesus “God
anointed Him with the Holy Spirit and power,” so that “He went about doing good,
and healing all that were oppressed of the devil; for God was with Him” (Acts
10:38). This anointing with the Spirit was distinct from that measure of the
Spirit which had been the portion of the Lord Jesus all His private life. Its
consequence was that “God was with Him” in a sense that was additional to the
former fellowship with His Father. Its effect was an accession of spiritual
energy for public service; He was anointed with the Holy Spirit and power, as it
is written of that event, that “Jesus returned in the power of the Spirit into
Galilee” (Luke 4:14), and showed the power of the anointing in victory over
disease, sorrow, Satan.*

[* These miraculous gifts of the Holy Spirit, are to be evident prior to the
return of our Lord, and the establishment of His Millennial Kingdom; they will
accompany those who are empowered to preach the “gospel of the kingdom,” that
is, the good news of Christ’s reign on earth in righteousness and peace. See
Acts 1:8 and compare with Luke 21:15; Luke 21:19. This power of God will be
necessary to withstand the false prophets - i,e, deceivers and servants of
Satan; who may include some who are regenerate (Mark 13:12). - Ed.], In like
manner the first disciples received power by the Holy Spirit coming upon them
(Acts 1:8) and became mighty witnesses to Christ glorified. This anointing can
be given to those only who have accepted the sprinkled blood as atonement for
sin. But why are so many who do this without power to witness and serve? The
solemn fact is undeniable:what is its reason? and what the remedy? Let each ask
himself, Have I consented that my ear shall be marked with blood, so that I
purpose to listen only and constantly to the voice of God? Have I dedicated my
hand to do only His will, His works? Am I, as blood-bought, resolved to walk
only in the footsteps of my Lord? Have I sought and received an anointing with
the Spirit and power? Or do I suppose that all this took place when first I went
to the altar and accepted pardon by blood?

It might have been thus, for so it was with Cornelius and his company (Acts
10:44-48); but was it so with you? Is the reader’s life as a believer marked by
power or by weakness? Be not beguiled by theory, but receive the reality by
faith. Dedicate your person to Christ to serve Him alone and wholly, so shall
the anointing of oil be added to the blood, and you shall have power to know the
mind of God (1 John 2:27), to go about doing good, to conquer the devil in your
own life and in others. But be assured that blood without oil does not produce
those blessed God-glorifying results. To service as prophet or priest or king
the anointing with oil was a distinct and known event.


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 48: 03.12.     THE BLOOD DOES NOT DISPENSE WITH DISCIPLINE.
========================================================================

5. The Blood does not dispense with discipline. The classic instance of this is
David after his lapse and recovery (2 Samuel 12:12-14). He was pardoned, his sin
put away, the capital punishment remitted, and all this because God was able to
give the repentant offender the benefit of the blood Jesus would shed. But to
the announcement of pardon the sentence was added that his child should die and
the sword would harass his house to the end. He had sinned publicly and had
given great occasion to the enemies of his God to blaspheme, and that holy God
was bound to vindicate His holiness and to show publicly that He does not
tolerate sin in His people. The after life of David showed that he humbly bowed
to this severe chastisement and was benefited by it. The leading passage on
parental discipline by God is Hebrews 12:1-17. This follows the great exposition
of remission through the blood and of cleansing by the water. Can discipline,
then, add ought to these? The passage declares that the Father “scourges every
son whom He receiveth,” and that this is a proof of His love and of their
sonship. The object of this severe treatment is “for our profit, that we may be
partakers [eis to metalabein, so that we may partake] of His holiness” (verses
6-10). Every one of His sons has already been reckoned righteous by faith in
Christ. But that is something imputed, securing a clear and safe standing in
law; this holiness is the actual character and activity of God infused into and
wrought out in His sons. The only other place of this exact word in the New
Testament is 2 Corinthians 1:12, where Paul uses it of his practical conduct at
Corinth. In that city notorious for vice he had “behaved in holiness and
sincerity of God.” For the furthering of this needful and noble end chastisement
is employed by God our Father, and neither blood, water, nor oil dispenses with
it. Gold is freed from dross by neither of these but by fire (1 Peter 1:7). This
is set in direct connexion with the believer being found unto “praise and glory
and honour at the revelation of Jesus Christ.” Our passage in Hebrews puts heavy
emphasis upon this same connexion by exhorting us to “follow after peace with
all men, and the sanctification without which no one shall see the Lord” (verses
14-17), that is, God the Father, for every eye is to see Christ and every knee
to bend before Him at one or other session of His judgment seat. In my
commentary on Hebrews it was shown from many Scriptures that there is a
possibility that this “scourging” of a child of God may continue after death. An
indignant critic complained in a magazine that it seems that what the blood
cannot do, a thousand years in purgatory is to do. I had shown that the process
proposed differed radically and essentially from the Roman Catholic conception
of purgatory in that the Catholic doctrine makes salvation dependent upon such
purgation, which is false. The critic ignored this. His phrase was clever, well
calculated to catch the unwary and mislead the uninstructed by a seeming
honouring of the blood:but it revealed the common and regrettable theological
error that the blood is like money and answereth for all things. Yet it is very
evident that in this life at least the atoning blood does not serve the end that
chastisement serves, nor, if discipline be resented, will the blood compensate
by perfecting holiness in the child of God. To lead the people of God to rest on
this misconception is injurious to their souls and to their prospects. It
retards growth in holiness, induces unwarranted confidence, and conduces to
lethargy.


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 49: 03.13.     BLOOD DOES NOT DO THE WORK OF THE SWORD.
========================================================================

6. Blood does not do the work of the sword. By blood Israel had been delivered
from the Destroyer in Egypt, but this did not give victory over Amalek in the
desert. It required the hill-top intercession of their Leader and their own
sharp swords. In the desert they had experienced the continual virtue of blood,
water, oil, and the fire of discipline; but this did not give them victory over
Sihon and Og:victory demanded their own swords. They went through Jordan,
typifying for us escape by the cross of Christ from the weary effort to suppress
the flesh, the “old man” and his corruptions; this did not give them possession
of their noble inheritance:possession had to be won at the sword’s point.

Israel in Egypt is the chosen people of God in bondage to the world; Israel in
the desert pictures her harassed and often defeated by defilements of the flesh
(as fornication and idolatry), and of spirit (as distrust and
self-pleasing):Israel fighting giants on the hilltops of Canaan represents our
warfare with wicked spirits in the heavenly places. This ceaseless battle must
be waged in our own hearts, watching against evil thoughts, feelings, desires:it
must be pressed in home, school, business, church, pulpit, perhaps in prison for
Christ’s sake.

Hast thou sheltered under the precious blood of Christ, then thou art secure
from eternal damnation; but take not thou for granted that all the privileges
and advantages of the new life in Christ, in time and eternity, are certain to
become thine. Not so, not so! Thou must put on the whole armour of God, and use
the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God (Ephesians 6:1-24).

Therefore challenge thy heart with the question, Am I fighting the good fight of
faith? “Am I a soldier of the cross? “ Thy new birth grants thy title to inherit
in Christ; the atoning blood has removed the legal obstacle to thy inheriting,
even thy sin; but possession will only be secured by thy sword. Therefore, my
brother, say resolutely to thy soul “Since I must fight if I would reign
Increase my courage, Lord, I’ll bear the toil, endure the pain Supported by Thy
word.”

What the blood does has been opened up in the former part of this exposition.
The God of all grace be praised for the rich and establishing truth there set
forth. Yet it is very necessary that the Christian should understand what the
blood does not do, in order that he may feel his need of water and oil, may set
himself to the life of detail obedience to the will of God declared in His Word,
may thus enjoy the communion of the Holy Spirit and “grow in the grace and
knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. To Him be the glory both now and
unto the day of eternity.

Amen.” (2 Peter 3:18).


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 50: 04.00.1-THE EARLIER YEARS OF THE MODERN TONGUES MOVEMENT
========================================================================

TITLE PAGE THE EARLIER YEARS OF THE MODERN TONGUES MOVEMENT A Historical Survey
and Its Lessons by George Henry Lang

1908


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 51: 04.00.2-CONTENTS
========================================================================

CONTENTS

Introduction

The Church of God

“How Pentecost Came to Los Angeles”

The Case of T. B. Barratt

William Booth-Clibborn

India and London

Testing the Spirits

False Doctrine

Special Features

Later Conditions

Conclusion


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 52: 04.00.3-E-SWORD MODULE PREPARED BY HTTP://WWW.BIBLESUPPORT.COM/
========================================================================

e-Sword Module Prepared by http://www.biblesupport.com/ The text has been
changed slightly from the print edition. Scripture references have been better
formatted for electronic presentation in e-Sword. Most implicit scripture
references were made specific to reference the actual book chapter:verse rather
than expecting the reader to deduce the chapter or book.

Download thousands of free e-Sword modules, find answers to e-Sword problems,
access e-Sword user forums, and fellowship with other e-Sword users.
http://www.biblesupport.com/is also home to the only e-Sword User’s Guide, the
most comprehensive documentation available for e-Sword.


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 53: 04.01-CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION
========================================================================

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION TO BE TRULY HELPFUL, history must be as full and as
accurate as is possible. It was in part to further this end, as regards the
history of the Brethren, that I wrote my life of A. N.

Groves, and the papers “Inquire of the Former Age” that appeared in the first
three issues of The Disciple. To the same end I here put on record some little
known facts connected with the modern Movement associated with speaking with
tongues. I write with no initial prejudice against this Movement, even as I had
none against the former, but would contribute facts not given in any account of
the Movement known to me, as well as reflections formed when reading its own
literature. In 1913 I issued a book entitled The Modern Gift of Tongues: Whence
is it? A reviewer wrote at the time that “highly controversial, the spirit of
love is never absent from these pages.” I desire that this present book may win
like praise. My principal sources of information are these,

My own contact with the Movement and its literature go back to 1909, that is, to
within three years of its commencement m Los Angeles, California, in 1906.

By the kindness of a friend in the U.S.A. I have read Like a Mighty Army Moves
the Church of God, by C. W. Conn, being the official history of what arrogates
to itself the title “The Church of God.” It was issued in March 1955 at
Cleveland, Tennessee.

With Signs Following: the Story of the Pentecostal Revival in the Twentieth
Century, by S. H. Frodsham: Springfield, U.S.A.. 1941. This writer was one of
the earliest members of the Movement, in Bournemouth, England.

The Pentecostal Movement: a Short History and an interpretation for British
Readers, by Donald Gee; Luton, Bedfordshire, England, 1941.

How Pentecost Came to Los Angeles. As it was in the Beginning, by Frank
Bartleman. By the kindness of the same American Friend I have been able to read
this rare and striking book. It is the best authority upon the first beginnings
in Los Angeles, being by one who had a leading part in preparation for the
outbreak, who described it from personal experience, and who wrote his account
as early as April 1925, using notes made at the time.

The Baptism in the Holy Spirit, a Personal Testimony, by William Booth-Clibborn.
First edition, 1929; third edition, Portland, Oregon, U.S.A, 1944. This is of
value as narrating the writer’s “baptism” as early as November 1908 in London. I
have consulted letters and smaller works found among my papers gathered in those
early years. In addition, and of great importance, are,

A set of 140 issues of the leading early magazine of the Movement, entitled
Confidence. It was published by Rev. Alexander A. Boddy, of All Saints Church,
Monkwearmouth, Sunderland, where in 1907 the Movement commenced in England. The
first number is dated April 1908: it was issued monthly till the end of 1916,
then bi-monthly, then quarterly, and the last number I have is dated 1926. Mr.
Boddy travelled in many lands visiting centers of the Movement; Christians 3from
many countries visited Sunderland; and as a result reports and letters reached
him from all over the earth. Conference addresses were published, articles
explaining the Movement were included, and his magazine became the chief early
organ of the Movement for the English-speaking world. To go through this
collection is to gain a comprehensive view of the whole Movement and knowledge
of its chief leaders in many lands.

In the first days of the Movement I was struck by the way its literature came to
me from many quarters quite unsought. It was partly this that impelled me to
write the book before mentioned. It seems noteworthy that when in 1955 I began
to ponder the Movement there should reach me in quick succession items 2, 5, 6
and 7, full of information now very difficult to obtain.

It will be observed that I have not used literature antagonistic to the
Movement. Indeed, to keep my mind free from its influence I have not looked at
what I have of such, and it is thirty or more years since I read it. The
Movement is considered here as recorded by its own leading representatives. A
personal and esteemed friend of many years, a pastor in the Movement, inquired
why I spoke of them as the “Tongues” Movement instead of using their chosen
title “Pentecostal”? I replied that were I to do so I should concede the very
point I doubt.

Why do I have this doubt? Speaking with tongues is certainly Pentecostal, nor do
I question that the Spirit of God can grant this power today. I reject the
theory that this and other such gifts were not intended to be permanent in this
age. On the contrary, the greater gifts are to be desired earnestly, especially
the power to prophesy; and lesser gifts, such as speaking with tongues, are not
forbidden (1 Corinthians 12:31; 1 Corinthians 14:39). Moreover, these brethren
declare the true faith of our Lord Jesus Christ, redemption by His atoning blood
is preached, there is most commendable zeal in spreading the gospel, which is
owned by God to the conversion of sinners. I am privileged with the individual
fellowship and co-operation of not a few ministers in the Movement. Why, then,
should one have doubts about it as a whole, and some-times utter a friendly
caution? In my own case the answer, and the reasons for now writing upon the
subject, will be best served by narrating some characteristic features of the
Movement in its earlier period. My experience of it goes back to those days.
Having no objection to the exercise of supernatural gifts, I did not look at the
matter with prejudice or initial disfavour. But facts are stubborn and would not
let me regard the Movement with complacence. Facts learned later have confirmed
that earlier attitude.

I am aware that the picture here drawn of those early years may disquiet and
distress some true children of God who, from lack of information, have felt
confident that there was then nothing less than an irruption of the Spirit of
God to awaken and quicken a sleeping church. It requires spiritual stamina to be
able to look with a quiet and honest mind upon what disturbs cherished opinions.
Such as, by the Spirit, have moral strength to do this will find that this book
is not designed to withdraw them from the realm of things super-natural, but
rather to enable them to discern more accurately between the divine and the
human, the heavenly and the earthly, the workings of the Spirit of truth and the
counter-workings of the great Liar and Deceiver.

“If therefore the Son shall make you free, ye shall be free indeed “ (John
8:36); free to move safely in that higher region of the kingdom of God which
Pentecost opened to all believers but with which many children of God have no
acquaintance, but in the search for which many honest seekers have been misled
into a neighboring realm of the supernatural where counterfeits beguile and
disasters over-whelm.


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 54: 04.02-CHAPTER 2 THE CHURCH OF GOD
========================================================================

CHAPTER 2 THE CHURCH OF GOD THIS EXTENSIVE and highly organized Community had
its rise in 1886, twenty years prior to the outburst at Los Angeles. It
commenced in Tennessee, U.S.A, among a scattered farming people in rough
country. They were mostly illiterate, with few books, yet in general were
religious. though largely without the power of godliness. To read of the violent
lawless deeds perpetrated with no restraint by authority, is a revelation of the
backward moral and social conditions in country regions of the U.S.A. only
seventy years ago. A Baptist pastor became distressed in soul about the
spiritual deadness prevailing. He devoted himself to prayer and study of the
Bible. A few joined him. In 1886 these saw that no general awakening of the
Churches was to be expected, so nine persons formed themselves into a Christian
Union, with the laudable but in part Scripturally unwarranted objective “to
restore primitive Christianity and bring about the Union of all denominations”
(p. 7). [All the page references in this chapter are to Conn: Like a Mighty Army
Moves the Church of God.]

It is obvious that this latter hope was at variance with the plain and united
forecast of the Word of God that the course of Christianity would be persistent
declension culminating in final apostasy, so that “When the Son of Man cometh
shall He find faith on the earth?

“(Luke 18:8). It is necessary to our present inquiry to note that this earnest
group were from the start deficient in Bible teaching and therefore in power of
discernment in things spiritual. In spite of fierce opposition their influence
extended and their numbers increased. The few early evangelists were earnest and
moving speakers. Their chief theme was personal holiness; but they did not
teach, but plainly rejected, present assurance of eternal life, and therefore,
though there were conversions of openly evil men, and others gained some
experience of holiness, they did not bring these into a deep and solid state of
heart. In consequence there was much spiritual emotionalism, and the historian
tells that “the people felt a strange exaltation that intermittently overflowed
in weeping and shouting. Their emotional expression frequently became even more
demonstrative, for many danced in spiritual ecstasy or trance (p. 20)...
leaping, shouting, and other manifestations were much in evidence (130)
shouting, dancing, talking in tongues, and praising God” (148). This last
sentence refers to public occasions, even when walking to meetings.

We need not wonder that with emotion so high further uncontrolled ecstatic
developments followed. “For ten years the Spirit of God had been preparing the
hearts of the people for something extraordinary... in ecstasy they spoke in
languages unknown to those who heard the utterances.. regardless of the place,
time, or circumstances contingent to the experience, one manifestation was
uniform in all: they spoke in tongues, or languages, unknown to those who
listened in wonder and hope” (24).

Examining the Scriptures, they concluded that what was taking place was a
renewal of Pentecost, Caesarea. and Ephesus. “While the meetings were in
progress, one after another fell under the power of God, and soon quite a number
were speaking in other tongues as the Spirit gave them utterance” (25).

Both the subjects of these experiences and the historian took for granted that
this was a genuine working of the Spirit of God. But is it wise to take this for
granted? Twenty years later, in 1906, while these exalted ecstasies were still
in progress, the similar events in Los Angeles commenced. The leading pastor of
the older Movement invited a preacher who had been “baptized” at Los Angeles to
visit him. The pastor had himself long been seeking the “baptism” and this is
his description of how it came. “On Sunday morning, January 12 [1908], while he
[the visitor] was preaching, a peculiar sensation took hold of me, and almost
unconsciously I slipped off my chair in a heap on the rostrum at Brother
Cashwell’s feet. As I lay there great joy flooded my soul.” He wrote further
that “he spoke in about ten languages unknown to him” (p.85).

