Audio from Conference on Holy Spirit Now Online

On Saturday, Dr. Michael Haykin led a conference on the Holy Spirit on Saturday on the doctrine of the Holy Spirit at Farmdale Baptist Church in Frankfort, KY.  The MP3s of the conference sessions and Q & A session are below:

Posted by Steve Weaver, Research and Administrative Assistant to the Director of the Andrew Fuller Center for Baptist Studies, Dr. Michael A.G. Haykin.

On Wolves and Dogs

The New Testament authors are frank about false teachers. Just to give a sampling from the Apostle Paul: false teachers are “wolves” (Acts 20:29); men who “by smooth talk and flattery” deceive hearts (Romans 16:18; cp. 2 Cor 11:1-4; Titus 1:10); “false apostles, deceitful workmen” (2 Cor 11:13); “enemies of the cross of Christ” (Phil 3:18); “dogs” and “evildoers” (Phil3:2); men with seared consciences (1 Tim 4:1-2), who speak “irreverent babble” (1 Tim 6:20); “evil beasts,” “detestable” and unfit for any good work (Titus 1:16). This is but a sample. It is very strong language. Rightly are we careful in applying such texts to the present day. Moreover, I know that this list of errorists does not refer to the same type of problems.

But…we would be utterly naïve if we thought our generation above all others had managed to avoid this problem entirely, a problem that was clearly not rare even in the Apostolic era.

In this light, read this excellent post by Dr. Russell Moore: Serpent-Sensitive Worship.

Why Are Cats Not Mentioned in Holy Writ?

Albrecht Dürer (1471-1528), one of the greatest of Renaissance artists, has a painting entitled Adam and Eve (1504) in which there is the most curious of things: a cat (for the painting, see http://www.metmuseum.org/TOAH/ho/08/euwc/ho_19.73.1.htm)! The cat, experts in artistic metaphor tell us, represents the choleric temperament in man. In Dürer’s rendition, the cat seems to be sleeping, while very close to it is a mouse, utterly unconcerned for its safety. The scene is pre-fall, and thus the fact that there is no danger for the mouse. Now, what I find most curious is this: cats are never mentioned in Scripture. How strange in that case to find one at the feet of Dürer’s Adam and Eve. That other prolific western pet, dogs, are mentioned in the Bible, though they rarely come off well. But cats make no showing at all. It is a good reminder that Scripture is not to meant to give us an exhaustive encyclopedia of all human knowledge nor is it designed as a comprehensive guide to every conceivable human decision.

Should I buy a cat? Well, cats are not even mentioned! So, no way. If God had wanted me to have a cat, he would have told me in his Word.

No, this is a misuse of Scripture. There are principles of guidance about buying and selling—which, we must say, are utterly sufficient—but as to the specifics of the question above in relation to cats, no details. This, it seems, has convinced some in the western tradition that cats are evil. Otherwise, why no mention of them? No, cats are not inherently evil—our flame-point Siamese Chai is rambunctious, but hardly evil—they are part of the goodness of God’s creation which our Maker has given us to enjoy.

All of this is a good reminder that we must ask questions of God’s Holy Word it is designed to answer. And the most critical of those is how can a Holy God deal with the sin of us post-fall human beings and yet still love the creation he has made and do it good? This is a weighty question indeed (and we heard some good answers at this year’s T4G this past week).

The Error of the Federal Vision

In the Ancient Church a Christian was a person who turned from idols and embraced the living God as he had revealed himself definitively in the crucified and risen Christ (1 Thessalonians 1:9-10). What made him a Christian? Faith, which was rooted in the electing work of God (see Acts 11:18; 13:48; 15:7-9; 16:31). None of the early New Testament authors believed that the act of baptism alone saved anyone (thus Mark 16:16). Baptism is the way a person with a good conscience (to see what this is and how one obtains it, read Hebrews 9:14) responds to the saving work of God. Thus 1 Peter 3:21 means that the baptism which saves is that which is “the pledge of a good conscience toward God.”

These convictions must be asserted afresh today for the upholders of the so-called Federal Vision maintain that the baptism of infants makes them Christians—a position that is simply taking us back to the disastrous confusion of the medieval Church. As a Calvinistic Baptist I have deep admiration for many Reformed paedobaptist brothers, though I would disagree with their argument that infant baptism is a covenantal sign that must be affirmed later in life. But such brethren do not argue for trust for salvation in the baptismal rite. There must be conversion.

But this position is quite different from the affirmation that a human rite in itself and by itself saves. The Apostle clearly rejects this latter argument in 1 Corinthians 10:1-5. If participation in the ordinances saved, then surely those who followed Moses out of Egypt would have entered the Promised Land. But they did not—for baptism (and the Lord’s Table) do not save.

God will not give the glory of being the Saviour of his people to another person or thing!

