^ pp Siottrp o f ISpmnnal, Pagp 4 0 3
VOL. V.
JULY, 1914
No. 7
Keeping the Bible from the People EDITORIAL
Waiting on God for the Coming of His Son By ANDREW MURRAY The Fundamental Principles of Christianity in the Light of Modern Thinking By JOHN M. MACINNIS
Studies in the Gospel According to John By R. A. TORREY
Published Once a Month by the J&Me 3ttsKhtlf a f %ots iXxtQtUe LOS ANGELES, CAL.
FIFTY CENTS A YEAR
MOTTO: “I the Lord do keep it. I will water it every moment lest any hurt it, I -will keep it night and day.”—Isa. 27:3. THE KING’S BUSINESS E. A. TORREY, Editor J. H. SAMMIS, T. C. HORTON, J. H. HUNTER, Associate Editors Entered as Second-Class matter November 17, 1910, a t the postoffice at Los Angeles, California, under the Act of March 3, 1879. Organ of the Bible Institute of Los Angeles, Inc. 536-558 South Hope Street, Los Angeles, California
DIRECTORS
Lyman Stewart, President. William Thorn, Secretary. T. C. Horton, Superintendent. E. A, K. Hackett. S. I. Merrill.
Rev. A. B. Prichard, Vice-President. J. M. Irvine, Treasurer. R. A. Torrey, Dean. Giles Kellogg. H. A. Getz.
DOCTRINAL STATEMENT We hold to the Historic Faith of the Church as expressed in the Common Creed of Evangelical Christendom and including: The Trinity of the Godhead. The Deity of the Christ.
Thè Maintenance of Good Works. The Second Coming of Christ. The Immortality of the Spirit. The Resurrection of the Body. The Life Everlasting of Believers. The Endless Punishment of the Im penitent. The Reality and Personality of Satan. (5) Shop Work. Regular services in shops and factories. (6) Jewish Evangelism. Personal work among the Hebrews. (7) Bible Women. House-to-house visitation and neighborhood classes. (8) Oil Fields. A mission to men on the oil fields. (9) Harbor Work. For seamen in Los Angeles harbor. (10) Books and Traces. Sale and dis tribution of selected books and tracts.
The Personality of the Holy Ghost. The Supernatural and Plenary 'au thority of the Holy Scriptures. The Unity in Diversity of the Church, which is the Body and Bride of Christ. The Substitutionary Atonement. The Necessity of the New Birth. . . . . . *The Institute trains, free of II I p 0 SCeost ; accredited men and women, in the knowledge and use of the Bible. n pn a r i men t (1) The I n s t i t u t e UBpdliniBHI classes held daily ex cept Saturdays and Sundays. (2) Extension work. Classes and con ferences held in neighboring cities and towns. (3) Evangelistic. Meetings conducted by our evangelists. (4) Spanish Mission. Meetings every night.
OUR WORK
THE KING’S BUSINESS
Table of Contents Editorials: A Kind and Scholarly Reply to an Unkind, Un- scholarly and Stupid Sneer—Keeping the Bible from the Peop le................................................................. _ ............ . 365 Waiting on God for the Coming of His Son. By Andrew Murray................. ............ 370 Conquering Love,” (poem). By Theodore Monod............. 371 The Fundamental Principles of Christianity in the Light of Modern Thinking. By John M. Maclnnis............................. 372 Studies in the Gospel According to John. By R. A. Torrey... 375 The International Sunday School Lessons. By J. H. S............. 379 The Heart of the Lesson. By T. C. Horton...... ............................ 387 “Nothing but Leaves, (poem). Anon ......................................... .389 Junior Endeavor Topics. By J. K. H. S.......................................... 390 At Home and Abroad.................... 393 Hints and Helps. . . . ( . . ) ............................................... 397 Questions and Answers. By R. A. Torrey.................................... 402 Bible Institute of Los Angeles......... .................... 403 Prayer for the Lost Sheep ( poem). By J. H. S........................ 416 Book Reviews...................................................................... 417
SUBSCRIPTION RATES
.
.
.
