468
G ’ S B U S I N E S S
THE
August 1926
W ill aMan DefendHimself and Not Defend Christ and the Bible? PRO F . L E A N D E R S. KEY SER , D.D. We highly commend this splendid article by our beloved friend Dr. Keyser. The editor has often made the statement that a man who would not defend his wife was a poor specimen of the human race; and that any man who loved his wife more than he loved his Lord was a poor specimen o f a Christian. WANT to give a concrete case (without mention ing any names), and draw the relevant lesson from It. There Is a certain prominent man in one of the leading denominations who does not approve of the present controversy In the Protestant church. He does not want ¡the evangelical portion of the church to defend the Bible and Christ against the criticisms of the Modernists, but »wants all of us just to keep quiet for the sake of peace. At the same time he professes to be thor oughly evangelical himself, and to be loyal to the standards of his own denomination, which bind all its members to the evangelical position. Again and again the Modernists have torn out large parts of the Bible and called them “ outworn categories.” Again and again they have denied the Virgin Birth of -our Lord, His essential deity, His resurrection, and His visible second coming. But the man to whom I refer, and who professes to be evangelical in his theology, has never used his pen or lifted his voice through all these years in defense of these holy Christian' doctrines. But here is a still more inconsistent feature of his case. Some time ago one of his church’s periodicals contained a few lines that seemed to reflect upon him. Did he keep quiet then? Did he go on the principle of saying nothing for the sake of peace and good will? No; he fairly flew to his own defense; and not in a mild spirit, either, but with real anger and with many harsh expressions. Oh, yes! he was ready to defend Number One—that is, himself, but never a word in defense of the Bible find evangelical Chris tianity! Not very consistent, is it? This leads one to won der whether he really wants people to keep quiet for the sake of peace o r ‘whether it might not be because he half sympathizes with the liberalistic party, The thing that seems to be so inapt is that a man can profess to be earnestly, whole-heartedly evangelical, and yet can sit quietly by and permit the precious doctrines of our faith to be attacked without coming to their defense, and even go bo far as to rebuke those who do oppose heresjr and try to vindicate the fundamental doctrines,. If a man’s wife or mother were in any way disparaged, surely he would not fold his hands and keep silent. But Christ’s virgin birth can be denied and held up to scorn as a “ biological miracle” which is Intolerable to the "modern mind," and yet some professedly evangelical men will maintain a mouse-like silence. Does not the Bible plainly teach that, our Lord, as to His human nature, “ was conceived by the Holy Ghost and born of the Virgin Mary” ? And is that not the historic Hamma Divinity'—School Wittenberg College, Ohio
WAITING FOR THE KING (Tune—“The Battle Hymn of the Republic” ) H oward W. P ope The Church is waiting for her King to take supreme command, And spread the gospel o’ er the earth on every sea and land, Till from the world the Lord has called a conse crated band, And then go marching on. Come, brothers, let us rally ’round the standard of the King, And girded by the Spirit’s power, His praises we will sing, Until the last one to be called, in triumph we shall bring, As we go marching on. And may the Spirit search our hearts to find out any stain, And cleanse us with the crimson flood at any cost or pain, That we may pure and spotless be, when Jesus comes again, As we go marching on. Chorus: • _____________________________ ______________________ faith of the Christian church? Can a man be inwardly evan gelical in his faith without defending that doctrine when it is attacked? What is his view of the Bible if he c^n let parts of it be thrown into the discard and never enter a protest? If Christ was naturally engendered, then He was only a human person. • No matter how much He may have been filled with God or the Holy Spirit, He still was a human personality, not a divine one. Then to worship Him is idolatry; to trust in Him as an adequate Saviour of the whole world from sin is futile. There can be no incarnation of the divine Son of God in human form If Christ as to His divine person was not ensphered by the Holy Ghost in human nature. Therefore the Modernist who denies the Virgin Birth of Christ denies the incarnation, and thus saps the foundation of our Christian faith. Can earnest evan gelical believers permit such a movement and apostasy to go on without flying to the defense of the Gospel. Consider another precious doctrine that is regarded as “ outmoded” by many propagandists of Modernism— the doc trine of the atonement as substitutionary and sacrificial. It surely is a doctrine which is plainly taught in the Bible; and the shedding of Christ’s blood on Calvary 1 b connected with it. Note how large a part of the four gospels is devoted to the narrative of the sufferings and death of our Lord. Yet there are people who assert that we are saved, not by the death of Christ, but by His life; by which they mean that He was only our teacher and example. Then He did not “ give His life a ransom for the many,” as He Himself declared. Then He did not shed His blood “ for the remld- (Continued on page 493) Glory, Glory, Hallelujah; Glory, Glory, Hallelujah; Glory, Glory, Hallelujah, As we go marching on.
Made with FlippingBook HTML5