The Perversity of the Human Heart

So perverse is the human heart that even when a person grows up under the constant sound of the gospel and hears the Word preached regularly, and has surrounding him or her godly models of the Christian life, unless God acts in sovereign grace, there will be no saving faith in the heart. Well did John Calvin put it in his Treatise on Eternal Election (1562): ‘It is not within our power to convert ourselves from our evil life, unless God changes us and cleanses us by his Holy Spirit.’[1]

[1] CO 8:113.

Advancing the Truth

Given a lifetime of going to school--first as a student and then as a teacher--it should not be surprising that I view the autumn, not the new year in January, as the time of fresh beginnings. All across this continent seminary students and professors stand on the threshold of a new year. The best of them have come together to spend time reading and meditating on Holy Scripture, studying theology and the history of the church, learning Greek and Hebrew, worshipping and praying together, and learning how to serve the church. These schools do so in the hope that their communities would be two things: places of truth and Christian integrity and places of Christian love and genuine community. The eighteenth-century Baptist theologian Andrew Fuller once brought both of these things together in a beautiful passage when he observed that it is not by “converting the pulpit into a stage of strife…that truth is promoted.” Rather, it is “by reading, by calm and serious reflection, by humble prayer, and by a free and friendly communication of our thoughts to one another in private conversation, that truth makes progress.”[1]

Of course there is a time for clear proclamation that does not shrink from controversy--Fuller knew this better than anyone of his day. But it is noteworthy the means he cited for the advance of the truth. Truth advances by:

· reading · reflection/meditation on what has been read · prayer · fellowship.

Where did Fuller learn about the importance of truth? From Scripture. For example, one of the results of the outpouring of the Spirit on the Day of Pentecost was the fact that those who were converted on that day “continued steadfastly in the apostles’ doctrine” (Acts 2:42). The teaching and preaching of the Apostles became food for their souls and a light for their path.

And many years later, when the Apostle Paul came to write what was his final letter to Timothy, he urged his close friend to guard jealously the treasure of apostolic doctrine that had been committed to his care, and to do this in reliance upon the Holy Spirit who indwelt him (2 Timothy 1:13-14). After a lifetime of ministry Paul well knew that the faithful transmission of orthodox doctrine from one generation to another cannot be done without the keeping power of the Holy Spirit. Moreover, in urging Timothy to rely upon the Spirit for help in this regard, Paul is obviously convinced that doctrine matters to the Spirit of God and that when he comes to indwell a man or a woman he gives that person a concern for truth and doctrine.

Finally, it is not at all fortuitous that our Lord calls the Holy Spirit “the Spirit of truth” (John 14:17; 15:26; 16:13). He is the One who imparts the truth in the Scriptures to the people of God, illumines it for them, and enables them to put it into practice.

Looking at this from the perspective of subjective experience, we can say that the New Testament bears eloquent witness to the fact that solid doctrine is essential to sound spirituality. In the words of Charles Haddon Spurgeon: the coals of orthodoxy are ever necessary for the fire of spirituality.[2] Where orthodox doctrine is regarded as unimportant, the fire of Christian piety will inevitably be quenched.

[1] “Remarks on Two Sermons by W.W. Horne” (Complete Works, III, 582).

[2] This phrase is attribted to Spurgeon by David Kingdon, “C H Spurgeon and the Downgrade Controversy” in his et al., A Marvelous Ministry. How the All-round Ministry of C H Spurgeon Speaks to Us Today (Ligonier, Pennsylvania: Soli Deo Gloria Publications, 1993), 128. See also the remarks of Robert M. Bowman, Jr., Orthodoxy & Heresy. A Biblical Guide to Doctrinal Discernment (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1992), 18-20.

The Floodlight Ministry of the Holy Spirit

In all of the activities of the Holy Spirit in the lives of believers and in the life of the Church is there one thing above all other things he is seeking to do? Is there, in other words, a centre to his work and ministry in the lives of Christians? An answer to these questions can be readily found in John 16:13-14, verses which record important words that Jesus spoke to his disciples on the night of his betrayal.

"When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth, for he will not speak on his own authority, but whatever he hears he will speak, and he will declare to you the things that are to come. He will glorify me, for he will take what is mine and declare it to you."

In the surrounding context Jesus is assuring his disciples that they will not be left alone when he returns to the Father after the cross and resurrection. Jesus will still be present with them, but not now via his Incarnate presence but rather by means of his Holy Spirit. He is thus helping them understand something of the ministry of the Holy Spirit after what we call Pentecost.

Now, in the words “He will bring glory to me,” we have set forth for us what J. I. Packer has rightly called the “Holy Spirit’s distinctive new covenant role,” namely, “directing all attention away from himself to Christ and drawing folk into the faith, hope, love, obedience, adoration, and dedication, which constitute communion with Christ.” This ministry of the Spirit in relation to Christ is what Packer goes on to call “a floodlight ministry.” [Keep In Step With The Spirit (Old Tappan, New Jersey: Fleming H. Revell Co., 1984), 64, 65. A slightly revised edition has just been released by Zondervan (2005).]