FIFTY CENTS A YEAR
Published by the Bible Institute of Los Angeles 536-558 South Hope Street, Los Angeles, California
Andrew J. Johnson, Printing, 719 W. Seventh St.
DR. TORREY'S NEW BOOK THE RETURN of the LORD JESUS
The Key to th e Scriptures, and th e Solution of All O ur Political and Social Problems or The Golden Age th a t is Soon Coming to th e E arth
By R. A. TORREY, D. D. Dean of the Bible Institute " of Los Angeles
T he Second Coming of the Lord is most ably presented by Dr. T orrey as the most precious tru th the Bible contains—* the safeguard against all cu rren t heresies, errors and false* hoods—-the believer’s hope and joy.
The fallowing excerpt» from press: notice» indicate how the book is -bejngp received;/
sure, cto be. widely read, as it deserv es to be.f' —T he L ife of F aith , London. * “If o u r read ers desire a concise, and' yet com prehensive tre a tise to p u t In to th e h an d s of an inquirer, th is is th e one by all m eans. It tre a ts * of th e im portance of b u r L o rd 's com ing again, its certain ty , th e m an n er of it, th e resu lts, th e tim e, an d our a ttitu d e w ith reference to it. It also gives a collation of S crip tu re passages, on th e second com ing of C h r is t; for individual study. W e u rg e th e stu d y of th is su b ject upon all o u r C h ristian b reth ren , both ¡m inisters an d laym en, su g g estin g th a t-th e y bould n o t g et a b e tte r te x t book w ith w hich to begin th e stu d y th a n th is of Dr. T orrey. "T-rÇhçistian W o rk ers' M aga zine, Chicago. “T h is g re a t evangelist, Bible teach er, scholar an d a u th o r h as p u t his whole h e a rt into th is little w ork. H e m entions as one of th é fo u r1 g re a t religious experiences of his life his realizatio n of th e B ible d octrine of C h rist’s ^Second Com ing. H e says:. T t tra n s form ed m y whole idea of life, it broke th e pow er of th e w orld an d its am b itio n over me, an d fille d 'm y life" w ith th e m ost ra d ia n t op tim ism even un d er th e m ost discouraging cir cum stances. H e is. absolutely tru e to th e S crip tu res an d quotes both th e Old T e sta m en t an d th e N ew T estam en t v ery freely. It is a . m ost h earten in g little volum e, published in good type an d on Splendid paper, arid àt* th e sm all price should have a large circu la tion. I t is true, to th e S crip tu res an d loyal to th e ‘L ord an d will stren g th en th e faith , b rig h te n th e hope, quicken th e zeal arid purify the; life of an y tru e child of God who read s it.’ Ÿ —T he W estern R ecorder, L ouis- villei
“L ike all of D r, T o rre y 's books thin book is w ritte n w ith ab so lu te clarity an d ' is free from p assio n .”—T he Pacific P resb y terian . “T hè book is0no exception to th e a u th o r's o th er w ritin g s in its clear, clean -cu t s ta te m ents of God’s t r u t h / '—^C hristian H erald of London. “Dr. T orrey offers th is a s ‘th e ,key ( to th e S crip tu res.’ H e finds th e second com ing of C hrist m entioned 318 tim es in th e 260.. ch ap te rs Of th e N ew T estam en t, an d h e considers it ‘th e m ost precious tru th th e B ible con ta in s /.” . I Ijjjj “Dr. T orrey is vigorous in h is style, and his appeal is wholly to th e S criptures. T his book gives' a Concise arid rèlidblé sta te m e n t of th e p re-m illen n arian view by one w ho holds it firm ly an d intelligently. ”-r-The P re s b y terian , P hiladelphia. “F o r a com paratively sm all book it is ex ceedingly ex h au stiv e on th e glorious them e all C h ristian s should have so m uch a t h eart. Tt could riot be àim plèr, and, for c le a r S crip tu re teaching, it is a book a fte r o u r own h eart/;--rT h e M orning S tar,, London. “Dr. T o rrey w rites in th e earn estn e ss an d sim plicity of a profound C h ristian faith . H e believes th e S crip tu res an d tak es God a t H is word. Je su s is to come again. T h is is his assu ran ce, and th e them e of th is volum e, which is full of th e S crip tu res.” “T he able tre a tm e n t of th is im p o rtan t, su b je c t which is given in th ese pages will, w e are sure, be ap p reciated by m any who love to th in k of C h rist’s reappearing*- a n d _who reg ard it as th e only rem edy fo r th e p resen t condition of th e world. Dr. T o rrey ’s book is
Can be had in two Bindings—Cloth 50c« Paper 25c.