Paul spoke with tongues more than others but declared. “howbeit in the church I
had rather speak five words with my understanding, that I might instruct others
also, than ten thousand words in a tongue” (1 Corinthians 14:19). In the case
before us there had been no interpretation. It was rather a case of ten thousand
words in tongues and not even five spoken with the understanding. This was
rectified in one instance on August 25th of that year. “The service was pregnant
with the Divine Presence, and the altar was filled with sixty-five or seventy
souls. This young Christian, completely overcome, started to the altar but fell
weakly under the passion of his soul into the sawdust aisle.” He was carried to
the “altar” and ‘within a short time, the humble seeker was baptized in the Holy
Ghost and began to speak in tongues. A quiet, retiring, unobtrusive personality
before, he was now exuberant, overflowing, vocal.

Under the spell of the Spirit, he arose from the altar where he had lain
prostrate. Then how wonderfully the Spirit wafted him across the platform and up
and down the aisles, during which time he preached powerfully and eloquently in
other tongues... “ He “ remained in this state of ecstasy for several hours.”
“Mexicans present testified that he spoke Spanish during his discoursing” (89,
90). The next day he went six miles to his father’s farm, and “sat on the front
porch steps and endeavoured to tell them of the exhilaration 3rd tranquility he
felt in his heart... He was immediately overcome with ecstasy and fell back
across the steps, where he lay speaking forth the praises of God in an unknown
tongue, interpreting the messages under the affiatus of the Spirit” (91). In
addition to such demonstrations there were healings of the sick, singing in
tongues, and, what seems a unique feature, persons who were not musical, playing
well on piano or organ. A woman rose in a meeting and moved toward the piano.
Her husband, knowing she could not play, shut the piano to avoid a fiasco. But
she, though walking among the seats with her eyes tightly closed, reached the
piano safely, opened it and played musically.

It will suffice to give one more scene from those early days, in the year 1914.
It concerns one of the most renowned and effective of the evangelists of that
Church. “The meetings were so emotionally pitched and the booming voice of the
evangelist so sincere that people often fell into the sawdust as he invited them
to the altar. He stalked the aisles pointing his finger at sinners and
commanding them to seek God, many of whom fell screaming in either fear or
ecstasy as they started toward the altar” (26). Does this describe Jesus
preaching on the hillsides of Galilee or in the Temple courts? Did Paul “stalk
the aisles” in the synagogues or the temple on Mars Hill. and make people
“scream” with fear?

It is to be borne in mind that the scenes and features here given are not culled
from attacks by hostile critics, and are not false and regrettable
extravagancies of which sober minded leaders of that Church now feel ashamed.
They are recorded by the official historian of the Church, who selected them
after fifty years as being the very features he, and his Supreme Council who
highly commend his book, wish to offer as accurately exhibiting the proper
character of their Movement.

Let the reader put together what is thus commended to him as workings of the
blessed Holy Spirit of God. Walking about a hall and playing a piano with one’s
eyes shut: public weeping, shouting, dancing, leaping, lying in a heap on the
rostrum before the congregation: falling backward across steps, constant
speaking in tongues often simultaneously, tongues which usually no one
understood and which mostly were not interpreted. Both these last two items are
activities expressly forbidden in public (1 Corinthians 14:27-28). Let the
reader watch an estimable young Christian man, seeking the “baptism,” moving
toward the “altar” (known elsewhere as the “penitent form”), suddenly becoming
exhausted and collapsing in the sawdust of the aisle, carried helpless to the
front, lying there prostrate, and then suddenly “wafted across the platform and
up and down the aisles” preaching in tongues. Let him further study the
vigorous, vociferous evangelist, using his powerful voice as he strode up and
down among the audience, frightening some until they screamed.

Let the serious Christian with a fair knowledge of his New Testament, try to fit
such extravagancies into the public gatherings of The Acts of the Apostles or
make them to harmonize with the sobriety and order demanded in 1 Corinthians
14:1-40. Dull, lifeless routine in Divine worship is indeed unscriptural: the
Spirit of life will infuse heavenly life and vigour into gatherings where He has
true liberty, bringing fervour of spirit and spontaneity of utterance, but if it
is He who produces such unrestrained excesses as are above reviewed, then have
we read our New Testament to little purpose.


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 55: 04.03-CHAPTER 3 HOW PENTECOST CAME TO LOS ANGELES
========================================================================

CHAPTER 3 “HOW PENTECOST CAME TO LOS ANGELES”

FRANK BARTLEMAN, writer of the book with the above title, is the most engaging
personality we have met in our study of the events before us. He was a man of
God beyond many, devoted to Christ and His cause, an evangelist most eager to
see sinners saved, and ready for every sacrifice. His prayer-life was intense,
even intemperate, accompanied by fasting to excess, to the serious depletion of
health.

He was a servant ready to trust his Master. Though unsupported by any Church or
Society it was his fixed rule never to mention to man his temporal needs, or to
hint at financial questions, even when penniless and without food for his
family. His wife was heartily with him in this and accepted privation when God
tested their faith, as He always tests it, and they rejoiced together in the
marked deliverances with which faith is rewarded. In 1910 and 1911 he travelled
for eleven months, visiting seventeen countries between England and Japan,
returning via the Pacific. He writes:

I did not carry a single dollar with me from Los Angeles... My family trusted
God fully and were better cared for than they had ever been while I was with
them. I returned with about one dollar in my pocket. My wife had fifty dollars
in bank. “Faithful is He who calleth you, who also will do it.” (p.142)... In a
wonderful way the Lord preserved me from sickness. [Happily it was not yet the
time when Governments insist on poisoning travellers with powerful drugs which
can do as much damage as the diseases they arc to prevent.] I passed through
cholera, plague, and smallpox districts and exposure, and through fever sections
at the most deadly time of the year. But the Lord preserved me. I came home
weighing ten pounds heavier than I had weighed for years. My family had been
kept in fair health during my absence, and with plenty for their temporal needs.
I never asked for a penny nor a collection. All was given me voluntarily. I only
received fifty dollars from America after leaving her shores. In Palestine.
India, and China, help came from the most unexpected and unlikely sources. God
proved lie could provide abroad as well as at home. I reached China with only
ten dollars. No money came from America to me there. The writer does not show
whether he knew that eighty years before A. N. Groves had set the modern example
of serving the Lord on this, the apostolic plan, or whether he had heard of
George Muller of Bristol. Certainly he did not know that at the very same period
(1910, 1911) the present writer was on a tour of over two years in India, Burma,
Egypt, Tunisia, and Switzerland, similarly waiting upon God alone for money and
having the like experience of testings and miraculous supplies. This life of
practical trust in God is not to be attributed to the Movement, for Bartleman
was walking this path before the latter commenced.

Bartleman’s testimony is commended to the attention of many today who profess to
follow the same path but who really have one eye on some organization or fund.
Such send reports to magazines, or issue circular letters to keep themselves
before friends, which circulars often of late bear the names of the writer’s
wife, and of Susan, John, Mary, and the baby. It will be healthy for the soul
and good for their work when days come in which magazines, lists of workers, and
circulars are no more available. Workers will then discover whether they are
spiritually as far advanced as the saint of the former dispensation who wrote:
“My soul waiteth only upon God: From Him cometh my salvation. He only is my rock
My soul, wait thou only upon God, For my expectation is from Him. He only is my
rock” (Psalms 62:1-6). The evil in view is, of course, not new. Spurgeon
somewhere said that some evangelists could not kill a mouse but that they must
announce the feat in the Gospel Magazine: whereas Samson killed a lion and said
nothing about it!

Living thus, this dear brother Bartleman was free from bondage to man and
control by his brethren. He could learn more of the mind of Christ and could
practice what he learned.

One very important thing that he saw was that control by man of gatherings of
Christians, and the imposing of human order, are denial of the right of the
Spirit of God and restrain His 8gracious activity in the saints. He felt that
the formal ordering of public worship was a severe and constant hindrance to
such a working of the Spirit as he longed and prayed to see. And he presently
learned of the ceasing of the 1904-5 revival in Wales when ministerial control
was reinforced, and shortly he saw the blight of human rule and order quench the
Movement in Los Angeles. In the earliest days of that Movement there were no
arranged speakers or pre-announcing of subjects, and the singing was equally
spontaneous. Old well-known hymns were used from memory. A fresh feature that
developed was “heavenly singing,” without words or else in tongues. Of this he
says, “they finally began to despise this ’gift’ when the human spirit asserted
itself again. They drove it out by hymnbooks, and selected songs by leaders. It
was like murdering the Spirit, and most painful to some of us, but the tide was
too strong against us.” And then he adds these pungent remarks: “Hymnbooks today
[1925], are largely a commercial proposition, and we would not lose much without
most of them. The old tunes, even, are violated by change, and new styles must
be gotten out every season, for added profit. There is very little real spirit
of worship in them. They move the toes, but not the hearts of men” (57).

Bartleman’s narrative begins with his arrival at Los Angeles on December 22.
1904. On April 8, 1905, he heard F. B. Meyer describe the then awakening in
Wales. This stirred him deeply. He commenced to distribute accounts of it by S.
B. Shaw and Campbell Morgan.

These helped to stir desire and expectancy in many hearts. He and Evan Roberts
exchanged some letters. In measure the Los Angeles Movement arose out of the
movement in Wales, the more so in that a Los Angeles pastor named Sniale had
visited Wales and had returned with some quickening.

There being in the Churches and Missions but little spiritual liberty, a few
earnest people met for prayer in a cottage. No. 214 Bonnie Brae Street, Los
Angeles. On April 9, 1906, a number spoke in tongues. On Sunday morning, April
15, at the New Testament Church, Burbank Hall, a coloured sister spoke in
tongues. When these things were noised abroad, the crowds came together. The
meetings were removed to 312 Azuza Street. This had been a Methodist Church but
was now a lumber store. Enough space was cleared of dirt and debris to lay
planks on top of empty nail kegs, to seat possibly thirty persons. They were
arranged in a square facing one another.

Intense excitement arose, augmented by some temporary concern in souls caused by
the mighty earthquake which began on April 19, through which some ten thousand
people were killed. The building was soon packed, tongues were frequent, the
“heavenly choir” was heard often, men and women flocked in dozens to the
“altar,” meetings went on continuously, almost round the clock. “Some one might
be speaking. Suddenly the Spirit would fall upon the congregation. God himself
would give the altar call. Men would fall all over the house, like the slain in
battle, or rush for the altar enmasse, to seek God” (60). The supernatural force
concentrated in this humble building was so intense as to surcharge the
immediate neighbourhood, so that persons approaching would fall under its grip
while still a block or two away. Others who had come to the city to investigate
were “baptized” where they were lodging. They had come from all parts of the
earth and returned to their spheres so charged with the energy operating that
through their testimonies and appeals similar scenes were re-enacted. Before
long the Movement became world-wide. Its leaders were very confident that it
would cover the earth and continue until the coming of the Lord.

Those who participated were possessed by an unquestioning conviction that the
power acting was that of the Holy Spirit of God. This assurance breathes
instinctively in the hundreds of testimonies published in the magazine
“Confidence.” The uniformity of description of the experiences is striking,
acceptance of the Divine source of it is invariable, and might easily overwhelm
the incautious reader into acquiescence, as it did so many thousands of readers
and beholders. And yet -? When a cautious inquirer, even though well-disposed to
the supernatural and ready to accept its manifestations, ponders many details as
given by participants and believers in them, questions will clamour for answer.
The literature reveals an almost childlike innocence in the acceptance of the
view that the experiences were given by God. None seem to have at all doubted
this. It was just taken for granted. They had sought earnestly for revival, and
surely here it was! Would God give stones to those who had asked for bread? But
the majority in those early days seem not to have heeded the exhortation of Paul
that his readers, as wise men, were to judge what even he, the apostle, said (1
Corinthians 10:15). Apparently they were not warned by John’s explicit statement
that many false prophets were clamouring to be heard and therefore every spirit
must be tested (1 John 4:1). Later in the Movement a few leaders gave such
warnings, but not it would seem to much purpose. This habit of mind is
dangerous, for it makes easy the work of deceiving spirits and false prophets.
There were leaders, of whom Bartleman was one, who recognized that evil spirits
might counterfeit the work of the Holy Spirit; but I have not read that any one
of them scrutinized his own “baptism” and tongues, or doubted the Divine origin
of this exercise or of the healings of the body that took place. A line of truth
was pressed to an extreme and furthered the tendency not to exercise the
judgment as to these experiences. Bartleman describes the occasion when first he
spoke in an unknown tongue, and says,

I was truly “sealed in the forehead,” ceasing from the works of my own natural
mind fully... My mind, the last fortress of men to yield, was taken possession
of by the Spirit... My mind had always been very active... Nothing hinders faith
and the operation of the Spirit so much as the self-assertiveness of the human
spirit, the wisdom, strength and self-sufficiency of the human mind. This must
all be crucified, and here is where the fight comes in (72).

There is here a point of importance. even that the inner man of the heart must
be brought into subjection to the Spirit of God: but that the powers of the
human mind “must all be crucified” simply puts the man off his proper defence,
so as to accept whatever is urged by an extraneous power, whatever that power
may be.

It was to the same effect that an Archdeacon, speaking of his “baptism,” said,

If I might add a word of caution from experience, it would be to use the
greatest care to keep one’s head out of the way. It is not by way of one’s head
so much as by way of one’s heart that the Holy Ghost loves to enter.
(Confidence, Dec. 1908, 13).

Here again is an element of truth. It is certain that with too many believers it
is principally a mental knowledge that is gained while the affections remain
little moved toward Christ. Yet an experience that is mainly emotional, the
feelings stirred though intelligence be meagre, will leave open the door to
false emotionalism and to the mind being misled by false ideas.

Speakers in that period laid much stress on Romans 6:6 : “Your old man was
crucified with Him.” It was well urged that the anointing of the Spirit could
not be put upon the old sinful nature but only upon Christ developed in the
believer. Mrs. Boddy was urgent in pressing this truth. But the psychology was
faulty. The term “the old man” points to the moral nature, which is incurably
corrupt and must be held in death, so that the resurrection of Christ may
animate the Christian by faith. But this moral nature is not the intellect, the
mind, as a faculty, but the false perverting influence that blinds the mind.
This moral nature must die with Christ by faith, and the mind be thus liberated
and renewed; but this does not mean that the intellect itself, as a faculty,
must die and cease to operate, so putting the judgment into abeyance on matters
spiritual. When it is a question of testimony to ordinary events there may be
little need to test the competency of the speaker; but when a man talks upon one
of the more recondite facts 10and problems of some science it is necessary to
learn that he is competent to speak upon the subject. Even so it is needful to
consider whether those who testify to supernatural events are reliable as
witnesses. In the present case a particular feature is noticeable. The
literature before me gives photographs of quite a number of men and women
connected with the Movement in the early years. They divide into two main
classes: those whose eyes have the dreamy, far-away look of the gentle,
sentimental nature, and those whose eyes glitter, are restless, intense. Only
few faces show a normal, placid, controlled spirit. Neither of the two former
classes can be relied upon to form a sober, tested judgment upon exciting
experiences. One who knew Mr. A. A. Boddy as a preacher in those early days has
described to me his preaching as “emotional.” His photo confirms this. One who
knew the leader in India of that time, named Moorhead, tells me he was
“erratic.” The judgment of such is usually hasty, as we shall shortly have
occasion to see. At the time of the Los Angeles manifestations Frank Bartleman
was aged thirty-four. His photo shows a sweet, intense nature of the first type
mentioned, that of a man likely to be too easily moved and carried away. An
instance can be given. It concerns a Mr. and Mrs. A. G. Garr. He says,

I preached at Fifth Street Mission, where the “Burning Bush” had gotten
control... They were going wild (6)... The “Burning Bush” had spoiled the spirit
of the saints greatly in San Diego. It had made them harsh and hard. There was
little love, but much strife and contention (31)... [Later] Brother and Sister
Carr closed “the Burning Bush” hall, came to Azuza, received the “baptism,” and
were soon on the way to India to spread the fire (54); And in February 1911 he
wrote warmly of them in China, whither they had gone on from India. Here is a
rapid change of judgment about these friends. Before they went to Azuza their
work was “going wild,” making saints “harsh and hard,” “breeding strife and
contention;” but when they had fallen under the Azuza spell they are at once
commended and encouraged. Now the “Good Report,” the Los Angeles organ of the
Movement, in its issue for June 1913, gave a large portrait of these friends.
Mrs. Garr has a sweet, pensive face of the first type described, but her
husband’s expression is fierce, aggressive, bellicose, with no trace of the
meekness and gentleness of Christ, though he was supposed to have received so
recently a special baptism in the Spirit of Christ. There will be occasion later
to learn that Bartleman’s estimate of hint showed a defect in judgment and that
the spirit that made people harsh and hard was still dominant in him. This same
lack of balance can be seen in another feature of this excellent man. He was
liable to violent illnesses, dangerous and painful, associated with chronic
neurasthenia, the result of excessive efforts. His children had attacks of
convulsions and other conditions inherited from their neurotic father. He
frequently mentions these factors, and of every sickness he declares that it was
the devil trying to kill him and them. This was unfair to the devil for all
neurasthenics are liable to such attacks without Satanic action. It belongs to
the condition. But not only was his reasoning and judgment at fault - as might
naturally follow from his mind having been “crucified” - but regularly he says
that prayer was made and that the Lord delivered him or the children. Yet the
steady recurrence and intensifying of the attacks makes clear that there was
nothing more than that cessation of the violence of the pains known with severe
neuralgic spasms, with no plain indications of distinct Divine healing action.
That the Lord supported the spirit of His dear servant under the strain would
certainly be the case, but that is not direct healing of the body. But his
failure of judgment as to his own case and that of his children, on the part of
so godly a brother and so prominent a leader, naturally raises the question as
to whether the same feature obtained in many other cases of sickness and healing
of those days. The point is of importance, because the records in “Confidence”
indicate that after a few years the matter of “tongues” lost its early
prominence and that of “healings” came to the front. The most remarkable
instance is that of one Smith Wigglesworth. “Confidence” gives many 11reports
about him and by him, and, if only half the cases of healing be accepted, he
came not a whit behind the very chiefest Apostles as a healer.

It is by no means suggested that there were no genuine instances of Divine
healing.