Since 1985 I have had the privilege nearly every year of teaching at Séminaire Baptiste Évangélique du Québec, in Montreal, Canada (SEMBEQ), the French Fellowship Baptist seminary in the west end of Montreal, located on Gouin boulevard. The building that houses the seminary used to be a school and is located in a very prestigious area of the West Island of Montreal. I recall vividly one summer night after I had taught all day. I had decided to go for a walk in the neighbourhood. I noticed that a good number of the owners of the wealthy homes in the area had strategically placed floodlights around their homes so that passers-by like myself might ooh and aah about their achievements in stone and brick.

Now, if instead of focusing on the homes which were lit by the floodlights I had instead concentrated my attention on the floodlight themselves—“Oh, that’s an interesting-looking floodlight; I wonder where they bought it” or “what a lovely light that floodlight is giving; I wonder how powerful it is”—I would have missed the whole meaning and purpose of the floodlights. The owners of the homes had put the floodlights out in front so that I should look at their homes, not at the floodlights, the source of illumination.

So it is with the Spirit’s ministry. He has been sent by God the Father to focus our attention to Christ, to kindle in our hearts an unquenchable love for Christ and for his purposes, and to enable us to reflect faithfully his person and character. The Spirit has not come to primarily speak about himself. He has not been given to us so that we should focus primarily on him and his work. He has come to inhabit these mortal frames so that we should love Christ and adore him, and that we should seek to live each day in obedience to Jesus. The work and ministry of the Holy Spirit has this one indispensable genuine mark then: it is Christ-centred—it is designed to exalt him and glorify him in the minds and hearts of men and women, and boys and girls. As the great nineteenth-century Baptist preacher Charles Haddon Spurgeon (1834-1892) once put it:

"If we do not make the Lord Jesus glorious; if we do not lift him high in the esteem of men, if we do not labour to make him King of kings, and Lord of lords; we shall not have the Holy Spirit with us. Vain will be rhetoric, music, architecture, energy, and social status: if our one design be not to magnify the Lord Jesus, we shall work alone and work in vain." [The Greatest Fight in the World (London: Passmore and Alabaster, 1891), 64].

Celebrating Advent & Christmas Today

Not finding Advent and Christmas explicitly named in the Bible, many of our Evangelical forebears refused to celebrate it. Some of my heroes, the Calvinistic Baptists of the 18th century, are a good example in this regard. But while we must learn from the past—a deep-seated conviction I live my life by—we don’t live in those days. It is today we must seize for Christ. And it is Scriptural to set apart days—even seasons—to reflect on God’s goodness and mercy, and to seek his face. And the Advent—blessed are all those who long for Christ’s appearing—and Christmas seasons are a marvellous time for such reflection and such seeking. PS It is very interesting that many of those remarkable brothers and sisters of the 18th century were adamant about celebrating the Fifth of November—the anniversary of England’s deliverance from the Gunpowder plot in the first decade of the seventeenth century and then of the landing of William III in England in 1688, “King Billy,” who brought religious toleration.

I think, for example of Caleb Evans’ great sermon on British Constitutional Liberty given on November 5, 1775 or Evans’ The remembrance of former days (Bristol, 1778).

Was that hypocrisy? Not at all. I simply think Advent and Christmas are more important than November 5—though I do value religious freedom (see previous post!).

The Aqueducts of Ancient Rome and God’s Common Grace

Roman technology in the Ancient world was second to none. Think of the aqueduct system that fed the heart of the Empire, Rome itself. There were eleven aqueducts that daily delivered 1.2 million cubic metres of water (nearly 300 million gallons)—yes daily!—to the city. One of the superintendents of the aqueduct system for the city, Sextus Julius Frontinus, the curator aquarum, penned a fabulous treatise De aquaeductu (97ad) at the close of the first century during the reign of Nerva. Comparing the system of aqueducts to other architectural marvels of the ancient world, he asked:

“I ask you! Just compare those useless pyramids, or the good-for-nothing tourist attractions of the Greeks with the vast monuments of this vital aqueduct network.”

When the Apostle Paul arrived in Rome for the first time (Acts 28), he would have seen these architectural marvels, and when he stayed in the city for those two years under house arrest, the water he drank and bathed in would have come through this remarkable system of aqueducts. How thankful we should be for the common grace that surrounds us.

Here, in the West, I am deeply grateful for the architectural web of institutions that grace our world—the freedoms of speech and movement that we enjoy because of them—and the freedom to preach the gospel and plant churches. These should never be taken for granted. There are others in this world—the old remnants of leftist ideological persuasion, radical Muslims, for instance—who would deprive us of such.

