October 1927
T h e
K i n g ’ s
633
B u s i n e s s
blessing which the believer may obtain subsequent to his conversion. What, then, shall be said about the teaching that Chris tians must tarry and seek and agonize for the baptism of the Spirit? It is, indeed, true that many more than our Pentecostal friends use the term “baptism” to describe the fulness of the Spirit, but surely such a use of the word is unwarranted. The writer would not in the least mini mise the need o f seeking and striving for the fulness of the Spirit. This duty should lie heavily on many more of God’s people than it does, and let nothing that is here written hinder anyone from most earnestly seeking this
all-needful blessing. But let not the fulness be confused with the baptism of the Spirit. Biblical terms should never be confused. Any careless handling of the Word should be avoided. Such a procedure cannot but lend itself to the propagation o f error, of which the teaching under discussion is an outstanding example, which by the misapplication of Scripture has plunged many a seeking soul into spiritual darkness and satisfied others with its will-o-the-wisp lights. Let us be sure of this, that the Word of God does not warrant any believer to tarry and seek and pray for the baptism of the Spirit. Every believer already has this great primal blessing.
¿Mb.
Here’s a Sample-Case of Liberalism S how ing th e R eligious T rend in S ome C ircles
W E do not like to give much of our valuable space to quotations'from Modernists. We much prefer to fill our pages with constructive helps. It may, how ever, be profitable occasionally to notice some quotations from ministers who seek to adapt their message to the latest pronouncements of science. It will help us to get the trend of the times and prepare us to meet the argu ments when they come to us from those who have imbibed them from the higher-ups. * * * This from the Congregational Council Sermon , gives one in a nutshell the program of liberalism: “The world is to be saved—but not by external miracle, not by blind acceptance of some judicial fiction or some mechanical scheme of salvation, but by actually achieving salvation, by mankind catching the beauty and greatness and utter inevitableness of Christ’s ideal and putting it into practice. And such a salvation comes only by sav iours !” In other words—we are our own saviours. The world has been limping along on that idea since the time of Cain. T h is —F or S unday S chools A Sunday-school magazine carries the following com ment on John 6:1-15 : “Feeding the Multitude. There are many views re garding this incident. Kent says : “It is a fact that inhab itants of Palestine in the past—and today—rarely set out even for a few hours without placing some soft ori ental bread in their wallets. When multitudes gathered, Jesus certainly allayed their spiritual hunger, and aroused their desire to remain and hear Him. . Would He not have inspired the spirit of unselfish giving which would lead each to share what he had with his. neighbor ?” Kent, p. 107. The narrative says: “Jesus took the food and dis tributed it, Himself setting the example of sharing.” On the transfiguration scene, the same paper makes this comment: “Moon probably at full, shedding radiant light on glistening snow. When Peter tried to tell about it afterwards, scarcely knew what happened. Perhaps only half awake, but thought he heard Jesus talking with God and Moses and Elijah and the prophets of old. Everything around so beautiful and dazzling: covered face with hands for a time. When he looked again saw
Jesus alone, rising from prayer, and dawn was breaking. In light of rising sun, rosy and golden, they looked at Jesus and saw that light in His eyes He always had after night of prayer on hillside.” * * * The following is the pronouncement of a modernistic Doctor of Divinity, as quoted by The Methodist: “1 would rather live in a godless universe than in one wor shiping the kind of ogre set up in some minds. We must rid ourselves of a Nero god, who fiddles in Paradise while hell burns.” What a caricature and what a vile fling at the God of the Bible! But who, pray, ever be lieved in a God who “fiddles while hell burns” ? It is a gross travesty! Is A tonement A “T heory ” ? In an article entitled: “The New Outlook,” a noted minister says: “If men today are moving away from the substitution ary theory of the Atonement we need not become panic- stricken, for this is only a. theory. It has served its day well, but may have to give place to a fresh interpretation of Scripture teaching. “Is the world anything the worse today, is it not rather the better, because we hold a more humane conception of God? Is not that conception reflected in all the great in stitutions of life in almost every land, in a more merciful, thoughtful and kindly treatment of our fellows ? The ages when God was conceived of as the stern Almighty but just Ruler of the Universe, whose wrath toward sin ful man was only placated by the intervention of His Son, were the ages when cruelty and oppression abounded on every hand.” The writer above makes it appear that Substitutionary Atonement is only a theory, whereas it is the plain and repeated teaching of Scripture. As to the days of “cruelty and oppression,” one only needs to read history to discover that the great revivals bringing the teaching of the Atone ment have been the means used of God for human uplifting and deliverance century after century. , We could fill many pages with such quotations, taken from clippings sent to our desk. We have given enough to show how these gentlemen deliberately invert the facts and, like a well-oiled weathercock, are free to respond to all the winds that blow.
Made with FlippingBook flipbook maker