There may have been many, for where faith presented itself to the Lord He, of
course, would respond. Only it must be remembered that though Peter healed very
many sick folk, and even raised the dead (and several alleged raisings of the
dead are given in “Confidence “), that did not imply the Lord’s endorsement of
all that Peter said and did, such as his rebuke of Christ (Matthew 16) or his
lapse at Antioch (Galatians 2:11-18). Neither would abundance of cases of the
sick being healed prove of itself that accompanying “tongues” and “prophesyings”
were of God. Healings take place among sundry false cults, such, for example, as
Christian Science. Our present question is whether with many healers and many
healed there may have been the same deficiency of knowledge and the like defect
of judgment as with Frank Bartleman, and much have been ranked as Divine healing
without being really such. Just as Bartleman saw an attack of the devil in every
attack of sickness, so it seems did Smith Wigglesworth regard all sickness as
directly from the devil, and he would curse the demon and command him to depart.
It seems scarcely of Christ that his messenger should curse any one, even a
demon. The exhortation to the Christian is, “Bless, and curse not” (Romans
12:14), and though one could not bless a demon, neither should one curse him
(Jude 1:9; Zechariah 3:1-2). But in many cases, especially of neurotic types,
such daring, dramatic action would be a likely way to startle, arouse, and
benefit the sufferer. It would have been of value had some competent person
examined some of the more striking instances and formed an opinion upon this
aspect. Lapse of time now precludes this or learning as to the permanence of the
cures. In 1955 a dear man well in middle life, who was for thirty years a
“pastor” in the Movement and is still a firm adherent, narrated to me at length
his own remarkable healing by the Lord (as he believed) when he was a young man.
He was taken with violent abdominal pain, but determined that he would trust the
Lord only for healing. The doctor called by his parents he sent away, and for
six terrible weeks he struggled on, claiming deliverance and healing on the
ground of the blood of Christ. Abatement came at length, he vomited some black
clots, and gradually regained strength. So little did he know of sickness that
he had all along supposed it was appendicitis, until I told him that the
appendix was on the other side of the body. There is, I suppose, little doubt
that it was a gastric ulcer, which took a natural course and reached a natural
end, nor was there any sign whatever of supernatural intervention. Yet all these
years the dear man in his innocence had regarded and narrated this as a gracious
instance of Divine healing. And many cases are on record in which recovery was
more or less slow and seemingly natural. We do well to give God thanks when we
pull through and recover health, but to proclaim these as instances of direct
Divine action argues that lack of knowledge and judgment here before us. But
seeing that in such physical matters the judgment of good Christians could
either err or be in abeyance, may it not have been so as regards the more
difficult and distinctly spiritual matters they shared? We have quoted
Bartleman’s account of how at Azuza the Spirit would fall suddenly and men would
drop to the ground all over the house, or rush in crowds to the front, till the
place was like a forest of fallen trees. Many would talk in tongues together,
though this is plainly contrary to Scripture. Curious things are described.

Brother Seymour [a coloured brother, a godly man] was recognized as the nominal
leader in charge...Brother Seymour generally sat behind two empty shoe boxes,
one on top of the other. He usually kept his head inside of the top one during
the meetings, in prayer (58). A singular spectacle this - the leader with his
head hidden in a box while the fire of excitement blazed and roared around him.

We wanted God. When we first reached the meeting we avoided as much as possible
human contact and greeting. We wanted to meet God first. We got our head under
some bench in the corner in prayer, and met 12men only in the Spirit, knowing
them after the flesh” no more (59).

Here again are excellencies and eccentricities. To come to meet God, to avoid
merely human contacts - good indeed but why get one’s head under a bench? Why
hide one’s head in a box?

Another feature provokes inquiry.

We had a “tarrying” room upstairs, for those especially seeking God for the
“baptism,” though many got it in the main assembly room also. In fact they often
got it in their seats in those days. On the wall of the tarrying room was hung a
placard with the words, “No talking above a whisper.” We knew nothing of
“jazzing” them through at that time (55)... Our so-called tarrying and prayer
rooms today [1925] are but a shadow of the former ones, too often a place to
blow off steam in human enthusiasm, or become mentally intoxicated, supposedly
from the Holy Ghost. Many of them are a kind of lethal chamber, with very little
of the pure Spirit of God (81).

Thus there were two apartments, greatly in contrast. One retired and quiet,
where God could be sought in stillness the other marked by crowds, excitement,
movement, noise. Which of these was according to God? Apparently it made little
difference, for people were “baptized” in both some finding the gift by quiet
seeking, others while sitting in the public and restless meeting.

Here is another strange scene from the public meeting.

Brother Ansell Post, a Baptist preacher, was sitting on a chair in the middle of
the floor one evening in the meeting. Suddenly the Spirit fell upon him. He
sprang from his chair, began to praise God in a loud voice in “tongues,” and ran
all over the place, hugging all the brethren he could get hold of. He was filled
with divine love. He later went to Egypt as a missionary (61). That some spirit
urged the dear man seems certain: but it is hard to believe that the Spirit of
God, who commands and produces decency and order in public, provoked a preacher
to rush about the assembly, shouting in a strange tongue that edified no one,
and seizing and hugging the men folk. But Bartleman had no doubt it was the Holy
Spirit, which suggests a judgment faulty and unreliable.

Again, At the New Testament Church a young lady of refinement was prostrate on
the floor for hours, while at times the most heavenly singing would issue from
her lips... All over the house men and women were weeping. A preacher was flat
on his face on the floor, crying out. “Pentecost has fully come” (61).

It is safe to say that if at Pentecost of old any Oriental young woman had been
stretched on the floor for hours in the presence of men, and singing, it would
have been impossible to convince people that the Spirit of the Holy One of
Israel was the cause of this. Or again, of another centre in Los Angeles in the
same opening year, 1906, we read, The atmosphere at Eighth and Maple was for a
time even deeper than at “Azuza.” God came so wonderfully near us, the very
atmosphere of heaven seemed to surround us. Such a divine “weight of glory” was
upon us we could only lie on our faces. For a long time we could hardly remain
seated even. All would be on their faces on the floor, sometimes during the
whole service. I was seldom able to keep from lying full length on the floor on
my face. There was a little raise of about a foot, for a platform, when we moved
into the church. On this I generally lay, while God ran the meetings (69).

Once more, in 1908 in Indianopolis: At one meeting when I was through the slain
of the Lord lay all over the floor. I looked for the preachers behind me and
they lay stretched out on the floor too. One of them had his feet tangled up in
a chair, so I knew they had gone down under the power of God. I stepped over
near the piano, among the people. My body began to rock under the power of God
and I fell over on to the piano and lay there. It was a cyclonic manifestation
of the power of God (122).

These scenes from the first days, when the power acting was working most
energetically and pervading the Movement, were given by this chief and godly
leader as displaying what characterized those days and proved to him that
Pentecost had been renewed and the ever-blessed Spirit had fallen afresh. The
reader must judge for himself whether this is sufficiently proved by a preacher
lying on the platform before the audience with “his feet tangled up in a chair”
and by another “falling over on to the piano and lying there.” Is there any
parallel to such scenes in the Acts of the Apostles? This good man makes
prominent another feature concerning himself, which has a lesson and a warning.
It refers to his health, already mentioned.

[1904] My nerves had been worn threadbare from years of previous pioneer mission
work... My back was my weak spot (10)... I have always worked harder than my
natural strength reasonably allowed (13). [1905] My life was by this time
literally swallowed up in prayer. I was praying day and night (18)... We prayed
for a spirit of revival for Pasadena until the burden became well-nigh
unbearable. I cried out like a woman in birth-pangs (19)... I had an awful
attack of neuralgia of the stomach. I felt I would die. I fasted and prayed a
whole day and night and the Lord delivered (26). We [brother Boehrner, a
gardener] spent several hours in prayer... We often spent whole nights together
in prayer during those days. It seemed a great privilege to spend a whole night
with the Lord. He drew so near. We never seemed to get weary on such occasions
(33). The spirit of prayer came more and more heavily upon us... I would lie on
my bed in the daytime and roll and groan under the burden. At night I could
scarcely sleep for the spirit of prayer. I fasted much, not caring for food when
burdened. At one time I was in soul travail for nearly twenty-four hours without
intermission. It nearly used me up. Prayer literally consumed me. I would groan
all night in my sleep (35). I had a blessed weeping burden for a number of
days... I had such a burden one night I could not sleep (40)... spent another
all night of prayer with Brother Boehnmer My nerves were getting very worn from
constant conflict in prayer with the powers of darkness (42). [1907] I then
began to stay at home more to rest and recuperate. I had written much, attended
meetings constantly, besides going through the terrific siege of prayer both
before and after the outpouring, so that my nerves were completely exhausted. I
could hardly contemplate the writing of an ordinary postcard without mental
agony at this time... I can sympathize with Evan Robert’s nervous breakdown
after the revival in Wales (92).

Readers of my pamphlets Praying is Working and Prayer Focused and Fighting will
be aware that the Lord taught me something of the need and power of prayer
conflict. I have experienced the strain and the blessed effects of prayer, and
of some fasting. But is it of God, is it a necessity in the world of spirits,
that servants of Christ should disable themselves from the wars of the Lord by
such extreme and sustained pressure as induces nervous exhaustion and mental
collapse? The histories of the Bible offer no instance of it. The closing
letters of Paul and Peter and John show no brain fag, but are as vigorous as
their early writing and preaching, and they were old men. But the above pathetic
extracts are from a man only thirty-four to thirty-six years of age. The first
photo in his book shows eyes already with signs of weariness, and his portrait
of only nineteen years later gives a man of only fifty-three years yet
prematurely aged, gaunt and grey, with knitted brow and strained eyes. One can
respect the zeal and revere the devotion, but question the wisdom, or want of
wisdom. And in all spheres such early exhaustion is seen in servants of Christ
with often premature death and consequent weakening of the armies of the Lord.
And for the purpose of our present inquiry it is to be pondered that a brain
thus wearied means a reduced power of reflection and discernment, with a
proportionate liability to unrecognized adverse influence by the powers of
darkness. So devoted a disciple as Simon Peter had not the least notion that it
was from Satan there had come a false idea, skillfully mingled with a genuine
desire for his Master’s welfare (Matthew 16:22-23). Simon was not a worn-out
man: much more will the exhausted disciple be open to such harmful influence.
This leads to the observation that in the Movement before us there was plainly a
deep mixture of what was of God and what was not of Him. Many who joined early
in the Movement and received the “baptism” were already serious and instructed
Christians. They held firmly the great truths of the faith, loved Christ, sought
to bring sinners to Him, looked for His return. The entrance into their hearts
and lives of the fresh elements the “baptism” brought did not affect this
earlier stock of knowledge and experience: and when the new stimulus came these
believers went forth and still preached salvation by the atoning blood,
sanctification by the Spirit, and much else that was godly and helpful. Nor need
one doubt that some sincere longers after God’s fulness were met by Him in
grace, irrespective of what in the meetings was not of Him, and there received a
fulness of the Spirit not known before. Also it is quite believable that the
truly expectant found healing of the body. All this would call forth praise to
His holy name. Whatever features can he paralleled in the New Testament should
he received gratefully. But when it is urged that these features prove that the
“tongues”, “ prophecies,” ecstasies, visions were of God, then must be kept in
mind the mixed condition above indicated, and these startling additional
experiences must be tested, lest anything false has commingled with the true.
This necessary scruting was too much neglected, and, moreover. some had become
disqualified for exercising it by causes above suggested.

One singular feature of those earlier years was that Mrs. Boddy, who is reported
to have healed many, herself faded to be healed of a chronic and painful
disease. A Movement cannot be tested by those features which it has in common
with other Christians or bodies of Christians but only by the features peculiar
to itself. Adherence to true doctrine, love for Christ, zeal in spreading the
gospel, and similar conditions were not first generated in this Movement they
are found in equal vigour where no supernatural gifts have been claimed, and
cannot therefore be a guarantee that the latter are from God. It may not be so.
This examination of the first days of the Movement raises grave doubts as to
this with regard to the Movement as a whole, which doubt is confirmed when
details are examined.

One further matter deserves special mention because it provides a test in some
other vital questions. From the very first, and throughout all the early years,
there was persistent assertion that the second advent of Christ was just at
hand. From 1911 to 1917 there was given on the first page of “Confidence” a
brief summary of doctrines believed, which included “the soon-coming of the
Lord.” This imminency was emphasized in addresses, reports, and letters, so that
few pages of that magazine are without such a statement. This erroneous
expectation has been entertained by very many outside the Movement, but the
difference is that these believers generally set forth the view as no more than
their opinion of the meaning of Scripture, whereas in the Movement it was
announced as a Divine communication. In “tongues,” interpretations, prophecies,
and visions it was iterated and reiterated, as, for example, when in a vision of
Christ He was reported to have said He was coming soon and they were to tell
people this.

It is evident that the Lord never made this mis-statement. Fifty years have
passed and He is not here. It follows that the visions, tongues, and prophecies
which contained these unfounded statements were either not inspired at all, but
were merely the utterances of the natural mind, or else they were inspired by
lying spirits. Many of the utterances were quite precise, as that the Lord will
come “this year,” or within two years, or that this may be the last winter
before He comes. Few speaking from their own mind would be thus daring; it
suggests an outside foreign source or impulse, but this source could not have
been the Spirit of truth. This false prediction was so constant, so emphatic, so
universal as to constitute a major feature of the whole Movement from its start,
which forces serious doubt as to the energy animating it.

Quite apart from this Movement there is something startling, almost sinister, in
the way this false hope has seized vast numbers of truly godly persons. It has
been fostered by the equally unwarranted assertion that the apostles and the
early church expected the Lord to return at any time - so ought we not to
cherish the same hope? Yet it is abundantly clear that the first generation of
Christians that Christ would not return in their day - certainly 15not till
after Peter should have grown old and died (John 21:18-23). The Lord had
specifically warned the apostles against this very idea, saying, “Take heed that
no one lead you astray... for the end is not yet, not immediately” (Matthew
24:3-6; Luke 21:7-9). And Paul distinctly contemplated that false spirits and
even forged letters would seek to make Christians think that the day of the Lord
was already come (2 Thessalonians 2:1-4). The indulging of this false hope, ever
disproved from generation to generation, has served to bring into disrepute the
whole theme of the second Advent, which has served well the scheme of the powers
of darkness. It is regrettable that the Movement here in view served their ends
in this particular. It raises the whole question of the origin of the
supernatural element in the Movement, seeing that the error was inculcated by
persistent utterances alleged to have been given by supernatural agency. If the
power was supernatural, then it was evil; otherwise the utterances were not
supernatural as was claimed, and then the Movement from its beginning largely
loses its supernatural character as regards its two most distinctive features of
tongues and prophecies.

Yet without some supernatural agency it will be hard to account for much that
undoubtedly took place as recorded by this evidently honest witness, Frank
Bartleman. His book bears the impress of complete sincerity, and he was esteemed
by the contemporary actors in these events, as is shown by several cordial
references to him in “Confidence.”


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 56: 04.04-CHAPTER 4 THE CASE OF T. B. BARRATT
========================================================================

CHAPTER 4 THE CASE OF T. B. BARRATT IN MR. DONALD GEE’S painstaking history The
Pentecostal Movement it is said on page 19, paragraph (d), that

Truth must honestly admit that there were scenes in the first rush of new
spiritual enthusiasm and experience that no reputable Christian worker would now
seek to defend or excuse... There were, let it be quite frankly admitted, some
scenes of indisputable fanaticism. At the beginning there were few leaders with
sufficient experience of just this type of movement who could lay their hand on
extremists without fear of quenching the Spirit. That phase, however, has long
since passed. Most of the early fanaticism in the Pentecostal Movement arose
from the utmost sincerity, and in the midst of many mistakes hearts were right,
and therefore God was able steadily to bring things into a healthier condition.

Upon this I can but remark that the clear impression made at the time on me, as
a sympathetic observer, and endorsed by this present inquiry, is that the
acknowledged fanaticism and regrettable excesses were the dominant and
characteristic features of those days.

Mr. Gee sets forth the experience of T. B. Barratt, of Christiania, Norway, as
“typical of the experience of multitudes” (15), and as “a true and faithful
account of similar emotions and manifestations that, in varying measure, have
been enjoyed by many, many thousands all over the world”; and he adds that “ it
is these facts of quite definite and vivid experience that constitute the solid
core of the unique testimony of the Pentecostal Movement” (16). This is helpful,
and I am sure it is true to fact. It enables us, on the authority of the, I
think, most gifted teacher in the Movement, and its laborious historian, to
learn at once what is “unique” and characteristic of the whole Movement. From
the point of view of the Movement Mr. Barratt’s case at least was not one of the
experiences “that no reputable Christian worker would seek to defend;” it was
not an instance of “early fanaticism,” but was a typical genuine example of the
Movement. It occurred in its first year (1906) and was cited with approval as
late as 1940, when Mr. Gee’s history ends.

Mr. Barratt, while in New York, “received a wonderful baptism of the Holy Spirit
on October 7th, 1906.” Of this he gave his own “vivid account as follows, In a
letter in “Confidence” (Nov. 1912, p.260) Mr. Barratt said: “Cleansing on the
30th September, mighty baptism eight days after, on 15th November the full
Pentecost with tongues. Glory!” The events now described were therefore on Nov.
15th, 1906.

I was filled with light and such a power that I began to shout as loud as I
could in a foreign language. I must have spoken seven or eight languages to
judge from the various sounds and forms of speech used. I stood erect at times,
preaching in one foreign tongue after another, and I know from the strength of
my voice that 10,000 might easily have heard all I said... That night will never
be forgotten by any who were there. Now and then, after a short pause, the words
would rush forth like a cataract. That this was accepted by the Movement as of
God is shown by the facts that Mr. A. A. Boddy, of Sunderland, cited it in a
tract entitled How the Fire Fell, and that this was quoted freely in Cloud of
Witnesses to Pentecost in India, the organ of the Movement in that land. This
account informs us that only fifteen persons were present, and adds, in Mr.
Barratt’s words, these striking particulars The power came so suddenly and
powerfully that I lay on the floor speaking in tongues incessantly for some
time. In fact, I kept on, mostly speaking in tongues, singing and praying, with
very little intermission until 4 o’clock in the morning. [The power had fallen
at 12.30 midnight.] It seemed as if an iron hand laid over my jaws. Both jaws
and tongue were worked by this unseen power.