Daniel Johnson, in a disturbing article [“Allah’s England?”, Commentary, 122, no.4 (November 2006), 41-46] quotes a self-styled spokesperson for Islam in England, a certain Abu Izzadeen, a convert to Islam, dismissing free speech and our democratic way of life and saying over the British airwaves: Britain “doesn’t belong to you [the British], or to the Queen, or to the government, but to Allah. He has put us on earth to implement shari’a law” [page 46].

I, for one, am deeply thankful for the web of the Western culture—no, it is not Christian—but oh the freedoms it gives. In this we see the goodness of God designed to lead sinners to repentance!

Like the water the ancient Apostle drank in the city of Rome.

The Sin of Racism

Since I never watched Seinfeld, I knew nothing about Cosmo Kramer, played by actor Michael Richards. And I had not heard about the incident of Richards’ racist remarks until just now, reading it on the blog of Kirk Wellum. That led to reading this mini-essay by CT editor-at-large Ed Gilbreath, who writes on “Kramer's Sins--and Ours”, which is excellent. Having come from a Middle Eastern background (my father is a Kurd from Iraq), I experienced significant racist remarks in early High School—one young man insisted on calling me “Arab” and sometimes resorted to calling me by the N-word!—but only through life in Christ can there be healing for this sin. He is the One who breaks down the walls dividing men and women from each other on the basis of race. Ephesians 2 is such a powerful critique of this sin.

Yet even here Christians can fail. One thinks of the racism that underlay the slave trade in which Christians participated. But they were not living in accord with the Gospel! May God the Holy Spirit shine light and truth into all the crevices of our hearts and root out sin in its entirety, including the sin of racism!

Spurgeon on Keeping in Step with the Spirit

This week I am at Southern Baptist Theological Seminary—one of my most favourite places in the world—teaching a course on Baptist theologians. At the end of the week we shall be looking at Charles Haddon Spurgeon (1834-1892), that remarkable preacher-theologian. Here is a taster of the theological riches to be found in his preaching. These texts speak of the need of our churches to keep in step with the Holy Spirit. May God enable us to learn the theological lesson these texts proclaim. In an early sermon, “The Superlative Excellence of the Holy Spirit,” Spurgeon emphasizes that the Spirit must be treated with “deep awe and reverence.” Believers must be careful not to grieve him or provoke him to anger through sin. Moreover, if “the Holy Spirit be indeed so mighty, let us do nothing without him; let us begin no project, and carry on no enterprise, and conclude no transaction, without imploring his blessing.” (The Metropolitan Tabernacle Pulpit, 10:338).

In a later sermon, entitled “The Paraclete,” which was preached in 1872, Spurgeon reminded his audience that if they truly considered the Spirit to be their “sole force,” then they ought to: “Love the Spirit, worship the Spirit, trust the Spirit, obey the Spirit, and, as a church, cry mightily to the Spirit. Beseech him to let his mighty power be known and felt among you.” (The Metropolitan Tabernacle Pulpit, 18:564). And putting his own advice into practice, Spurgeon went on to cry: “Come, Holy Spirit now! Thou art with us, but come with power and let us feel thy sacred might!” (The Metropolitan Tabernacle Pulpit, 18:564).

Spurgeon was all too aware of the consequences of failing to heed such advice. In a sermon preached two years before “The Paraclete,” the Baptist preacher laid before the congregation of the Metropolitan Tabernacle what he called “A Most Needful Prayer Concerning the Holy Spirit.” His text was the prayer of David in Psalm 51:11: “Cast me not away from thy presence; and take not thy Holy Spirit from me.” After a personal confession, in which Spurgeon declared that he “would sooner die a thousand times, than lose the helpful presence of the Holy Ghost,” he used a vivid illustration, fresh in the minds of his hearers, to depict the church from which the Spirit has departed.

On the other side of the English Channel the Franco-Prussian War was raging, and, as Spurgeon preached, the war was going badly for the French, who would suffer a humiliating defeat at the hands of the Prussians at the end of that year. “Any church from which the Spirit has departed,” Spurgeon declared, “becomes very like that great empire with whose military glory the world was dazzled, and whose strength made the nations tremble. France, mistress of arms, queen of beauty, arbiter of politics, how soon has she fallen!…The nation once so great now lies bleeding at her victor’s feet, pitied of us all none the less because her folly continues the useless fight. Just so have we seen it in churches; may we never so see it here.” (The Metropolitan Tabernacle Pulpit, 16:562).

Spurgeon turns to the geography of Egypt to drive his point home even further. Areas of land in Egypt which were once fertile because of life-giving irrigation canals drawn from the Nile River are now desert simply because these canals have been allowed to lapse into disuse. So it is with churches, Spurgeon emphasizes. Churches “irrigated by the Spirit,” he declared, “once produced rich harvests of souls; left of the Spirit the sand of the world has covered them, and where once all was green and beautiful there is nothing but the former howling wilderness.” (The Metropolitan Tabernacle Pulpit, 16:563).

Sticking with Egypt for a further illustration, Spurgeon takes up an aspect of the history of that land. The nineteenth century witnessed the systematic ransacking of the Egyptian pyramids by European archaeologists and explorers. Prominent amongst the treasures found in these pyramids were the mummified bodies of the Pharaohs. Spurgeon clearly has little sympathy with the removal of these bodies of the ancient Egyptian kings. Their discovery and exposure to “every vulgar eye” awakens in Spurgeon “melancholy reflections.” These poor mummies, “once a Pharaoh whose voice could shake a nation and devastate continents,” are now mere objects for a museum. And now Spurgeon draws the comparison with the local church.

“[A]live by the divine indwelling, God gives it royalty, and makes it a king and priest unto himself among the sons of men; its influence is felt further than it dreams; the world trembles at it, for it is fair as the sun, clear as the moon, and terrible as an army with banners; but when the Spirit of God is departed, what remains but its old records, ancient creeds, title-deeds, traditions, histories and memories? it is in fact a mummy of a church rather than a church of God, and it is better fitted to be looked at by antiquarians than to be treated as an existent agency.” (The Metropolitan Tabernacle Pulpit, 16:563).

Calvinistic Baptists and Hyper-Calvinists: The Difference

Frequently those of us who describe ourselves as Evangelical Calvinists and Calvinistic Baptists get labeled as Hyper-Calvinists who have no interest in or passion about evangelism. To anyone who knows the history of Calvinistic Baptists and what is Hyper-Calvinism, the charge is so patently ridiculous and often indicates that the individual making the charge has never really known a Hyper-Calvinist. Just so that one knows what the nature of a live Hyper-Calvinist is really like, see this blog entry by Terry Leap on Hyper-Calvinism in eastern Kentucky: “Caners continue mis-characterization knowingly...”

Not one Calvinistic Baptist I know has anything remotely in common with this Hardshell Baptist! Here is what the Calvinistic Baptists I know look like: the Spurgeon who preached to all and sundry: see Darrin Brooker’s post on Stupid Sinners.

Women in Office

Women and ministry? It seems that I have been thinking about—wrestling with—pondering—this subject for ages. In fact, I recall distinctly teaching a series on the issue back in 1981-1982 at what was called by those involved “The Tuesday Night Bible Study,” a bible study of anywhere between seven or eight and thirty or so. [This bible study originated with the conversion of a number of individuals through the “I Found It” evangelistic campaign of Bill Bright in 1979 or so. This group of individuals became linked to Stanley Avenue Baptist Church in Hamilton, Ontario, where I was a member. They began to meet and somehow I became involved as a teacher. It ran for over fifteen years and it was a great training ground for me, as I taught through tons of Scripture and some church history as well].

Well, among the topics I taught on was the issue of the role of women in the life of the church. It was a contentious issue then and is even more so now. Over the years, having thought about the issue at a number of levels, especially with regard to what should be said and what approach should be taken in a seminary context, my convictions have deepened that the complementarian viewpoint is the only position that does justice to both the text of Scripture and its deep structures that address life in this world.

Of course, women should be involved in various ministries in the life of the church. One cannot read Romans 16:1-16, for example, and not see the evidence that women were involved in this way in the Pauline communities. But can they be ruling, teaching elders? To be sure, one’s answer to this question is not one that affects one’s salvation. In that sense, it is like other secondary issues, such as ecclesial polity or baptism.

Yet, unlike one’s decision on these two issues, contemporary egalitarianism (to be distinguished from that of the Methodist or Holiness movements of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries) often does entail a denial of the sufficiency of Scripture. Yes, one can be an egalitarian and affirm scriptural inerrancy. But the egalitarian who is committed to inerrancy has to argue that scriptural statements on the whole range of male-female relationships in the church and in the home are no longer applicable. There are various ways this is done today, but common to them all, it strikes me, is an implicit denial of the sufficiency of Scripture.

Of course, those who recognize the discontinuity introduced by the new covenant also argue that portions of the old covenant are no longer applicable. But in the case of egalitarianism, it is new covenant affirmations that are being ruled as passé and this raises the question, “Does egalitarianism necessarily undermine Scriptural sufficiency?”

For further helpful reflections on this issue as it is currently impacting those in the Reformed community, see Ligon Duncan’s thoughts on “Complementarianism and the Conservative Reformed Community” at this post on the Reformation 21 blog.

HT: David Shedden.

Terrorists in Canada and the Kingdom of Christ

In the recent arrest of 12 men and 5 youths planning terrorist activities here in Canada (see this CTV report here), Luc Portelance of the Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS) commented: “It is important to note that this operation in no way reflects negatively on any specific community or ethno-cultural group in Canada. Terrorism is a dangerous ideology and a global phenomenon. As yesterday’s arrests confirm, Canada is not immune from this ideology.” This is interesting, for in the list of names released on the report, all of them are clearly Muslim. I am convinced that it would be a despicable act of utter folly and downright racism to argue that this means all people of Muslim descent in this country are potential terrorists. After all, my own birth-name was Azad Michael Anthony Hakim and my forebears were Kurdish Muslims from Kirkuk, Iraq. I endured enough racist slurs as a young boy growing up in England and Canada in the 1960s to know the error and personal pain of such racial stereotyping.