It is quite just that this be set forth as a typical experience of multitudes of
other persons. Its essential features were common and characteristic, of which
there is abundant testimony in “Confidence.” Let us consider some of these
features. The visitation, as described by its own subject, was marked by

1. Terrific and wholly unedifying noise. This is the first feature that Mr.
Barratt mentions. It has been one of the most marked and frequent facts in these
experiences, individual and collective. Is it produced by the Spirit of God, or
how is it caused? A quite small company of persons are together in a room.
Suddenly a man starts to shout at the top of his voice. The stentorian tones
could have been heard by ten thousand people. To what purpose was this in so
small a group? Who was built up in soul by this excessive noise? But what is not
unto spiritual upbuilding is not allowable in a Christian gathering: “Let all
things be done unto edifying” (1 Corinthians 14:26). In a meeting in Europe (not
in this circle) one prayed in this alarming manner. I asked him if his heavenly
Father were deaf that he roared thus in prayer.

If Paul had given way like this he could not have written the chapter just
quoted and concluded his exhortation with the command “Let all things be done
decently and in order” (ver. 40). Our Lord often preached to thousands, but it
were irreverent to suppose that He roared at the top of His voice. On the
contrary, He fulfilled the prophecy, “He will not cry, nor lift up His voice,
nor cause it to be heard in the street.” In that clear atmosphere there is no
need to shout, and we may be sure He did not do so.

2. Falling to the ground and talking there is another common feature of these
experiences. But the New Testament does not show it as a feature of apostolic
gatherings, but rather as exceptional (1 Corinthians 14:24-25).

3. Mr. Barratt said that he spoke in several foreign languages. No proof is
offered that the sounds were languages. It was assumed to be so, as shown by his
words, “to judge from the various sounds and forms of speech used.” No one
present seems to have understood these “languages” or to have testified on the
point. This also is a most common feature of the Movement. It is not at all
denied that at times languages have been spoken under inspiration: but in the
vast majority of meetings and cases there seems to be no proof.

4. Yet if Mr. Barratt did speak actual languages, there was no interpretation,
therefore no one was edified, and the exhibition was plainly contrary to the
unequivocal prohibition “if there be no interpreter let him keep silence in the
church” (1 Corinthians 14:28). This too was constantly repeated in the meetings
of the Movement.

5. A further feature specified by Mr. Barratt was extreme velocity of speech:
“the words would rush forth like a cataract.” Naturally they were not
interpreted: one cannot well interpret a cataract. This is a most dangerous and
well-marked feature of demon inspiration.

I have myself heard it (apart from this Movement) when there was no doubt that
its origin was evil. It also has been frequent in gatherings of the Movement.

6. This involves a further significant matter. The whole scene does indeed
testify that Mr. Barratt was seized and moved by some extraneous power. The
suddenness of the first outburst, the unreasonable deafening noise, the
irresistible control of the jaws, the furious rapidity of speech, all testify
that this good man was carried beyond himself. This again has been very
frequent. We shall notice it further. It is contrary to apostolic direction.
What a spectacle is here presented as being of God. A minister of the gospel
lying on the floor hour after hour, talking incessantly, sometimes springing to
his feet to shout abnormally. In ordinary life, should a usually normal person
thus behave he would be thought demented.

7. The apostolic direction quoted was that one speaking by the Holy Spirit in a
tongue, or prophesying, was to keep silence if there were no interpreter or
should a revelation be made to another sitting by (1 Corinthians 14:28-30). This
shows that the “gifted” person retained full control of the organs of speech and
could speak or be silent at will. The Spirit of God does not suppress or
supersede the natural faculties, though He employs and empowers 18them. In Mr.
Barratt’s case this was entirely reversed. An iron hand seemed to seize his jaws
and he could not but speak nor could he refrain from speaking. Self-control was
suspended. The first manifestations in England occurred in September, 1907, at
the church of All Saints, Monkwearmouth, Sunder-land, of which Mr. A. A. Boddy
was vicar. He had been to Los Angeles, to Mukti, India, and had also seen the
manifestations at Mr. Barratt’s, Christiania, and was seeking the like
visitation at Sunderland. One of the first to receive there this so longed-for
power described to me his experience. It corresponded closely to that of Mr.
Barratt in New York. He specified these particulars of his own case and that of
others. His jaws were suddenly gripped. He was compelled to speak and could
neither resist nor restrain the utterance. For hours at a time the sounds would
rush forth like a torrent. His voice became stentorian, though by nature he is
quiet and gentle; and this was a marked feature even in but a small room with
few present. It was taken for granted that he spoke in a language, though there
was no interpretation, and no one understood, so that no one was edified.
Persons frequently fell to the floor. This dear friend, was moved to bring many
into the like experience. Power passed from him to others. A Christian woman
told me that, kneeling in a waiting meeting, someone passed by and put a hand
upon her shoulder; immediately her whole body thrilled with powerful emotions.
It was the brother in question who had touched her. Speaking in tongues
followed, and she too told of the seizure of the jaws and the forced and
uncontrollable utterance that rushed forth. This abundantly confirms that T. B.
Barratt’s experience was typical. It shows that the Movement in general needed
to be tested as regards the source of the power that operated. That cannot be of
God which is contrary to His instructions.

Speaking with tongues, ravishing singing, exalted emotions are no final test of
what spirit is acting, for demons confer these upon their votaries. Nor is it
sufficient that, when out of these special hours, a person may be a zealous
Christian. It is natural that when the ecstasy ceases a sincere lover of Christ
should resume his usual testimony to Him. This last does not guarantee that the
special visitations are from Him or endorsed by Him. With all soberness it may
be said that the features specified by the subject of these experiences are
unsupported by the New Testament, and that the features demanded by Scripture,
such as decency, order, sobriety, self-control, with edification of others
present, were absent. The following excellent remarks are from a book
enthusiastically supporting the Movement, Carl Brumback’s What Meaneth This? It
is a recent work, dated 1946. On p.317 there is a section headed “Let all things
be done decently and in order,” and it is said, The Holy Spirit never renders
anyone incapable of self-control. “The spirits of the prophets are subject to
the prophets” (1 Corinthians 14:32). He does not cause a believer to act in any
way contrary to the Word which He has inspired. This means that all those who
possess the gifts of the Spirit should acquaint themselves thoroughly with the
Scriptural regulations for their manifestation, and seek to conform every
manifestation of the gifts to them. There is no real bondage in obedience to
these regulations, and no real liberty in casting them aside.

If these sound principles had ruled as early as 1906, such experiences as those
of T. B. Barratt would not have occurred, or occurring would have been
recognized as not being of God.

Mr. Gee tells us that “Mr. Barratt sailed from New York on December 8th, 1906,
and a great movement on Pentecostal lines began immediately he resumed his
ministry in Norway.” An interesting sidelight on this is given by one who had no
aversion to stirring meetings, William Booth of the Salvation Army. Writing from
Christiania only a month later (January 1907) he said

Soldiers’ and ex-Soldiers’ Meeting. Hall packed... talked with some power...
Great 19expectations for a proper smash - but alas! an old man broke out with a
wild incoherent prayer, and others in shouts of Hallelujah, and strange sounds
which are supposed to be some visitation of a Holy Spirit... These things took
attention away from what I was saying, and spoiled the result.

Nevertheless we had 74 out, many backsliders among them.

It appears that two or three Corps are divided on this question of “tongues”,
and it will be a good thing if abiding evil does not ensue. (William Booth,
Founder of the Salvation Army, ii. 374.)


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 57: 04.05-CHAPTER 5 WILLIAM BOOTH-CLIBBORN
========================================================================

CHAPTER 5 WILLIAM BOOTH-CLIBBORN

ARTHUR CLIBBORN married the eldest daughter of William Booth of the Salvation
Army, and took the name Booth-Clibborn. They had ten children, of whom William
was the fifth. He believed that his grandfather’s mantle fell on him. His father
was the means of his conversion, which blessed circumstance ought to be far more
frequent than it is. He was then twelve years of age, and for a time was a
vigorous witness for his Saviour. Presently this zeal cooled, as is often the
case with youthful converts. William has told his story in The Baptism of the
Holy Spirit (Edition 1929 ed. 3, 1944). Stripped of its rhetoric and rhapsody
the salient features are as follows. At the close of November 1908, and
therefore early in the Movement, the father took his son one Saturday evening
from Westcliff-on-Sea, where they lived, to London. In the train he dealt
solemnly with the lad about his “backsliding,” the waning of his testimony as a
Christian. The words took effect, and the boy reached the hall to which they
were going much occupied with his own state. During a hymn a lady in front of
him sat down weeping. A moment later she was speaking in a strange language. As
his father knew eight languages and himself five, he thought they might
understand her, but it was not so. Shortly she sank to her knees seemingly
overwhelmed with grief, groaning and praying in that strange language. it
occurred to William that this woman might possibly be praying for him, that God
had placed his condition upon her heart, and she was bearing his burden in the
Spirit (22, 23). This was of course a purely subjective idea of his own, for she
did not know him, nor did they know what she was saying.

Then a man behind, who had been rejoicing and laughing in the Spirit, suddenly
began to talk loudly in an unknown tongue. Interpretation followed, every word
of which searched this boy’s heart and left him filled with dismay and shame. He
says of the address that every word pierced his heart, and conviction tormented
him (26). He arose and pushed his way to the aisle. Of his own accord he found a
chair near the platform, knelt there oblivious of his surroundings, and wept and
wept and still wept. He must have wept by that chair from ten o’clock p.m. to
one in the morning. His father had his hand on his shoulder and was praying with
him. Finally the father definitely asked God to give the lad the comfort of
Divine forgiveness, and quoted 1 John 1:9 “If we confess our sins He is faithful
and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness”
(27, 30). The consciousness of pardon was granted.

Deep conviction is good, but was it necessary that a mere boy should be
tormented so long? Might not the blessed Spirit have gladly spoken peace sooner
had those words of peace been spoken earlier? The account adds that it must have
been past one o’clock in the morning before he rose from his knees, and he says,
“In the hollow of that chair I can still see the big pool of my tears” (30).

Here evidently was one of those keenly emotional natures peculiarly susceptible
to the powerful excitements incident to such a Movement. This is seen in an
earlier picture of that night of distress. His father sat down beside him and
endeavoured to appease his cries for forgiveness. He had completely forgotten
his whereabouts, complained aloud of his condition and lamented his
backslidings. He would not be comforted: “I put my arms around him and wept in
his bosom. I said, ‘Let me weep’” (28).

After this midnight of nervous tension he could hardly speak. Of the hotel
breakfast he scarcely partook, yet was feasting, as he says. They went early to
a private house near London. It was Sunday. There was a morning service, the
Lord’s Supper, a long talk with another lad who had received his “baptism,” and
an evening service followed: a pretty full day after a tiring night. The moment
prayer was called he dropped to his knees and forgot himself and his whereabouts
(36). Again a lady was prostrated upon her face before God, weeping and
groaning, and again he could feel that her struggling intercession was for him.

Presently he clapped his hands; from his inner being there poured forth a
growing, rushing torrent of prayer-praise like a swollen mountain stream; there
were fresh tears of bittersweet regret, followed by a flood of joy and he began
to laugh and laugh and laugh until he cried for very joy (40, 41). He tells us
that the noise he bad been making predominated in the meeting (43). The leader
of the gathering was an accredited missionary of the Movement and was on his way
to Egypt to spread the fire. He laid his hands on the boy’s head and throat and
prayed, and shortly he was singing in a beautiful language entirely foreign to
him. His shouts and praises mingled with the most intoxicating laughter, and his
tongue raced like “the pen of a ready writer” (Psalms 45:1). Heavenly angelic
choirs gave the roar of a glorious diapason. He listened enthralled by those
rhapsodies, whilst new rivers of burning tears flooded down his cheeks. Again
and again he burst in renewed vigour to take up the angelic theme. His body
tossed back and forth, sympathetically swinging to the peals of melodious
thunder that coursed in rending, tearing crashes through him. He sung till it
seemed his physical heart would stop. His uplifted arms kept beating time to the
majestic tempo of that celestial song (47, 48). Be it remembered that this is
the ecstatic, exciting experience of a schoolboy of fifteen years, and this is
his own description of it. In addition to the severe emotional tension of the
preceding night and day, this occasion had lasted four and a half hours. Let the
reader consider whether there is in the New Testament anything remotely
resembling this as accompanying the Baptism in the Holy Spirit. The Movement has
ever used Pentecost, Samaria and Ephesus (Acts 2; Acts 8; Acts 10; Acts 19) as
the Scripture basis for their “baptism;” but those scriptures show an immediate
bestowal of tongues with no previous prolonged and strenuous exercises of the
above character, and no such extravagancies as shouting, weeping, singing, and
uncontrollable, intoxicating laughter. It seems clear from his book that,
neither at the time nor later, did the writer give thought to the fact of there
being no New Testament parallel.

It is now well after midnight, nearly two in the morning, and someone told
William that before retiring refreshments would be served in the next room. The
dear friends solicitously helped him to his feet, still speaking in tongues. He
says that he was drenched, wet from head to foot with perspiration and endless
weeping, disheveled, and reeling like one intoxicated, and thus he staggered to
his place at table. Finally every one rose to retire, but he was so drunk with
the Spirit that when he tried to ascend the stairs he could not succeed until he
was assisted up. And he just lay in bed laughing irrepressibly.

It is this poor bedraggled, disheveled, exhausted boy who presents himself as a
brilliant example of being baptized in the third Person of the ever-blessed
Trinity! And his reeling, staggering, laughing, crying, singing, and shouting
are declared to be results of the presence of Him who develops in us the high
virtue of self-control (Galatians 5:22). And so profound and indelible was the
impression that thirty-six years later it still dominated him and he issued the
third edition of his book commending his early experience. The next morning
father and son went into the City (London). Picture the scene as the son gives
it. The boy could not refrain from singing in the unknown tongue. His father
begged him to tone down; but it was impossible: it seemed positively wrong to
quench the Spirit! So his father told him to shut his eyes. like a blind man,
and he would lead him and tell him when the pavement dropped or rose, so that he
should not stumble. So he shut himself in with God (!), singing and talking in
the new tongue to his heart’s content. He tells us that many stood staring,
wondering what on earth was affecting him, or possibly, he thinks, sad to see
another victim of the liquor evil. But when two “bobbies” began to move towards
them the father acted promptly. He hailed a taxi, dumped the boy in, and to the
driver’s inquiry, “Where?” he shouted: “Anywhere! never mind! go on!” The driver
drove 22furiously, and they praised the Lord all the way to the next meeting, to
which presently the father directed the driver. Would the inspired prophet add
the comment, “This also cometh forth from Jehovah of hosts?” (Isaiah 28:29).

Presently they went home, and the youth set himself to lead into the same
experience every member of the household, brothers, sisters, governess, and
others. In this he shortly succeeded. Meetings were held in the house nightly,
with the heavenly singing, deliriums of tears, tongues, and prophesyings, which
declared the approaching end of the age and described phases of the coming of
our Lord in glory. Presently Mrs. Booth-Clibborn came home, was captured by the
meetings, kneeled in front of her own boy, begged him to pray for her also,
lifted his hand on to her head and said, “Lord, give me this blessing, too.”
Whether she was “baptized” the narrative does not say; but it seems singular
that Mr. Booth-Clibborn did not share the “baptism” at that time nor for at
least three years after, for it is stated in “Confidence” for June, 1911, that
he declared that he would not be satisfied till he had done so. The meetings in
the house would go on till the small hours of the morning, and the noise caused
such consternation among the neighbours that a petition, signed by many, asked
that the clamour should cease or be controlled. Even this did not raise in their
minds the inquiry whether disturbing the neighbours by night could he pleasing
to God, but quilts and blankets were fastened over windows and doors, and the
“heavenly music” went on unabated. The literature of the Movement mentions that
the first person in England to receive the “baptism” was a Mrs. Price. This lady
visited the family and confirmed that the work was of the Holy Spirit, and later
she wrote a commendatory foreword to the book in question. But this only raises
doubts as to her own spiritual discernment and wisdom.

Later father and son toured in Europe and saw such scenes repeated on a large
scale. In view of the adverse judgment one has been obliged to form as to
William Booth-Clibborn’s own experience, as given by himself, one cannot but
extend the same estimate to the similar experience into which he led others.
Moreover, inasmuch as this is a fair sample of much that marked those early
years, the same doubts must arise as to the Movement as a whole. Arthur
Booth-Clibborn was an acknowledged figure in the Movement: “Confidence”
contained numerous articles by him and Bartleman quoted him. At the Sunderland
conferences he sometimes interpreted speakers from the Continent. It seems
singular that among people who claimed to be in succession from Pentecost there
should be need of uninspired interpretation, or that their missionaries should
need to learn languages, as was the case. By the vivid narrative here employed
the reader has been enabled to attend a public meeting of the Movement and a
midnight house party, as described by a principal figure in both. He has seen a
mere youth weep and lament by the hour, until the chair was a pool of tears. He
has watched him lying on the drawing room floor sweating, weeping, singing,
shouting, laughing till the noise dominated the gathering. He has seen a lad of
fifteen so enfeebled as to be unable to struggle to his feet or to walk to the
table, or to get up the stairs without aid: and so overwrought as to be unable
to sleep all night: and so out of control that he could not restrain himself in
the public street. All this is part of the picture of the early days of the
Movement.

It may be that my reader will grieve with me that a company of respectable and
Christian men and women could be so deluded as to regard such doings as wrought
by the Spirit who gives rest and self-restraint and who directs that gatherings
of saints should be marked by decency and order. My reader may wonder that such
a mature public worker as Arthur Booth-Clibborn should find satisfaction in his
own son passing through such a degrading experience, reducing him to
helplessness of body and nerves. Yet, when the matter of imminent school
examinations came up the next morning after the night described, he declared
that the lad had been too hopelessly blessed to be any good as a student, and
that this was not a time for school, for “once we have tasted of this wine we
are as incurable as drunkards! We always want more” (53, 54).

So, then, this “baptism” disinclines from concentrated study. Is this part of
the explanation of the feature, mentioned elsewhere, that the Movement has
produced so very few competent teachers? For naturally there would be
disinclination to such strenuous subjects as Biblical languages, customs,
history, and doctrine. One who is too intoxicated to study will avoid philology
and archaeology.

Considering how deeply infatuated the father was, it was remarkable that he had
to seek long without receiving the “baptism.” Of a well-known leader in America
it is told that he, too, had to wait and seek for two years. Is the Head of the
church sometimes unwilling to give the Spirit to them that ask Him? Neither
Pentecost, Caesarea, nor Ephesus were marked by “tarrying” meetings, where
strenuous and sustained effort was required. It is true that for ten days the
120 continued in steadfast prayer: but this could not have involved agonizing
strain of spirit to secure the anointing, for the Lord had promised definitely
that they should receive the Spirit before many days, so that they would have
waited in assured, if eager, expectation. At Caesarea and Ephesus there was no
waiting at all. Prolonged tension of mind is not needful to the securing of the
promise of the Father, but is a frequent preparation for the reception of a
false spirit, as in avowed demonism.


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 58: 04.06-CHAPTER 6 INDIA AND LONDON
========================================================================

CHAPTER 6 INDIA AND LONDON THE MOVEMENT commenced in Los Angeles in 1906. By the
next year it was spreading rapidly in India. Bartleman wrote of Wales as the
cradle of the Movement, India as the Nazareth where it was brought up, and Azuza
Street as the place of its full display.

Early in 1907 Mr. and Mrs. A. G. Garr, of Los Angeles, reached Calcutta. Their
meetings were marked by characteristic features already considered. That
well-known servant of Christ, Lord Radstock, was at that time in Calcutta and
strongly disapproved of the meetings. Sundry missionary brethren and sisters
became entangled, yet some for only a short time. In India its principal
advocate was Max Wood Moorhead, editor of the periodical mentioned, Cloud of
Witnesses to Pentecost in India. The third number was dated October 12th, 1907.
The Movement promptly ventured on an audacious prophecy. There lies before me a
copy of the handbill that first announced this. It reads, A MESSAGE FROM GOD
given September 23rd, 1907 (The) Spirit saith - JUDGMENT IS COMING (in) ten
months- COLOMBO EARTHQUAKE FIRST CEYLON SUNK (IN) SEA This reached Mr. Moorhead
in Ceylon, who repeated the whole handbill, of which the above was the
beginning, in the issue of his magazine mentioned. He stated that the message
was given through a Swedish missionary, and that her fellow lady workers had
received confirmation of it. He gave a lengthy account of how by tongues and
interpretations the prophecy was confirmed to him on four occasions. The
destruction was fixed for October 16 and 17. Many fled from the City. Mr. Garr
and his party departed for Hong Kong.

It is obvious that from the first a lying spirit was deluding members of the
Movement in India, including its principal leader. It is instructive to learn
how leaders endeavored to parry the blow at the prestige of the Movement. Six
months later T. B. Barratt was in India. On the 16th May, 1908, he wrote from
Coonoor, Nilgiri Hills, to A. A. Boddy as follows, which Mr. Boddy published in
a Supplement to “Confidence” dated June, 1908, headed “Important Letters from
Pastor Barratt and Others.” Mr. Barratt said, Of course, mistakes have been made
here in India as elsewhere. The Apostles even made mistakes after “Pentecost.”
But the Lord is taking us on and teaching us in His wonderful school daily. The
prophecy concerning Colombo was a mistake. Mr. Moorhouse (head) also very
emphatically acknowledged it. [But his acknowledgment was by no means so
immediate or spontaneous as could have been expected. One who was at that time
intimate with him informs me that it was only after long and severe pressure by
himself that Moorhead at last acknowledged his false position.] But our
adversaries are constantly trying to find fault and and make a tremendous noise
at every mistake thus made, as if the whole Revival were to blame for it. They
ought to mind mind their own “P’s and Q’s.” On the other hand, it ought to teach
our friends NOT TO LISTEN OR FOLLOW EVERY VOICE THEY HEAR. The Devil’s voice was
also heard among the “Sons of God (Job 1:6-9), and you find that he was there
for no good purpose. He never is.

That’s where the gift of discernment is to be applied, and 1 John 4:1-4. Where
“voices” or a “voice” is heard, or some intense impression received to do this
or that, let us put the PASSWORD to the power influencing us before allowing it
to enter. Every evil spirit or demon is AFRAID OF THE BLOOD OF JESUS. IT ACTS
LIKE POISON TO THEM. Spiritualists hate it, which is a very good proof. And no
evil power will recognize Christ as having come in the flesh or acknowledge Him
as King and Lord (1 Corinthians 12:3).

Then we are PERFECTLY SAFE, having been sprinkled with the Blood and are kept by
HIS POWER.

Ought Mr. Barratt to have been indignant that lookers-on took notice of this
prophecy? The Movement had suddenly thrust itself forward as blessed with a
revival of supernatural gifts of tongues, interpretations, and prophecies. Was
it of no significance for the public that so early a palpably false prophecy was
spread over the land? Very plainly it was everybody’s business not to be misled.
And was the matter a mere “mistake”? and if so, whose mistake was it? Mr.
Moorhead affirmed categorically that the prophecy was given in tongues to a
Christian woman, was confirmed by at least two others, and was re-affirmed
supernaturally to himself on four occasions. It were extraordinary that so many
persons, on so many occasions, made exactly the same “mistake.” It were
wonderful, if it were only a mistake, that the Lord did not enlighten them, or
the very many that read the prophecy, during the weeks that intervened before
the date predicted, but left them all to be undeceived by the failure. There is
no explanation but that a spirit deceived them and kept them deceived. This Mr.
Barratt virtually admitted by adding his strong warning against being misled by
evil spirits. In the spring and summer of that year, 1908, that Mr. Barratt was
there the centre of the Movement was at Coonoor, the lovely district on the
Nilgiri Hills where English officials and others resided, or gathered for the
hot season. Christian workers from all parts of India resorted thither, and it
was a spiritually strategic centre. From April of the next year again, 1909, I
was there for many months. The failure of the prophecy had called a halt in the
Movement, but from several godly persons who had been at the meetings the
previous year I received separate and accordant descriptions. Each told of the
terrific noise, by sounds like those of birds and beasts, tame and wild, human
and non-human, roared forth by many at once. And they spoke of men and women
grovelling on the ground, and of ladies going around arranging the skirts of
women rolling and kicking on the floor, or covering them with shawls. These
facts have been lately confirmed to me in writing by one who was present.

Such indecent doings were not limited to India. In November 1913 a report
reached me of young women similarly rolling on the floor at meetings in Bedford
connected with Mr. Cecil Polhill. Leaders of the Movement have expressed
surprise at the opposition it encountered in those early days, but such
regrettable conduct could not but provoke hostility from right-minded people not
blinded and warped by the power provoking these improprieties.

There were resident at Coonoor a godly man and his wife of social standing and
refinement. They were universally esteemed as Christians. I had happy spiritual
fellowship with them, which was not hindered by the fact that they were leaders
in this Movement. At his “baptism” he spoke in tongues “only a few syllables and
this was quite sufficient to bring forth Hallelujahs and shoutings, etc, at
about midnight, which we heard in ‘Ochtertyre’,” a mile or more away. Thus
writes to me an actor in the events of that early time. I told them what had
been told me of the doings at the meetings the year before, of which there could
be no doubt seeing that so many had given separately the identical details.
Their reply startled me. It was that they had been at the meetings but had never
seen such doings. Their sincerity could not be doubted, but how could their
ignorance be explained?

We will pursue this interesting inquiry in England. A notable early convert to
the Movement was Mr. Cecil PoIhill mentioned. He owned Howbury Hall, Bedford,
and was wealthy. He was deservedly in high repute in evangelical circles. He was
one of the 26”Cambridge Seven,” University men whose united going forth to China
as evangelists was the sensation of its time, and he had a long record of
devoted labour in that land. He received his “baptism” at Los Angeles, and
forthwith devoted time and wealth to forwarding the Movement in England. To this
end in 1908 he took No. 9 Gloucester Place, in the west end of London, which
house was for a time the London centre. Mrs. Boddy and other chief leaders
helped in these meetings. Mr. Boddy wrote in “Confidence” (Nov. 1908. p.10: Dec.

1908. p.7) that “visitors to the meetings... write and speak very thankfully of
these gatherings... they have been a help to many.” But there lies before me a
very different account by a member of the household. Mrs. Polhill had died and
her sister was keeping house for Mr. Polhill and caring for his two children of
nine and five years. This was Miss Annie W. Marston. a lady well known and
esteemed among evangelical people. She wrote an account of matters at 9
Gloucester Place, addressed to Miss E. Ada Camp, Principal of Carfax Missionary
College, Bristol, who showed the letter to me. It read:

We have shut up Howbury and have all, that is Mr. Polhill and I, the governess,
the two little girls of five and nine, and half the servants - come here into
the filthiest, dingiest hole I ever stepped into, to stay till just before
Christmas, simply and only that Mr. P. may push this tongues movement in London,
where all its adherents flock round him and flatter him, for no other reason I
am convinced, and on very good grounds, than because they want his money.

Howbury Hall was a stately country mansion, in lovely surroundings. How came it
that its owner took his family to stay in a house that could be described as a
filthy, dingy hole?He had abundant means and surely could have secured another
type of house. The step suggests some abnormal influence at work upon a
gentleman of his type and standing. The letter continued,

If you could live in this house for a month and see the effect of going into
this thing, you would never wonder again whether it is of God or not. Mr. C. G.
Moore [a notable evangelical clergyman of that time], wasn’t one bit too strong
when he said to me some months ago, “It comes straight from the pit.” This house
is swarming with them, between fifty and sixty in a day sometimes; rolling and
kicking, bellowing, rattling, cackling, singing, shouting, in tongues and
without tongues, with words and without words: shaking the whole house and
making such noises that you cannot get away from the sound of them.

All the servants and the governess are in a state of terror.

I told Mr. P. that I really believed that it would kill the elder of the two
little girls... but he only laughed... The governess says she would not stay in
the house half an hour if I left, and I believe the servants would go too. and
what would happen to these poor mites? Their father seldom sees them more than a
quarter of an hour a day, sometimes not that...

They had Mr. Boddy at Howbury for a week. He is dreadful.

Mr. A. A. Boddy was the son of a clergyman, himself for some years a solicitor,
and later a clergyman. What influence was at work upon this cultivated Christian
gentleman that he should leave this painful impression upon his hostess, a
cultured Christian lady? Personally, and apart from these special doings, he was
quite otherwise, an attractive, much-liked gentleman. I have talked with some
who knew him well, one of whom was one of his spiritual children. And what
influence was at work upon another gentleman such as Mr. Polhill that he should
be inattentive to his little children? The letter continued,

Mr. P. spends thousands of pounds on it, and they would like to get thousands
more. A gentleman who was up in such matters said to me yesterday, “This well
end, you will see, either in immorality or insanity.” It has ended in both ways
already in many, many cases. Of this last assertion I received written
confirmation from a member of the China Inland Mission in Shansi. north China,
dated in 1913, from personal knowledge of the Movement there. The Pentecostal
Missionary Union was formed in January 1909, the chief promoters being Messrs.
Boddy and Polhill. The first worker sent out was one of a family known to me. As
early as December 1911 her death was announced in “Confidence.” It stated only
that “she has not been strong of late,” and added, “Thou shalt know hereafter.”
It was not made known that this friend died in deep nervous prostration, though
in only early womanhood.

One of the family circle described it to me as “tragic.” An older sister, also a
missionary, though not of this Mission, plunged heart and soul into these
exhausting experiences and died in similar mental collapse. Thus were two truly
devoted women worn out prematurely.

There is no need to wait till “hereafter” to understand these sad events. An
excess of current burns the wire.

Miss Marston’s sombre account of those meetings was confirmed to me by her
sister Miss Selina Marston. She endorsed it in detail. She had attended the
meetings and spoke of the abnormal noises, the confusion, the terror of the
servants, and added that passers by would stop to listen, and that even the
police loitered about as if thinking they would be needed within. It was
pandemonium.

Here, then, is the same contradiction as at Coonoor; meetings marked by dire
confusion and disorder, but godly persons not discerning this. It is evident
that two Christian sisters would not invent such a story concerning the house of
their relative; the facts are not to be disputed. It must be taken as equally
certain that Mrs. Boddy and others would not deliberately, fabricate a totally
false account of the gatherings. It seems clear that while in the meetings they
lived in a subjective world of their own, which concealed from them the
unpleasant doings around. But has the human mind a native power that it can live
so isolated and concentrated, cut off from pressing realities around, and in an
unreal world?

There is another possible explanation. In 1875 Colonel H. F. Olcott collaborated
with Mme. H. P. Blavatsky in New York to found the Theosophical Society. The
object was to extinguish the light of Christianity by diffusing in the West the
darkness of Eastern Theosophy. The history of this Movement is given in Olcott’s
Old Diary Leaves, the True History of the Theosophical Society. Speaking of
Mine. Blavatsky’s doings as a powerful medium Olcott narrates (pp. 46, 47) that
he saw her go into a room and watched and waited for her to come out, which she
did not do. After some time he entered the room and looked round for her, but
she was not there. Yet there was only one door in the apartment. He adds:

After a while she calmly came out of her room into the passage and returned to
the sitting room with me...

I was the subject of a neat experiment in mental suggestion... H.P.B. had simply
inhibited my organs of sight from perceiving her presence, perhaps within two
paces of me in the room... the superior neatness of Oriental over Western
hypnotic suggestion is that in such cases as this, the inhibitory effect upon
the subject’s perceptive organs results from mental, not spoken, command or
suggestion. The subject is not put on his guard to resist the illusion, and it
is done before he has the least suspicion of any experiment that is being made
at his expense.

Olcutt declares that Mme. Blavatsky did the same on other occasions. This avowed
enemy of Christ was confessedly the conscious agent of various powerful spirits
who acted through her.

Scripture gives definite instances of the exercise by heavenly beings of this
power of inhibiting the faculties of men. A gang of Sodomites were determined to
break into Lot’s house, but the two angels who had come to him “smote the men
that were at the door of the house with blindness, both small and great, so that
they wearied themselves to find the door” (Genesis 19:11). Had this been
absolute physical blindness they would scarcely have persevered in their
attempt; but with the inner vision blurred they could not find a door though all
around it.

Similarly in 2 Kings 6:17-20. A detachment of Syrian soldiers had been sent to
Dothan 28to seize Elisha the prophet. His servant was greatly alarmed, but in
answer to Elisha’s request, “God opened the eyes of the young man; and he saw,
and behold the mountain was full of horses and chariots of fire round about
Elisha.” Gehazi’s physical sight was not affected, for he saw the Syrians; but
an inner sight was granted to him to see things ordinarily invisible.

Conversely, in answer to the prayer of the prophet, the Syrians were smitten
with blindness (2 Kings 6:18 twice; the same word as in Genesis 19:11, its only
occurrences). Yet this was not physical blindness, for they followed the prophet
some fifteen miles from Dothan to Samaria; yet, without knowing it, they passed
through the gates of a walled city and saw not their perilous situation until,
in answer to a further prayer of Elisha, their “eyes were opened, and they saw;
and behold, they were in the midst of Samaria”; that is, the inhibition was
removed and natural perception was restored. I thought of this incident when
passing through the massive bastions that now flank the entrance to the ruins of
that ancient capital. A vivid recent example of this suspension of faculties in
modern heathendom is given by George Patterson in God’s Fool (Faber. London,
1956, p.137). On entering the low door of the room the sight that met our eyes
was like some hellish exaggeration of the Macbeth witches’ scene. Around the
walls of the room were squatting ten old women and one old man chanting some
incantation in high-pitched monotone, and then dropping to a droning repetition
of ’Om Mani Padme Hum,’ their magic prayer-formula. Although their eyes were
open they gazed unseeingly in front of them and paid no attention to us as we
entered hesitantly and sat down on the floor beside them. They had put
themselves into a trance by their incantations, and although their bodies moved
rhythmically sideways, like pendulums, to the rhythm of their chant, they were
not conscious of anything happening in that room at all.

It would appear that in Coonoor and in London powerful spirits of darkness
inhibited the perceptive faculty, and good people did not see or hear the
realities under their eyes, but were caused to see unrealities as real. Their
bona fides need not be questioned; but their own unconsciousness of the dire
confusion in which they participated, with their contrary supposition that the
gatherings were heavenly in character, had, it is to be feared, the same dread
origin. In the early records there are glowing, and I am sure sincere, accounts
of the start of the Movement in a certain seaside resort in England. In the
course of years I made inquiries of Christian residents who remembered those
days. The report was, as usual of the common distracting noises at the meetings.
The leading evangelist of the Movement went around with his tent and established
some centres. A resident in one area passing at night the house where the group
met, heard the usual alarming sounds and peered through a window. The noises
proceeded from a number of men whose condition was such that decency forbids
description. One known to me had gone to live in that district specially to
share in the meetings. It is small wonder that the end was mental collapse.

Two coincident features are thus met: rapturous accounts by participants in the
gatherings, with very opposite features when the details can be tested. After
forty-five years further reflection I have found no other explanation than the
fore-going of the contradiction involved, gladly as I would do so. It is evident
that the testimony of persons under this influence, as to what went on with and
around them, is eminently unreliable. This may apply to a vast mass of narrative
found in the literature of the Movement.


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 59: 04.07-CHAPTER 7 TESTING THE SPIRITS
========================================================================

CHAPTER 7 TESTING THE SPIRITS

ANOTHER FEATURE which early caused me to doubt the Movement was a frequent
unreadiness to test the spirits acting and an unwillingness of the spirits to be
tested.

Occasionally leaders uttered such a warning and exhortation as that of T. B.
Barratt quoted in the preceding chapter, but I recall no instance in the
literature of such a test being made, nor did I ever hear of a case. No one
seems to have thought of testing the source of Mr. Barratt’s behaviour at the
time of his “baptism.” It appears to have just been taken for granted that it
was of God which assumption has been too general. I had an early and somewhat
painful experience. An intimate personal friend went heart and soul into the
Movement. Against the wish of her godly husband she went to live near one of the
first and most violent centres. Presuming on our friendship I asked her to read
a manuscript of mine discussing some aspects of the matter. It was returned
unread with the scarcely polite remark, “The Lord will not let me read a thing
like that!” What “lord” moved her to pen such a reply, or thus to shun
investigation? Of herself she would have been too courteous to have so written.