On the other hand, this surely does mean that threats to our country’s safety are more likely to come from this community than from among immigrants from Brazil, say, or Thailand. And it would be equal folly for we who love Canada to think that she would be immune from the struggle that has engulfed other Western nations like Britain, Australia, Spain, and the U.S.A. I suspect we have thought that because the hatred of many in this world has been directed against America, we will get off scot-free, since we are clear that we are not Americans, but Canadians. But the distinctions that we love to make between ourselves and our friends to the south is completely lost in the eyes of many who are filled with loathing for all things Western. As our Prime Minister, Stephen Harper, emphasized: “We are a target because of who we are, how we live, our society, our diversity and our values—values such as freedom, democracy and the rule of law—the values that make Canada great.” (By the way, what a joy to have such a man as our Prime Minister!)

In these dangerous times, though, we who have a commitment to Christ have another responsibility above and beyond love of country: love of Christ and concern that his Kingdom embrace men and women of every clime and tongue. This is a Kingdom that is not of this world and cannot be brought in by the clash of arms or weapons of human destruction. It is by gospel proclamation, words of witness, deeds of love and Christian community—and above all the grace of the Holy Spirit’s converting power—that this Kingdom moves forward. And we must never forget that among the people for whom our Lord Jesus died are those who today call upon Allah. And there is coming a great day when they will cast this idol to the winds, the bats and the moles, and be converted and worship the Lord Christ.

God, hasten the day!

HT: Paul W. Martin.

A Thought about Azusa Street

We have our differences with classical Pentecostalism, especially with regard to the work of the Holy Spirit. But there is little doubt of classical Pentecostals’ love for Christ and their passion for missions. William J. Seymour (1870-1922), the preacher at the Apostolic Faith Mission on Azusa Street, where Pentecostalism was born, was very Christocentric. “The baptism with the Holy Ghost gives us power to testify to a risen, resurrected Savior,” wrote Seymour. “Our affections are in Jesus Christ, the Lamb of God that takes away the sin of the world.” [cited Gary B. McGee, “From Azusa Street to the Ends of the Earth.”] While I would strongly disagree with Seymour’s understanding of the baptism of the Spirit—he was actually a holiness preacher who believed that the baptism of the Spirit was a third work beyond conversion and entire sanctification—I can honour his passion for the glory of the Risen Christ and his desire to see that glory spread to the nations.

A discussion of centennial celebrations of what took place at Azusa Street in 1906 can be found here: Azusa Street Centennial. The section on the history is very well done.

Samuel Pearce on the Duty of Churches Towards Their Pastors

Among the shining names from the history of the Church of the Lord Jesus Christ is that of Samuel Pearce (1766-1799), who was the pastor of Cannon Street Baptist Church, Birmingham, for the ten years before his death. He was an engaging preacher who had a profound impact on many who heard him. Here is a portion of one of his sermons, The Duty of Churches to regard Ministers as the Gift of Christ, in which he is speaking on Ephesians 4:11-12 at an ordination, that of W. Belsher of Worcester. It is a text that is very relevant for today when pastors can be lightly esteemed. Pearce first emphasizes that pastors are a gift from Christ and why God has given them to the Church.

“None of God’s gifts are bestowed without design—the falling shower, and the clear shining of the sun after rain, the wintry frosts and the summer heats, have their respective uses; nor can you suppose that the great Head of the Church hath called our brother by his grace, put him into the ministry, and given him to you as a pastor, without having in view some important end. It will now be your wisdom, as it is your duty, to consider seriously what that end is, and to be practically concerned to have it answered.

“Plainly is this design unfolded in the words following the text, “for the perfection of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ” [Ephesians 4:12,] that is, not for your increase in numbers only, but also for your improvement in wisdom and goodness. Now your duties, my brethren, are consequent on your pastors: if he be a teacher, you must be learners; if he have a building to erect, you must be fellow labourers; and, unless you be wanting in the duties of your stations, you may be assured that the divine blessing will not be withheld.”

He then rightly points out the first and greatest need of pastors is that their people pray for them. This point is very much in line with the great sense of dependence on the Spirit that marked out Pearce and his friends, men like Andrew Fuller and William Carey:

“If you would have the design of the pastoral relation answered, you must be much in prayer for your minister: His work is great, and the necessary qualifications for the discharge of it, are neither unimportant nor few. It requires much wisdom to understand the Scriptures; much fortitude to oppose the errors, the indifference, and the impurities of the times; much zeal to labour extensively and habitually for Christ and souls; much prudence to advise and act in difficult cases, and much personal religion to impart a savor of Christ to all his conversation, his discourses, and his prayers.