Some were afraid to test the spirit because it affirmed itself to be the Holy
Spirit of God, and to test it would amount to the unpardonable sin. But the
Spirit of God has said expressly, “Beloved, believe not every spirit, but prove
the spirits, whether they are of God, because many false prophets are gone out
into the world” (1 John 4:1). Therefore a spirit that declines to be tested does
thereby reveal itself to be an evil spirit, and one can but see its deceiving
power in that any believer does not recognize this. Many have beguiled
themselves, or been beguiled, by reasoning that they had asked the heavenly
Father for bread, and would He give them a stone? Most certainly He would not:
but a deceiving spirit, if untested, would gladly do this, and would delude its
victim with the notion that a stone is a loaf! There is no limit to the folly of
a spirit-blinded Christian.

Moreover, a beguiling spirit may exert a subtle power to induce its victim to
reject even conclusive testimony against itself, of which the following is an
instance. In the very first days of the Movement in Sunderland another clergyman
was an enthusiastic supporter. He was the Rev. J. M. Pollock, brother to Mrs. A.
A. Boddy. He told me the following facts and confirmed them in writing. The
small son of a neighbour was sick. Mrs. Boddy received in “tongues” intimation
that the child would recover and be well. She requested her brother to take this
comforting news to the father. On the way the “power” fell on Mr. Pollock and by
“tongues” and interpretation he received confirmation of the message: but on
reaching the house he learned that the boy was already dead!

He pressed upon his sister that it was evidently a deceiving spirit that was
operating; but she, upon recovering from the first shock, said that she had
received the explanation.

They had misunderstood the message, the true import of which was that the boy
was to be well in the other world, not in this world! As if it needed a special
revelation to tell them this about a little child! By accepting this obvious
evasion this leading actor in the Movement at its British centre was more deeply
blinded and firmly fettered.

Mr. Pollock abandoned the Movement, but was long fiercely harassed by the evil
agents he had repudiated. It was some years before they ceased to torment his
spirit.

Naturally it is in the light of this fact, early made known to me. that I have
been compelled to consider with much care later experiences of this estimable
sister in Christ, lest she should have been further beguiled from time to time.
And the same caution has been constantly required seeing that testing the
spirits has been so generally neglected.


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 60: 04.08-CHAPTER 8 FALSE DOCTRINE
========================================================================

CHAPTER 8 FALSE DOCTRINE

THERE WAS ALSO A DOCTRINAL ELEMENT that made me at first hesitant as to the
Movement and presently decided me against it. It was laid down very definitely
that to speak with a “tongue” was the indispensable sign that a person had been
baptized in the Holy Spirit. This was the general view in the English-speaking
world. On the Continent leaders mostly allowed that other signs might prove the
anointing. Perhaps no other factor contributed so powerfully to urge earnest
souls to seek passionately this one sign. It mattered nothing that most of God’s
mightiest servants through the centuries had not received it, though their work
was manifestly done through the fulness of the power of the Spirit and could not
have been done without it. It did not count that the New Testament does not show
that the vast majority of the apostolic believers ever spoke in a tongue.

Three instances in Acts, spread over twenty five years (Pentecost. ch. 2,
Caesarea, ch. 10, and Ephesus, ch. 19), were assumed to be proof that the many
thousands of other believers did so speak in a tongue. I could not feel that the
Spirit of truth was the author of such dubious exegesis.

It could be urged to the contrary that in 1 Corinthians 12:29-30 the apostle
asked a series of questions each of which demands a negative answer: “Are all
apostles? (No!); are all prophets? (No!); are all teachers? (No!); are all
workers of miracles? (No!); have all gifts of healings? (No!); do all speak with
tongues? (No!): do all interpret? (No!).” To meet this objection it was asserted
that in this passage, and in ch. 14, Paul was speaking of the permanent use of
tongues, not of the initial baptism. This, however, would involve an impossible
contradiction. As to the regular continuous gift, the Lord laid down
peremptorily that its use must be marked by self-control, decency, and order;
but, according to the manifestations in the Movement, the initial gift was all
too often marked by absence of self-control, indecency. and disorder. Such a
manner of avoiding a difficulty confirmed me that the Spirit of God was not the
Teacher of these teachers, as regards this dogma, which they held as vital. To
support the distinction between the initial and the permanent gifts it has been
urged that in 1 Corinthians 14:27 it is ordered that in the church speaking in
tongues was to be “in turn,” not two or more together; but that at Pentecost
(Acts 2) they all spoke simultaneously. But where does the narrative say this?
The saints then gathered were the church of that time and the rule as to order
should apply. Moreover, had 120 men and women been all talking at the same time
it would have been difficult for the hearers each to pick out his own language.
For long the Movement in general insisted on these doctrines, though some have
now wisely abandoned them. In this connection it ever seemed to me remarkable
how very few really capable teachers grew up in the Movement, judging from its
extensive literature. Testifiers and exhorters abounded; few showed even natural
aptitude for teaching, not to say a spiritual gift for it. In a Movement
claiming quite special enduement of the Spirit it should have been the reverse
of this, seeing that teachers are one of the distinct gifts of the ascended Lord
(Ephesians 4:11), this gift being of far more general value than the use of
tongues. But far more serious doctrinal error developed. On January 24th. 1918,
J. Holland, an earnest Christian, who went to prison for his conscientious
objection to military service, told me that he had been a member at a Mission at
Caeran, Glamorganshire. In 1910 or 1911, and thus quite early in the Movement, a
group of members of the Movement who belonged to that district, but who had, he
believed, been to Sunderland, came to the Mission, and one of them, speaking at
the gospel service 31declared that Christ surrendered His deity on becoming man
and only resumed it after His resurrection. The others of his party supported
their speaker. The outcome was division in the Mission. But there was a
doctrinal lapse more serious and distressing because it occurred at the chief
centre of the Movement in England and was uttered by one of its chief persons.
In 1909 there was an International Congress at Sunderland, the proceedings at
which were reported in Mr. Boddy’s magazine “Confidence” (June 1909, 132, 133).
One of the speakers was Mrs. Boddy. It may be remarked that she spoke as a
teacher, her address being the expounding of a doctrinal theme. From 1
Corinthians 11:4-5, it is clear that women as well as men were used by the
Spirit in praying and prophesying in the church: but from 1 Timothy 2:12, it is
equally clear that women were not to teach in the church; the reason being that
the office of teacher carries authority, and the woman is not to rule over the
man. This direction should have prevented the present feature in the Assemblies
of God branch of the Movement that they now have women “pastors.” In those very
early days there were several very prominent women teachers who, with the
concurrence of the brethren, simply ignored the injunction in 1 Timothy 2:12. At
the Congress mentioned Mrs. Boddy offered instruction upon the topic “Everything
Yielded to Death,” and she said, We must remember that our Lord was the God man.
He was human though without sin, but so controlled by the Divine Spirit of God
that of Himself “He could no nothing.”

Everything He did was to fulfill the Scriptures. He was the living Word carrying
out the Written Word, and giving the world the pattern of a God-possessed man.
Step by step He brought everything human under the power of God. The last thing
He did was to commend His own Spirit unto the Father, having proclaimed to
Heaven and Hell in “It is Finished” the stupendous fact that on the Cross
everything carnal had been brought to an end and there remained only a body born
of incorruptible seed, “begotten out of God,” soon to be “raised by the glory of
the Father” to be “the firstborn of many brethren.”

Obviously this is utterly subversive of the truth as to the human nature and
body of the Lord Jesus. It was not His “Spirit” that He gave up to the Father at
death, but it was His “spirit,” that human spirit with which He had been endowed
at birth as is every child of a woman. From His Divine Spirit He was, of course,
inseparable in the unity of Deity. Then again, if it was only step by step that
He brought everything human under the power of God, then most of His life there
was that in Him which was not subordinate to God. If it was not till the cross
that everything carnal was brought to an end, then all His days there was the
carnal in Him; and, by consequence, not earlier than the cross was He fit to
atone for our sins, nor could have been wholly well-pleasing to the Father. Had
the speaker understood and meant what she said, then the painful fact would have
been that a person prominent in the Movement uttered fundamental heresy as to
the Person of Christ, and taught the error publicly at an international
gathering of the Movement. But other utterances of Mrs. Boddy show that this was
not so. Indeed, she began here by stating the truth that our Lord was without
sin, which, however, she at once contradicted. It is not likely that she was a
trained theologian. The alternative is that another spirit than her own used her
unconsciously to teach falsehood as to the humanity of the Son of God. This,
however, confirms that at the start of the Movement, and at its very heart in
England, a lying spirit was operating.

Many statements by Mr. Boddy show that he was wholly true as to the person of
our Lord; he appears to have been a sound evangelical clergyman. Now as a
clergyman he had been trained in theology: how was it, then, that he did not at
once detect this fundamental falsehood, but went on to publish it in his
magazine?

Again, Los Angeles, the place of origin of the Movement, had a magazine, “The
Upper Room.” In the issue for August that year, 1909, the Editor spoke highly of
“Confidence” and of the Congress and quoted Mrs. Boddy’s utterance. Thus this
destructive heresy was spread worldwide by chief leaders in chief magazines of
the Movement.

Seventy-five years earlier than this Congress a movement claiming supernatural
gifts had arisen in the Clyde area of Scotland. Delegates from Edward Irving’s
church in London went north to investigate and carried back to London the power
of this movement. Prophets and prophetesses arose in Irving’s church. He did not
himself receive any “gift” but he fully accredited the “gifted” persons in his
congregation, declaring publicly that God spoke through them. The features of
the modern Movement developed there: loud speaking, ecstatic emotion, with great
emphasis on the speedy return of Christ to the earth, an emphasis not warranted,
as events have shown. As far as is known, it was one of the prophetesses there
who first announced a secret coming of the Lord for His people. Patently false
prophecies were also made.

It is solemn and striking that in the midst of this spiritual confusion Irving
announced publicly precisely the same false doctrine that Mrs. Boddy declared.
To one of the chief prophets in his circle, Robert Baxter, he put this in
writing, under date April 21st, 1832, as follows,

Concerning the flesh of Christ... I believe it to have been no better than other
flesh, as to its passive qualities or properties, as a created thing. But that
the power of the Son of God, as son of man, in it, believing in the Father, did
for His obedience to become son of man, receive such a measure of the Holy Ghost
as sufficed to resist its own proclivity to the world and to Satan and to make
it obedient unto God in all things... I say not that Christ has the motions of
the flesh, but the law of the flesh was there all present; but that whereas in
us it is set on fire by an evil life, in Him it was, by a holy life, put down,
and His flesh brought to be a holy altar, whereon the sacrifice and offerings
for the sin of the world, and the whole burnt-offerings of sorrow and confession
and penitence for others, might ever be offered up. (Baxter’sNarrative of Facts,
41).

Upon this Baxter commented justly That there was in Christ’s flesh “a proclivity
to the world and to Satan,” and that Christ received “such a measure of the Holy
Ghost as sufficed to resist” this proclivity, is a doctrine so fearfully
erroneous that I cannot conceive anyone who has at all learned Christ, unless he
be blinded by delusion, can allow himself for a moment to entertain. The words
“blinded by a delusion” are the true explanation of how godly persons like
Edward Irving and others here mentioned allowed and spread this fatal doctrine.
For, according to these utterances, the human nature of the Lord had in it the
law of the flesh, as in the rest of mankind: but by a holy life this flesh was
“brought to be a holy altar” (note “brought to be,” that is, progressively: even
as Mrs. Boddy later said, “Step by step He brought everything human under the
power of God”), and so become at last a suitable vehicle to bear the sins of the
world. This doctrine was declared by Irving’s “gifted” associates to be
assuredly true. In his book, in the Days of the Latter Rain, pp. 59, 60, T. B.
Barratt left himself open to the charge that, if he did not actually hold this
teaching of Irving, of which he showed he had heard, he regarded it as no more
serious than sundry controversial questions that divide Denominations, and which
therefore could be tolerated. Now no one speaking by the Spirit of Christ would
in the least tolerate it but would instantly and earnestly repudiate it.


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 61: 04.09-CHAPTER 9 SPECIAL FEATURES
========================================================================

CHAPTER 9 SPECIAL FEATURES IN THOSE EARLIER YEARS, as at all times, there would
appear to have been a simultaneous working of the three well-known powers: (1)
the Divine: (2) the Satanic: (3) the Human.

1. A number of godly, earnest persons were seeking the Lord and He met with such
and blessed their inner life.

2. Mr. Gee justly points out that “at the beginning there were few leaders with
sufficient experience of just this type of movement who could lay their hands on
extremists without fear of quenching the Spirit” (19). Bartleman speaks of the
fear they felt at Azuza Street as to restraining what was felt to he out of
order “We dared not call the attention of the people too much to the working of
the evil. Fear would follow” (49). The difficulty was experienced in an outburst
in South India about the same time. Mr. E. S. Bowden gave some account of this
at Bristol in 1908. He belonged to the Godaveri Delta district, South India, and
had been through the outbreak. He told that a young girl took to accusing by
name men in the meetings of their personal and shameful vices. Leaders feared to
suppress her lest they might grieve the Spirit of God, but the effect was that
people became afraid to attend the meetings for fear of being exposed. One would
have thought it obvious that the Holy Spirit would not lead a young girl to talk
in public about the sins of the opposite sex, whereas corrupt demons would
readily spread corruption.

Another feature was an unwillingness by some to face the danger of Satanic
attack. This exposed souls to inroads of evils spirits.

3. There was also a strong element that was simply psychological. During an
address one broke out in tongues. The interpretation ran, The Lord hath exalted
His people... from grace to grace. spirit to spirit, until the whole church is
one solid block in the Lord, without spot or wrinkle, or any such thing. To this
end as a choice vessel keep thine house in order, filled with oil, waiting for
the consummation (“Confidence,” March 1917, 21).

What is meant by the whole church being a “solid block”? How could there be
“spots or wrinkles” connected with a “solid block”? How can a “vessel” “keep its
house in order”? or a “house” he “filled with oil”? or either a vessel or a
house “be waiting for the consummation”? It were irreverent to attribute to the
Spirit of God, the Creator of the mind and the Author of speech, such a jumble
of metaphors. It were disrespectful to suppose that a fallen spirit thinks so
incoherently or talks English so badly. Surely it was the utterance of an
untrained human mind. But if this was so the tongues and interpretation were not
inspired.

Other strange features can be thus explained, such as the frequent interjecting
of inappropriate words, as Glory! Hallelujah! Praise the Lord! I shall remark on
this when telling of a meeting in Egypt. Sometimes the habit leads to absurdity,
as when the leader of a local group in the Movement was asked as to the health
of his sick mother-in-law and replied: “Hallelujah! Praise the Lord! She’s gone
to heaven!” The few cases that have been before considered were not exceptional
but typical. The ample records in “Confidence” supply very many examples of all
the essential features.

(a) Inspired singing. This seems certainly to have been supernatural. The notes
produced were often beyond the compass of the human voice. Persons not musical
would join harmoniously in the grand music. Often magnificent strains would be
heard, not produced by or through the singer. This was no “gift” conferred on
the person, for when the impulses ceased the voice of the singer was as before,
and the non-musical remained so. But there were no words, or only in an unknown
tongue, which came to the same thing as regards intelligent thought. Therefore
this experience cannot have been from the Spirit of God, for He has expressly
forbidden the use in public of His own gifts unless there be imparted
instruction or spiritual upbuilding (1 Corinthians 14:27-28). The ecstasy and
ravishment caused by such music were by no necessity spiritual but only
psychological. All sensitive souls are thus affected by fine music. It is a
mistake to think that a grand organ, trained choir, stained glass, splendid
vestments, soothing incense lift the spirit to God and promote worship in spirit
and truth. Such influence is felt equally by devout persons who do not know God
savingly and are still spiritually dead, and it is felt by even the vicious
sinner.

(b) Noise. Opposed to the perfect “heavenly” singing, violent noise and
incoherent ravings were common. Animals and birds express their emotions by
their sounds. In mating time birds sing their love songs. The cow lows when
calling her calf. The dog barks when excited and growls when angry. The lion
roars when springing on his prey. But when members of the Movement were
together. and the power so wrought, they fell lower than the beasts, for they
gave vent to all animal sounds without any meaning. Yelling, screaming, barking,
crowing. roaring were a sorry form of temporary induced mania. What power was it
that induced it and often rendered otherwise sensible people unconscious of
their folly?

(c) Laughter. Narrating their “baptism” very many told of this quite
uncontrollable laughter, often continuing for hours at a time, sometimes all
night, the paroxysm being beyond restraint. The doctor is always sorry when this
condition supervenes in sickness.

Manifestly it is not produced by the blessed Spirit who ever strengthens us in
self-control among other excellencies (Galatians 5:22, “temperance”). Yet one
wrote of a Chinese that “the Holy Spirit wanted to laugh through him”
(Confidence, March, 1914. 57).

(d) The Altar. In the History of the Church of God (ch. 2), as in Bartleman and
other writings, there is frequent mention of dozens or even scores falling down
at one time or rushing simultaneously to the front of the meeting to seek the
“baptism.” This was regarded as a mighty working of the Spirit of God.

A. A. Boddy gave vivid detail pictures of such scenes which he saw in the United
States. This is what he, a sympathetic observer, wrote of a Camp Meeting in
Georgia. It is found in “Confidence” (Sept. 1914. p. 173).

POWER and NOISE. The preachers here, from my point of view, seem to preach with
tremendous vehemence, and to work up the congregations to unrestrained
demonstrations of appreciation. Unfriendly reporters of the Sunderland
Convention have once or twice written of “Pandemonium in Prayer,” but words
would fail an English reporter if he dropped in when the dear Pentecostal people
here were really warmed up.

“Every one pray; every one talk with God,” is the command shouted out by a
leader, and some are singing the brightest quick-time tunes; others are with
stentorian voices letting themselves go in ecstatic, ear-splitting prayers.
Nearly everyone is doing something, and I am beckoned for here and there to
minister to anxious ones seeking healing, or the Baptism, or sanctification, and
can scarcely make myself heard in the religious din and ecstatic turmoil as a
leader marches up and down the platform, clapping his hands and shouting at the
top of a tremendous voice. “Glory be to God. Hallelujah!” It seemed to be
encouraging and working up the great wind and the mighty earthquake, until the
“STILL SMALL VOICE” rarely gets a little chance. Quietness is treated almost as
failure. Well, we must admit that if there is not much in the New Testament, in
favour of shouting, there is a good deal in the Old Testament. I must confess I
rather like such a scene just now and again, but it should come spontaneously
and not be worked up.” And again, of a camp at Cazadero, N. California: Note the
opening statement -

Mrs. Carrie Judd Montgomery’s name was a guarantee against fanaticism or wild
fire, and the meetings were controlled by the Spirit... The scenes at the
evening meetings were sometimes almost amazing. The people in this land are very
responsive, and when a stirring address was ended they flung themselves on their
knees round the platform. The whole meeting seemed to rush for the “altar,”
general prayer went up all over the gathering, there was 35 strong crying often
merging into praise. Then the Heavenly Anthem till all arms went up and nearly
every throat was thrilling with melodious notes, and then all were next on their
feet raising higher the forest of uplifted arms and the upturned faces radiant
under the bright light of the lamps... The singing was hilariously joyful at
times. The chorus “On the resurrection morning We shall rise, we shall rise,”
made the assembly rise to its feet, and made all their arms and their hands rise
towards the skies. And dear old ladies and younger ones began to step out in the
straw, and in a dignified but joyful way there was rhythmic movement of the
limbs till it was almost, if not quite, what we should call stately dancing.
(“Confidence.” Dec. 1914, 224).

Alexander Boddy, and no doubt thousands more, liked such scenes, but did the
Lord like them, who, on entering groups of His people said, “Peace!”? (John
20:19; John 20:21) When Jehovah comes forth as Judge then “the God of glory
thundereth:” but does He like “religious din,” and scenes such as Mr. Boddy
pictures, to fill His private spiritual palace, the church? Was it the case that
such excitement was “controlled by the Spirit”? Was it a Divine, or a human, or
perhaps a demonic power that drove the whole meeting to “rush for the altar”?
Was it of God that one seeking to help souls could scarcely make himself heard
by a person beside him against a leader clapping his hands and shouting with
tremendous voice? Are “religious din and ecstatic turmoil” produced by the
Spirit of peace? Ought prayer meetings, however fervent, to give the world any
pretext for speaking of “pandemonium in prayer”? By quoting this last criticism
without remonstrance Mr. Boddy gave a hint as to the character of the gatherings
at the Sunderland Conventions. Christian gatherings are not to give unbelievers
warrant for saying that we are mad (1 Corinthians 14:23).

(e) Visions were a frequent feature, as recorded in “Confidence.” A Christian
maid had a vision of some Oriental seaport. Another was lying on the ground
shaking when “Gradually I was caused by the Lord Jesus to turn on to my back;”
whereupon there appeared the Lord himself, who shewed her “part of heaven.
First, I went up to Heaven and knocked at the Golden Gates: they were opened
wide and I entered in. The Lord Jesus placed on my head a golden crown. While in
the presence of my Saviour I saw my two young sisters and my brother, who had
gone home to glory a few years before. One of them said to me, “Oh, B. isn’t it
beautiful?” and they took hold of my hands and began to dance for joy.” This was
followed by a vivid re-enacting of the sufferings of Christ on the cross.
(“Confidence,” Aug. 1908, 6.) Is it not likely that this was simply a mental
visualizing of ideas already in the mind, as in the minds of people in general
who are religious? There is no such thing as “knocking at the Golden Gates,” for
they are never shut; nor are they of gold, but of pearl (Revelation 21:25;
Revelation 21:21). Nor have departed souls gone at death to heaven, nor are
golden crowns given until the day of the Lord. These are mere imaginations
fostered by sentimental hymns. In the same way the scene of Calvary can be
visualized by an active mind. In the June 1908 conference at Sunderland a lady
pointed to a visitor from Holland and said that in April she had seen him in a
vision and had been burdened in prayer for him (“Confidence,” Aug. 1908, 17).
Whatever may be the explanation of seeing persons in advance and at a distance,
it is a feature well known to investigators of psychic phenomena. A worker in
Bombay described a vision of many bees with wings outstretched about two and a
half feet across, and stings five or six inches long. These were stinging the
people in the meeting and causing terrible agony. The bees had names on their
backs, Fear, Envy, Pride, Unbelief, and the like, which were hindering the work
of God. There came smoke, which the Lord explained by opening heaven and showing
God on His throne and the smoke being the Incense of the prayers of the saints.
This smoke killed the bees by dozens, so making room in hearts for the Lord to
work. (“Confidence,” Aug. 1908, 19, 20.) In south Germany one saw the people of
God feasting upon the Lamb in readiness to go forth to meet Him in the air.
Nearby was the bride chamber, where the Bridegroom was waiting for his bride.
There were three bells, and as soon as these should ring the people were to rise
and go to the wedding feast. One wished to ring the bells, but it was pointed
out that they could not ring for they were upside down. Suddenly three serpents,
that were enjoying the sunshine in the bells, were cast down to the earth; the
bells swung into position and commenced to ring. It was explained that the bells
represented the three realms of man, spirit, soul, and body. Our sins have
driven away the Shekinah glory, and our repentance will bring it back.
(“Confidence,” Oct, 1910, 239.) A sister saw a nest full of birds. A Form put
his hand into the nest and stirred up the birds so that they flew away, but each
with a slip in its mouth with the words on it, “The Word of God.” She noticed
another strange thing. There seemed to be hollow pipes leading from the nest up
to a cistern. Each bird spoke through one of these pipes, and then a vapour came
out of the cistern and ascended to the throne. Then He that was on the throne at
once looked down towards the vapour and gave a command. Immediately there was a
great stir among all those round about Him, and they quickly carried out His
commands. Also she heard them say near the throne, “The Bridegroom is making
Himself ready.”

Surely this is justly called a “strange thing.” Birds speaking from a nest
through pipes into a cistern, with vapours rising from the cistern to the throne
in heaven - very strange indeed! Where is the mind that hath wisdom to interpret
this? In Revelation 19 we read of the Bride making herself ready but where is
this said of the Bridegroom? Is not He already perfectly ready? A brother saw a
ploughed field and that a dove descended toward it, but fluttered and flew away.
Then he saw that the field was moving, and the Lord said “There is in my church
too much of those old opinions and views and such like.” A field in motion! yet
no mention of an earthquake! A sister saw a dove descend to a tree in full bloom
but without leaves; but the bird flew away. Another part of the tree was without
bloom but in full leaf. Again the dove would not alight. Next came a tree which
fell dead, where also the dove would not settle. Finally there was a tree loaded
with fruit, where the dove settled. “The fruit was the product of life in the
tree, and the life of Christ must develop and mature and bring forth fruit, Then
the Holy Spirit can take them up in the power of God and unite them with Christ.
(“Confidence,” Jan. 1914, 13). The lesson aimed at is good, even the need for
the fruit of righteousness to abound in the believer, but the doctrine is wrong.
We do not become united with Christ because we bear fruit, but we bear fruit as
the result of union with Christ (John 15, Vine and branch). Are these intended
lessons anything more than could arise in any active Christian mind without need
of a “vision”? I have already pointed out that a vision could not have been from
God in which the Lord Jesus was made to declare forty years ago that His advent
would be soon. This is equally true of the same declarations to the same effect,
by prophetic students, whether by inspired persons (as in Irvingism and
elsewhere) or without a claim to inspiration. The reader can form his own
opinion as to the source of the visions now mentioned. To me they read like
vagaries of minds so excited as to be only too likely to think that to be a
“vision” which is only a working of the mind upon themes and ideas already known
from the Bible. That true God-given visions are possible I do not in the least
question or I must reject Acts 2:17, “your young men shall see visions;” but I
am bound to question the origin of a vision in which a young girl “states that
she has seen visions of persons who were dead, and has fervently told of a
glimpse of the glorified state and also of perdition.” (“Confidence,” April to
June, 1920). The seeing of dead persons is too much like the spiritistic séance;
and as the glorified state and perdition are not yet realities how could one get
a glimpse of them? This again seems to have been the imagination working upon
things foretold in Scripture.

One other of the many visions recorded must have special mention. It is related
that in 1914 Stephen Jeffreys was preaching at the Island Place Mission Room,
Llanelly, South Wales, when there came suddenly a supernatural picture upon the
wall above the platform. At first it was the head of a LAMB; then it gradually
changed and became the FACE OF THE

MAN OF SORROWS. There it remained in the sight of the congregation and of every
one who came in to see it. It was there for six hours, and many saw it.
(“Confidence,” July 1916, 113).

It is further related that while Stephen Jeffreys was speaking at Thornton Heath
in 1918, upon the martyr Stephen having the heavens opened to his view, “God
opened the heavens to him [Jeffreys] and he saw into the glory, saw the Lord and
the whole scene of Stephen being stoned.” (“Confidence,” Oct. - Dec, 1918, 64).
The question arises, if the preacher really saw into the glory where the Lord
is, how could he see Stephen being stoned there? for that dreadful event did not
take place in the glory. As several persons saw the Llanelly vision at one time,
watching as the vision took shape and changed its form, it would appear that
something was actually presented to their view. But by what power? The New
Testament gives no warrant to suppose that such a presentation of Christ as He
had been at Calvary was ever then made or ever would be.

While S. J. Russell was still an ardent advocate of the Group Movement, and far
from being an evangelical preacher of the true gospel, a similar representation
of Christ was seen on the wall of the chapel in which he was speaking. That also
was in South Wales. The account can be read by any who have For Sinners Only.

One can only seriously doubt whether such dramatic measures ever have been
employed by God to further His search for men and to promote His work in them.
He evidently took care that no authentic portrait of the Lord Jesus should be
preserved for future generations. It is difficult, if not unreasonable, to
suppose that it was by His power that such visible representations of Christ
should be presented, whether by inward vision or outwardly on a wall. That the
esteemed Editor of “Confidence” published these and other such recitals, and in
numbers, naturally raises doubt as to his own spiritual competence to estimate
these and other startling features of the Movement. When in practice as a
solicitor he would have been critical of statements and evidence for things
marvellous; but being himself under the power animating the Movement, and being
deeply convinced it was of God, he would naturally easily accept much that he
might otherwise have doubted. And as one is compelled to challenge the Divine
origin of these “visions,” it brings under suspicion other events described in
the same narratives, as occurring on the same occasions to the same persons.


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 62: 04.10-CHAPTER 10 LATER CONDITIONS
========================================================================

CHAPTER 10 LATER CONDITIONS

IT WILL BE OBSERVED that the facts here presented have not been collected from
the general history of the Movement and over a great length of time. Every far
extended Movement, even if distinctly of God, would in the course of years,
because of the weakness of the flesh in believers, yield items for regret. But
those here offered are taken from the opening years of the Movement when it was
at the initial white heat, displaying its definite and distinctive
characteristics, and they concern its chief centres in four countries and its
outstanding leaders. They may at least suffice to explain why the present writer
could not associate with the Movement, and they are put on record because he is
perhaps the only survivor of that period who can guarantee some of them. Without
such facts a full and true picture of that early time can scarcely be gained.
But is this now necessary? Has not the Movement as a whole sailed into quieter
and safer waters, marked by less excess and more sobriety? Outwardly this is
happily the case, yet there are indications that the same evil powers are, as
might be expected, alert to induce the earlier conditions. A few experiences
from later years will justify this statement and enforce the warning. In 1927 I
took a long journey off my main route specially to visit a group of the Movement
in the far south of Poland. I saw no demonstrations, for they gathered simply to
hear me. My message was from Galatians 5:22, “The fruit of the Spirit is
self-control.” The local leader was a quiet and gracious brother to whom my
heart was drawn: but the district leader, supervising this and other groups, was
of another type. After the meeting he said bluntly, “I thought from the first
that your coming was not of the Lord: now! am sure of it.”

Such was his reaction to a loving exhortation to self-control. It told its own
story as to the opposite type of experience and meetings that he fostered. In
1935 in a town in Upper Egypt, the pastor of the church asked me to address
them, to which I consented gladly. They met in a small room in an ordinary
house. The walls being of black Nile mud, unplastered, the effect was sombre.
One small oil light hanging from the ceiling could not dispel the gloom. Along
one wall there ran the customary mastaba, a low mud platform used for sitting
and sleeping. The pastor and I sat on this. Some twelve or fifteen Copts
gathered, men and women. Their bright eyes gleamed against their dark skin, and
their long white robes shone against the dark walls and floor. They formed a
circle, hand holding hand, and commenced springing lightly from the floor,
chanting ceaselessly the one word “Hallelujah” The dancing became faster and
faster: a circular whirl set in, getting ever swifter and swifter; the
“Hallelujah” became ever louder and louder until it reminded one of the
explosion of a motor bike. This useless and violent dance went on for over an
hour, becoming more and more frantic, until the pastor at length got them quiet
to hear me.

Here also I pressed upon them the same text, “The fruit of the Spirit is
self-control.” I reminded them of the Moslem zikr, a similar dance, which I had
seen. The proceedings were identical, save that in place of “Hallelujah” they
used the name “Mohammed” or a short sentence from their sacred book the Koran.
Such dances will go on for long hours, until they reach the desired stage of
demon possession, and at length the furious excitement ends in exhaustion and
collapse. The Christians were working up to a similar desired climax, only they
thought it would be possession by the Spirit of God. I told them that their
dance was essentially the same as that of the Moslems, and warned them against
the same excess and danger. As soon as I sat down the most excited of the
dancers sprang on to the platform in front 39of me, dancing wildly, ejaculating
and gesticulating, swinging his fist in my face. Such was his reaction to a
loving call for self-control. I must be forgiven for thinking that the whole
display was not Pentecostal. It will be remembered that the leader of the
Movement when William Booth-Clibborn was “baptized” was on the way to Egypt. The
meeting I attended was the condition to which things had come twenty seven years
later. In October 1943 an Indian Christian, aged twenty-four, attended a
convention of the Movement in north India. A well-known English worker in the
gospel warmly commended him to me as a pillar in a Christian assembly. He wrote
quite lovingly as follows:

It was a very nice convention. Atmosphere of worship, love, and holiness could
be found in most of the meetings. The music was very uplifting. But I was very
sad to discover how greatly Satan has deceived very devoted saints... In tarry
meetings I saw people (men and women) behaving unseemly. There was such a noise
and shouting as if with paralyzed minds. I saw one lady of thirty years old
sitting with straight back, teeth joined together with great force, hand going
around in the air, hair flowing, dress falling down from head and shoulder.
[This would be the sari, the long cloth wound round the body, the end draped
over the head, especially in public], sometimes becoming very quiet and
sometimes howling very loud, sometimes weeping and sometimes laughing.

Then one man who made a noise at the top of his voice laughed with hysteric
tone, jumped on feet from floor and fell down straight at his back in the line
of ladies. And like this many disorderly, confused, and mad things took place.
The thing that amazed me most was of a case of a South Indian person, who had
not spoken in tongues and was seeking tongues, came to the tarry room, bowed
down and, like a machine at the most quick speed, he started saying the words
“Praise the Lord;” for full one hour without any full stop he went on saying
till his throat was dry; his voice became very heavy but he did not stop
repeating the words; he was bent on having tongues (afterwards he told me that
if the Lord had not given him tongues he would have got himself lost in some
jungle). Now what happened to him? that he started losing the balance of his
tongue:- Praise the Lord, Praise the Lord, Praze the Lod, Praze the Lod, Paze
the Lod, Puz the Lod, Puz, Puz, Puz, Pizz the Lud, Pay, Pay, Pay, Pa, Pa, P, P,
P, P-and now he started shouting and could only say pa, pa, pa, p, p, p; here
his tongue starting a very intricate stammering, and suddenly he came to a
language like this - chu, chu, chum, chin, chuma, chumy, chemer, chama,
chit-chit-chin, chun, chee, chee, etc, etc. After having spoken this for fifteen
minutes he broke out into high class Persian and Arabic; then he spoke Sanscript
poetry with beautiful metre, and sung Indian classical songs. For all this he
took about forty-five minutes. I watched him very carefully.

After this I took him outside alone and asked him as to what actually happened
with him. He said he only remembered the time he was stammering; then he went
into unconscious state; and when he came to consciousness he only heard from
people that he had spoken in tongues, and hence he concluded that he had the
“Baptism of the Holy Ghost” as they call it. The next day I could see the signs
of tiredness and exhaustion on his face, the second day he could not go out
properly because he felt much backache. I risked him if he could tell me that it
was real experience of Holy Spirit. He was offended and felt angry. He had
mental satisfaction that he had spoken in tongues, but I could analyse from his
talk and behaviour that he did not have that joy and life at all which comes
after the fulness of the Spirit.

He did not know Persian, Sanscrit, and Arabic at all, but he spoke in them. For
first few hours in the night it amazed me cry much, but later on I could compare
this to the case of Séance Room where mediums are used by evil spirits. After
having spoken in tongues he developed a kind of superiority complex and did show
very little humility and undisturbed calmness of the Spirit. Mr. M. and Sister
H. joined a lot in noise.

Sister H. did a lot of clapping, shouting, and singing... I saw many other very
consecrated people there who talked very helpful things, but my heart becomes
full of sorrow when I see them mistaken on this point of tongues.