“Here then is scope for your petitions; the furniture of a Christian minister must come from above, and from thence it must be sought. “Brethren, pray for us,” said the apostle of the Gentiles. Brethren, pray for us, we also say: Men of like passions with yourselves—exposed to temptation from numerous quarters—as prone naturally to depart from God as you—liable to stupidity, carnality, and vanity—O, if you have any desire to see us holy, spiritual, active, honourable—pray for us.”

Pearce then outlines the key challenges before the preacher of the Word and reiterates the need for the sovereign power of God to accompany the pastor’s labours and as a means to this the faithful praying of God’s people:

“You are not unacquainted, brethren, with the difficulties which lie in the way of our success. …Not merely to inform the judgments—to excite the passions—to conquer the prejudices of education, and to reform the manners of men, are before us—a more arduous talk presents itself. My brethren, our point is not gained without a change of heart! A renovation of the whole soul! A conversion from the power of Satan unto God! But who is sufficient for these things? Can human energy effect them? Nay, my brethren, we are compelled to own that “we are not sufficient of ourselves to do any thing as of ourselves—all our sufficiency is of God.” Were all the moral virtues, and supernatual endowments, which have ever adorned the saint, or distinguished the apostle, concentrated in one Christian pastor, neither will believers be improved, nor sinners converted, without the presence, the power, and the grace of Christ! In vain we enter the pulpit—in vain we persuade, we exhort, we beseech, we reprove, we warn, or we invite—the word will never come with a saving power, unless it “come in the Holy Ghost.” …Our only encouragement to labour, and our only hope of success, arise from the promise of God, and as a mean of enjoying it, the prayers of our people. My dear brethren, you had better dispose of your pastor to some other church, unless you have a heart to pray for him.”

Words for our day indeed.

NOTE: Andrew Fuller would later draw up the life of his friend Pearce. One of the reasons he wrote his life was to illustrate the piety that accompanied genuine Calvinism, as opposed to what Fuller regarded as the “false Calvinism” of certain Antinomians of his day. These Antinomians tended to reject inviting sinners to Christ—or offering Christ indiscriminately to all and sundry. It is noteworthy that Pearce, near the end of the last section of this sermon cited above, describes the work of preaching thus: “we persuade, we exhort, we beseech, we reprove, we warn, or we invite.” This is a fabulous window into his thought about the content of faithful, biblical preaching. Note especially the presence of the phrase “we invite.” Biblical preaching invites sinners to come to the Saviour.

Irenaeus on the Beatific Vision, Part II

As we have noted (IRENAEUS OF LYONS ON THE BEATIFIC VISION, PART I), the Son’s revealing of the Father to men and women has been a continual one, yet it has not always been in the same fullness throughout history. There have been differing degrees of the vision of and knowledge of God in history (Against heresies 4.20.5). For Irenaeus, this vision and knowledge is a gradual one, thus implying a progressive revelation of God in history. This progressive revelation of God (through various economies) occurred because of humanity’s imperfection and men and women thus needed to be accustomed (assuescere) to bear the vision of God (Against heresies 4.14.2). See also Irenaeus’ use of assuescere with regard to man’s learning to receive the Spirit of God: Against heresies 3.20.2, 16.5; 4.5.4, 12.4, 14.2, 21.3.

History is therefore conceived by Irenaeus to be a process; a process by which imperfect man ascends (an ascent made possible by God) to a more perfect vision of God. Even Adam, who was created in the image and likeness of God was a child spiritually who needed to grow. Irenaeus found this view of Adam as being a child in the thought of Theophilus of Antioch. See To Autolycus 2.25; cf. Against heresies 3.22.4; 4.38.1.

Even if there had not been a Fall there would have been spiritual growth. Adam was given as much of the Spirit as he could bear. Adam therefore received a fragile incorruptibility (Against heresies 4.40.3; 5.16.2). In Irenaeus’ thinking, his loss of it was more through carelessness than malice. Yet, Irenaeus still sees it as sin and the essential cause of sin in the world.

However, the Fall does not alter God’s essential plan, that is, the raising of man to perfection and a perfect vision of God. True perfection, the destination of humanity, is nothing less than the vision of God, the crown of spiritual growth (Against heresies 4.11.1). Man, as a being of temporality, must learn to travel gradually towards God, who is not subject to time.

Old Testament history thus became, for Irenaeus, God’s work of “adjusting the human race, in manifold ways, to harmony with salvation” (Against heresies 4.14.2, 21.3, 38.1, 3, 39.2). Heresy was, therefore, for Irenaeus, an ignoring of God’s dispensations through history; that is, rejecting the historical provisions God has made for humanity’s salvation, perfection and ultimate destiny. See Against heresies 3.12.2, 16.8; 4.27.2, 29.1, 2, 35.2; 5.19.2.

Three further remarks of clarification are needed with regard to Irenaeus’ belief in the spiritual education of humanity. First, the ascending path of humanity to God in history is quite distinct from any Gnostic belief in the ascent of man to God. For Irenaeus it is the Holy Spirit which confers on man the possibility of progress.

Second, Irenaeus is not urging a cheap belief in progress qua progress. Progress is always connected to sonship and communion with God.

Third, history is intimately connected to eschatology. History does not continue ad infinitum. History has an end; but until the eschatological consummation humanity is constantly “on the way.”

Irenaeus of Lyons on the Beatific Vision, Part I

Over against all of the current inanities that are being said about Jesus Christ, why do Christians declare Jesus to be God and the only mediator between God and humanity? The second-century theologian Irenaeus (died c.202), who also had to face similar inanities in the form of Valentinian Gnosticism and Marcionism, can help us answer this question. For Irenaeus, the only way we can know and see God was through love; and not our love for him, but rather, through his love for us. We know God because he first loved us. Thus Irenaeus writes of Christ: “So he united man with God and brought about a communion of God and man, we being unable in any other wise to have part in incorruptibility, had it not been for his coming to us.” (Demonstration 31).

Humanity cannot see God the Father by its own powers (Against Heresies 1.20.5). Not only is the Father beyond perception and thus unknowable and invisible, but mankind is lost in sin because of Adam’s fall (Against Heresies 3.23.2; 5.1.3, 16.3, 21.1, 34.2; Demonstration 31, 37), and thus incapable by nature of seeing God and saving itself (sine Spiritu Dei salvari non possumus) (Against Heresies 3.18.2, 20.2-3; 4.13.3; 5.9.2, 12.3).

It is essential to bear in mind that for Irenaeus no created reality can be commensurate with God, even in heaven. God is always the Giver and humanity the recipient. See Against Heresies 4.11.2: “Et hoc Deus ab homine differt, quondam Deus quidem facit, homo autem fit.”

Although human beings cannot know God in their own strength, it does not follow that God cannot make himself known to them. Human beings can know God through divine love and are saved by this love.

Now, it is only through the Son that the Father is revealed. The Son is the agnitio Patris, mensura Patris, the manifestatio Patris, the visible Patris. The Son is the necessary mediator in imparting to men and women the knowledge of God the Father.

This revealing activity by the Son of the Father is a continuous one. It began at creation and will stretch into eternity. For Irenaeus, the Word was always present with God. Though Irenaeus does not define the relationship between Father and Son within the Godhead, his writings definitely imply the eternal generation of the Word. God was never without his Logos. The Son has, therefore, always been manifesting the Father.

This revelation of the Father by the Son depends on the good will of the Father (beneplacitum Patris) [J. Ochagavia, Visible Patris Filius (Rome, 1964), 66], for it is the Father that sends the Son (Against Heresies 4.11.2). The Son manifests the Father according to the Father’s benevolent disposition (Against Heresies 4.20.5). The Father’s transcendence rules out the possibility of his appearing to men and women; but the Father’s goodness leads to the sending of his Son to fallen humanity (Against Heresies 4.34.5).

The Apostle Paul: Our Precursor As Paleo-Blogger?

My friend and colleague Clint Humfrey has posted a very thoughtful entry on his blog entitled “The Apostle Paul: Paleo-Blogger?” Clint makes a good point in noting that Paul’s use of the letter as a medium of communication between himself and his churches bespeaks his pastoral heart and he rightly evidences 2 Cor 10:9-11 as proof. He also argues that there is a distinct similarity between the Apostle’s letters and the nature of blogging. In his words, “The use of blogging as a means of occasional correspondence to a wide range of readers—some of whom we may never meet—seems to offer parallels to Paul’s ministry.” He thus suggests that it is significant that the Apostle did not “draw up a circular Manual of Discipline, or a 95 Theses, or construct a Didactic Constitution for Christianity.”

Putting aside the question of whether each of these genres of litearture would have been available to the Apostle in his cultural environment, I think it is important to stress that Paul’s letters cannot be fully understood as being primarily, as Clint puts it, “ ‘occasioned’ by a situation needing to be addressed.” This is certainly not true of the circular letter we know as Ephesians and is hardly true of the heart of Romans (1:16-11:36). Some would argue that 1 Timothy has a “church manual” feel to it, though I personally would differ with this view of the purpose of the letter.

Granted there are distinct historical situations that give rise to the other letters—the issue of the Judaizers in Galatia, Paul’s impending death in 2 Timothy, etc.—yet Paul is well aware that he is writing Scripture (see, for example, 1 Corinthians 7:10, 25; 14:37-38; 1 Thessalonians 4:1-2, 8; Colossians 4:16), and, as such, he is aware that his letters have a message that transcends that which occasioned them (see Romans 15:4; cp. 2 Timothy 1:13-14 and 2:2). And he was not alone in thinking this way (see 2 Peter 3:15-16).

Thanks, Clint, for stimulating these thoughts—iron sharpening iron!