I enjoyed their love and fellowship. They are dear brothers in the Lord, but it
is a great pity how we are deceived by evil spirits of Satan. These are all
signs of times and of these later days when even most of the elect will be
deceived. I read that evil spirits would not urge spiritual Christians to open
sin, such as murder, drink, gambling, etc, but would plan deception in the form
of “teachings” and “doctrines,” the believer not knowing that deception and
“teachings” and “doctrines” gives admission to evil spirits to “possess” the
deceived one as much as through sin. This account by an acute oriental Christian
repays analysis. It reveals close correspondence with earlier manifestations,
such as abundant noise and unseemly behaviour. It justifies Mr. Gee’s statement
that Mr. Barratt’s experience has been known by many others, and it shows a
definite continuity of the Movement as years go by. A man falling to the floor
among Eastern women would shock all propriety. A woman allowing her veil to fall
away and her hair to stream loose in public, while she aimlessly waived her arm
in the air, would be gross impropriety, as it would in the West. The case of the
man here narrated is of special interest. The English (“Praise the Lord!”) with
which he commenced degenerated quickly into mere gibberish. Then he became
unconscious and spoke in eloquent Persian, Arabic, and Sanscrit, three very
difficult languages to master and of which he knew nothing. It is evident that
another spirit to his was operating but found it hard to gain control of his
mind and vocal organs and only succeeded when self-control ceased. The earlier
literature of the Movement gives many instances of this. It is hard to think
that the divine Spirit, our Creator, could be so frustrated and be able only to
act on one unconscious. Certainly no such features are given in any of the cases
found in the New Testament. And it is in plain opposition to the imperative
requirement that one speaking in a tongue must retain complete self-control and
be able to speak or not to speak at will.

While this paper is being written opportunity has come to converse with an
earnest, experienced Christian, of wide travel, who has attended dozens of
meetings of the Movement in different countries. He has no prejudice against it.
He is a professional linguist, acquainted with a most unusual number of modern
languages. He has never in a meeting heard used anyone of these several
languages which he knows, nor has he ever heard one supposed to be speaking in a
tongue use what to his highly trained ear sounded like a language at all. The
last preceding incident from India confirms other testimonies that sometimes
real languages are spoken; the experience just mentioned raises a presumption
that a large amount of what passes as tongues may be only sounds. In August 1951
I attended a long session of the annual assembly of The Apostolic Church at
Penygroes, South Wales. It was a large gathering from many lands. A brother
prayed in stentorian tones, but the prayer itself was very ordinary and the
style sounded forced. There were no “tongues” but there was a lengthy
“prophecy.” It differed nothing from any ordinary exhortation to Christian
living except that it purported to be spoken by God Himself. I have read many
such “prophetic” utterances and can only be amazed that godly people should so
often presume to put platitudes into the mouth of Almighty God. The ministry
that afternoon was spiritually poor. In many small gatherings, where no claim is
made to special enduement of the Spirit, I have felt more of His presence and
unction. From a far distant Island of the sea there came in 1954 a
circumstantial report plainly revealing demonic activity in the Movement. The
details are not suitable to repeat here, but they are corroborated by an English
evangelist on the spot with much experience of heathendom.

I have a friend with long knowledge of two foreign lands. He is godly,
experienced, and, like myself, with no prejudice against the supernatural. He
too has personal friends in the Movement. In 1954 with one of these friends he
attended a gathering in the south of England. It was led by a veteran, one of
the front-rank leaders of the early years. My friend was distressed by the
entire lack of helpful ministry, pained by the general hubbub through everybody
making all sorts of sounds at once, and grieved by the way the leader strove to
work up enthusiasm whenever it flagged.

Thus from widely separated lands there is testimony that the earlier conditions
still break forth, if commonly less fiercely. It shows that the spirit foes of
God still attack His cause by the same fell tactics as formerly. This calls for
ceaseless care, for a watchful mind. 1 Peter 5:8-10.


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 63: 04.11-CHAPTER 11 CONCLUSION
========================================================================

CHAPTER 11 CONCLUSION

IT IS TO BE TAKEN SERIOUSLY TO HEART by us all that failure of Christians in the
endeavour to obtain God’s supernatural gifts and to walk fully in His ways, even
though these failures have been extensive and disastrous, does not alter the
fact that His gifts are available or lessen the duty to seek them as He exhorts
us to do. The Corinthian believers failed much in the exercise of the gifts, but
when giving directions to correct the failures, the apostle included the call to
“Follow after love; yet desire earnestly spiritual gifts, but rather that ye may
prophecy” (1 Corinthians 14:1). Therefore: (a) The heart must first, always, and
supremely be set upon love as primary and superior. Considerable reading of the
early literature shows that this was too much overlooked. Gifts were given
precedence. (b) There must be preserved a sound judgment as to the relative
importance of the several gifts. it is abundantly clear that Scripture places
“prophecy” as the chief of them: it is equally clear that in the Movement
“tongues” was first given the pre-eminence, and later healings came to the
forefront. Sundry speakers and writers did occasionally exhort otherwise, but it
is evident that the vast majority sought and valued a “tongue” as the
inestimable boon. (c) So devastating was this misguided determination to speak
with a “tongue” that the Spirit of God was in practice denied His divine right
to “divide to each one severally as HE will” (1 Corinthians 12:11). This
diminished that humbleness of heart before God, that broken and contrite spirit,
which certainly secures His favour, and too frequently there was induced a state
of self-will which leaves the believer helpless before our watchful spirit foes.
For it serves their fell end to foster in us self-will as to a matter in the
spiritual life even better than in some carnal thing. Witness the man in India
who was so doggedly determined to speak with a tongue that were he denied this
he contemplated getting “lost in some jungle,” that is, he would court death.
Thus one may be seeking a “gift” and at the same time have self-murder in the
heart. How treacherous is our poor heart! To such an evil mind an evil spirit
could and would minister; indeed, from such a being must have come the very
thought of suicide if disappointed. The problem may be raised how God could give
blessing in a Movement while such conditions obtain. The answer is easy to find.
Peter had just made that true confession as to the person of Christ which has
remained the standard profession of faith: “Thou art the Anointed, the Son of
the living God” (Matthew 16:16). Only a few minutes later this same devoted
disciple became, all unconsciously, the tool of Satan to place a trap at the
feet of Christ (Matthew 16:22-23). This the Lord could not but rebuke sharply,
yet He did not dismiss Peter from His inner circle but continued to train and to
use him. He knew that his servant’s heart was right, though his judgment was
sadly at fault. It is not our aberrations and failures, even if in themselves
serious and disastrous, that forfeit the blessing of God on what in us is of
Him. It is known moral defilement that separates between us and our God, so that
He will not hear us (Isaiah 59:1-2): “If I wash thee not thou hast no part with
Me” (John 13:8).

If one is asked what one would wish one’s brethren in the Movement to do today,
the answer is that each should go on serving the Lord where he is, rejoicing in
any measure of the grace of God upon his service, and so continue until He calls
to some other course. Each servant of God should be ever ready for this. Only
let each 1. Scrutinize closely his own former personal experience, testing each
item by Holy Scripture. During the first outbreak of the Movement in India, in
1907, a leader from the original centre at Los Angeles was sent there to fan the
flame. At Coonoor he and his supporters were requested to justify from Scripture
the then happenings as mentioned 43earlier. A gathering was held, but when
pressed upon details they declined the task of giving proof from Scripture; and
small wonder, for such doings cannot be justified by Scripture. But this
attitude to God’s word written opens a door through which evil spirits find easy
access. The leader and his friends broke off the gathering, and their closing
words as to the other party were not heavenly. This last feature will not
surprise one who saw the photo of this leader. He was Mr. A. G. Garr, mentioned
earlier, the very type of man not able to endure persistent challenge and
contradiction.

One of his earliest supporters in India has lately written to me as follows, In
the month of June, 1907, there was an open meeting when it was hoped that
outsiders would be influenced. This meeting was attended by some of the leading
missionaries on the hills at the time - the writer was also present... In the
meeting referred to the demons seemed to be let loose and I have never witnessed
such a scene when Mr. G. appeared to be demon possessed. There was no doubt some
kind of mesmeric influence in the meetings and Mrs. G. gave the impression of
being a kind of medium having an entrancing voice, especially when under the
influence of the tongue. This meant the breaking up of the meetings in Coonoor
for a time. The party moved to Colombo. This writer confirms the impression of
Mr. Garr from his photo. He writes, Mr. G. was very autocratic, and perhaps this
is the reason why the demons were let loose that day.

Now no one filled with the Spirit of Christ will ever be autocratic, for Jesus
was meek and lowly, and His follower Paul, by nature and training, an
aristocrat, could say, “I beseech you by the meekness and gentleness of Christ,
I who in your presence am lowly among you” (2 Corinthians 10:1). In his
spiritually important treatise The New Testament Order for Church and
Missionary, Mr. A. R. Hay discussed at length the Gifts of the Spirit, including
speaking with tongues. He emphasizes their necessity for and permanency in the
church, and concludes with a valuable section on their counterfeits (chs. xv and
xvi). These last are of two types, those produced by evil spirits and those of
purely soulish origin. Of the latter again there are two types, the intellectual
and the emotional. He says (p.204): The emotions are not wrong; they are
God-given. They may be deeply stirred by the Holy Spirit... The Holy Spirit,
while He will profoundly stir the emotions, will never throw them out of
balance... The power of that which is of an evil spirit, or which is purely of
man’s own powers, does not effect this true balance; it introduces confusion and
prevents true unity and co-operation with the Spirit of God.

It will be found that emotional religion and sin are not incompatible. This
proves that such emotional religion has nothing to do with the Holy Spirit.
Roman Catholicism is largely an emotional religion. It is possible for a devout
Catholic to live on a low ethical and moral plane, having no true sense of sin.

Pentecostalism is largely an emotional religion. It also can be tolerant of sin.
Such we have found to be the case in many of the Pentecostal congregations with
which we are acquainted in South America. Believers from other churches who are
led astray by the movement generally lose their keen sense of sin, frequently to
a disastrous extent. In Pentecostal congregations where sin is rife, members,
themselves in sin, will be active in the use of “gifts” of tongues, prophecy,
healing, and in giving revelations. These gifts, of course, are not true gifts
of the Holy Spirit. He could not manifest Himself through such instruments. They
are false gifts deceptive emotional counterfeits of which evil spirits not
infrequently take advantage. As to the last point we may note that there was
grievous sin in the church at Corinth, yet they “came behind in no gift”, (1
Corinthians 1:7), nor in ch. 14 does Paul raise any doubt as to their gifts
being from the Holy Spirit. The warning as to sin accompanying gifts should not
be resented or ignored, seeing that it is the sober record of a servant of
Christ by no means antagonistic and with long experience of the lands of which
he speaks. Yet another aspect of the same scene came to me lately from another
British worker with equally long experience of that Continent. He speaks of the
vast modern evangelistic efforts made in English-speaking lands and notes that
they scarcely reach the pagan masses, because they work from within the churches
and the audiences are nearly always composed of 95% good 44church-going
Christians. But, adds he,

It seems that the Pentecostalists, with their emphasis on healing, a New
Testament emphasis of course, are doing a greater work, for they sometimes get
mass meetings in stadiums with perhaps 5% Christians and the rest modern pagans.
The day alone can declare comparative results. My correspondent then considers
the feature that in some South American lands mission work scarcely touches the
people, from the workers not being in close contact with them, and he adds this
testimony, The other strong point about the Pentecostals in their work in the
mission field is their complete identification with the natives and their lack
of anything like racial or social barriers. This bears directly upon the above
question of blessing attending the labours of sincere men, who do preach the
gospel, but in whose activities there commingle elements not of God. For the God
of all grace owns what is of Himself, though this does not justify elements not
of Him. For these latter we should watch carefully and remove them directly they
are detected, so that the divine blessing may flow the more freely.

Let each brother analyze his “baptism,” as that of T. B. Barratt was examined in
ch. IV, and retain only what conforms to Scripture. But in this process no one
should assume that the “tongue” was given by the Holy Spirit, even if it was a
genuine language, for demons cause mediums to speak perfectly in languages they
do not know. Nor should one rely on ecstatic emotions or other subjective marks,
since these also can be counterfeited.

2. Then let each examine carefully his doctrinal beliefs, lest he has been
betrayed into error on any point, especially as to the humanity of the Son of
God.

3. Let him maintain a sincere and open mind toward God, being ready to go on
with Christ according to His directions in the Word. It is happily true that the
more startling and shocking manifestations of those early years are not so much
seen today. But other subtler dangers have arisen and are general. One of these
is a secret satisfaction in things being great and imposing, revealed by great
organizations, large churches, huge assemblies, immense wall posters.

Another factor, which contributes to the former, is non-Scriptural organization.
This is far advanced in the larger branches of the Movement, and has reached
perhaps the utmost possible development in The Apostolic Church. Its
Constitution, dated, I believe, in 1937, regulates every conceivable contingency
in church order and Christian activity. It gives plenary authority to the
“Apostles” and “Prophets,” the latter being the really dominant persons to whom
even the “Apostles” must defer. After reciting the doctrinal beliefs, it lays
down that the “confession of faith as set out herein shall for ever be the
doctrinal standard of the Apostolic Church, and shall not be subject to any
change in any way whatever.” This is made legally binding by the Deed being
enrolled in the High Court. Thus no officer, teacher, or member is at liberty to
make the slightest progress in the knowledge and practice of truth as revealed
in Holy Scripture. If the Spirit of truth shall show him in Scripture something
different from or absent from the Constitution he must either stifle the truth
or leave the Apostolic Church. In essence the same position results wherever a
constitution or creed is adopted. It involves spiritual strangulation, as has
been seen in every corporate church system and will duly become apparent in this
Movement. A further example of unscriptural inter-church organization is seen in
The Church of God (ch. 2). It began in 1886, twenty years before the outbreak at
Los Angeles. Organizing soon commenced. The most influential leader was elected
as head of the rapidly growing Society. This spoiled him spiritually and he had
to be removed for financial default. See Like a Mighty Army (168 ff.). The same
regrettable development was shortly seen at the Azuza Street Mission, Los
Angeles. Bartleman stresses the feature that for a time the meetings there went
on without human control:

Brother Seymour was recognized as the nominal leader in charge... Brother
Seymour generally sat behind two empty shoe boxes, one on top of the other. He
usually kept his head inside of the top one during the meeting in prayer (How
Pentecost Came, 58)... The truth must be told. “Azuza” began to fail the Lord
also, early in her history. God showed me one day they were going to organize
(68)... As the movement began to apostatize platforms were built higher, coat
tails were worn longer, choirs were organized, and string bands, came into
existence to “jazz” the people. The kings came back once more to their thrones,
restored to sovereignty. We were no longer “brethren.” Then the divisions
multiplied etc. While brother Seymour kept his head inside the old empty box at
“Azuza” all was well. They later built for him a throne also (p.88). A chief
evil of organization is that a few men are able to dominate. Mr. Gee (p.148)
gives a tribute to the part Rev. A. A. Boddy and Mr. Cecil Polhill took in the
early years of the Movement in England, but he does not say why they dropped out
of prominence after only a few years. The reason in Mr. Boddy’s case was that
other leaders pressed him to leave the Church of England. He replied that the
Movement in this land had commenced in the Church, why should he leave it? But
as they pressed the point he dropped out of affairs, and Sunderland ceased to be
the centre it had been. Mr. Polhill also was a churchman. On retiring from the
Movement he became a lay reader in the Church of England, and also resumed his
former co-operation with the China Inland Mission.

It is easy to see that with the principal leader a clergyman, and the principal
centre a church, and the next chief leader also a churchman, it would have been
difficult to develop any other form of inter-church organization. But after
their withdrawal from leadership high organization went forward. The Assemblies
of God exhibits this. “Elim” went the same way, until at length its Founder
recognized the evil and left that organization, yet only to found another.

How organization induces deterioration was shown by the Editor of “Redemption
Tidings,” the organ of The Assemblies of God, in the issue of October 11th,
1957. Speaking of the conditions found in the Movement thirty years previously
he spoke of the holy contagious fervour then abounding, and said:

1. There were no “sermons,” they were all messages... We had no choirs then, we
were all choir.4.A great simplicity characterized our worship. Probably we erred
at that time through fear of organization, but we did enjoy a simplicity of
worship. Many meetings were “open.” While this brought its dangers, it also
presented its opportunities. We did not as a rule hold separate youth meetings:
we took our first steps in testifying, singing, or speaking in the “open”
meeting. When one sees the spiritual stalwarts that these methods produced, it
would seem that we were not too far out in our ways. Ministerial status was not
magnified, we were all brethren and ministerial attire was anathema in most
places. Often our services had no plan - but the variety was wonderful. This
testimony is simple and weighty. It illustrates that there were at that earlier
period features in the Movement which were of God and which He could own in
spite of contrary conditions. The “open” meeting gave to the Spirit of God due
honour as the actual Leader of worship and Trainer of witnesses, the outcome
being spiritual stalwarts. An order of humanly trained and appointed “ministers”
is essential clerisy: it restricts the Spirit and induces spiritual lethargy in
the members of the assembly. The Editor’s remarks and those of Bartleman
correspond. It is the history of this whole age of clerics suppressing the
laity, so that the Spirit of God is denied His rights in the house of God,
bringing feebleness and poverty, as in Laodicea, while the church boasts of its
riches. The New Testament knows nothing of any body corporate of Christians
except the local church under its elders, not under “prophets” or a single
“minister.” Nor does it recognize any authority over the Lord’s servants except
the Lord Himself. Councils, Committees, 46Conferences, Officials, regulating the
education of pastors, preventing a godly man exercising his preaching gift
unless he has been through the prescribed course, then appointing him a
“probationer” - these and any other such measures are all a product of human
prudence, a telling the Spirit of God that we know how to train preachers better
than He does: and they all involve intervention between the Lord and His
bondservant with some suppression of His rights as Head of His church.

Let each evangelist and teacher act upon the principles just stated as to the
local church and as to service to the Lord, remembering the words of the great
apostle Paul: “If I were now pleasing men I should not be the bondservant of
Christ... For freedom did Christ set us free: stand fast therefore, and be not
entangled again in a yoke of bondage” (Galatians 1:10; Galatians 5:1). It
demands courage and faith to follow Christ fully, to be a Caleb. As to temporal
needs in His service let us remember His own example of faith in His Father, and
let us in this matter keep in mind Frank Bartleman and his wife. To the trustful
the Lord ever imparts His courage and strength, by which He on earth did fully
the work and will of His Father and was well pleasing to Him.

Ye therefore, beloved, knowing these things beforehand, beware lest ye fall from
your own steadfastness. But grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and
Saviour Jesus Christ. To Him be the glory both now and for ever. Amen. (2 Peter
3:17-18).


========================================================================
Source: https://sermonindex.net/books/writings-of-george-h-lang/
========================================================================