BIBLE INSTITUTE BOOK ROOM
LOS ANGELES
The King’s Business
Yol. 5
JULY, 1914
No. 7
A Kind and Scholarly Reply to aji Unkind, Unscholarly and Stupid Sneer T HE California Christian Advocate says under the caption of. “A Pathetic Conference” : “This would be a proper description of the Prophetic Conferences which are being held, if half the things reported were true. It is difficult for a hobbyist not to wrest Scripture to his own hurt to prove his hobby., One of the most remarkable illustrations of which we have heard is the exegesis of the Rev. W. B. Riley, pastor of the First Baptist Church in Minneapolis, in his teaching upon the doctrine of the nature of the resurrec tion body: It is certainly strangely and wonderfully made. He says that Christ’s body lost all its blood on the cross. Since it was buried without blood, his resurrection body was bloodless and his heart did not beat. This he bases oh the statement, ‘Flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God.’ He takes his argument further, thus: Jesus said, “A spirit hath not flesh and bones as ye see me have’—with the conclusion that our resurrection bodies will have flesh and bones, but not flesh and blood. If there is an exhibition of exegetical stupidity by a teacher of the church which equals this, it has not been our misfortune to learn it.” Some one sent this very bitter exhibition of theological hatred to Dr. Riley. Dr. Riley replied to the Christian Advocate as follows: . “In connection with the Prophetic Conference, held in the Immanuel Presbyterian Church, Los Angeles, Calif., in March, I spoke of the risen body of Jesus Christ. I claimed, as the Christian Advocate in its invective charged, that Christ’s body in the death of the cross, lost all its blood and having been buried without blood, His risen body was bloodless and His heart did not beat. | “This your Editor characterizes as an exhibition of ‘exegetical stupidity’ not surpassed within his knowledge. “May I propose for the consideration of your Editor and your readers alike, á few questions? “1. Did Christ she'd His blood? And if so, how much of it? Dr. How ard Kelly, of Baltimore, a scientist of whom the best are not ashamed, contends that, the four Gospels prove past dispute that Christ’s heart broke, and poured the entire content of blood into the pericardium; and that, with the thrust of the soldier’s sword, all His blood was shed: “2; If Christ’s heart beat, and His blood circulated after His resurrection, will the Editor explain for us the significance qf Christ’s statement to Thomas: ‘Reach hither thy finger, and behold my hands; and reach hither thy hand, and thrust it into my side, and be not faithless but believing’? “3. If the wound remained an open one, and still the heart beat and the •blood circulated, arid Christ suffered rio ill effects from it, will the Editor explain to us how this fact comports with,the denial of miracles now common to scientific and advanced thinkers ? Possibly the Editor has reached the point,
366 THE KING’S BUSINESS now maintained by many of our new theologians, that Christ never rose. If so, let us have a clear statement regarding the matter. “Finally; if Christ did rise in a bloodless body, animated by the eternal Spirit of God, and yet a body which, on the authority of His own word, had flesh and bones, what does the Editor say to the statement that ‘He is the first fruits of them that slept’ and the later fruits shall be like Him? In other words, that His risen body is a sample of the risen body of all saints ? Give to your readers a clear, intelligent, scientific; and yet scriptural exegesis of this incident. Gladly would I have any blunders of mine corrected. “Will the Editor of the Christian Advocate give us a clear exegesis of the statement, ‘There is a natural body and there is also a spiritual body!’ ” The Editor of the Christian Advocate seems to think that the view pre sented by Dr. Riley is something new and original with him. It is substan tially the view that has been held by a great many scholars for many years. In the book WHAT THE BIBLE TEACHES written by the writer of this editorial and published in 1898, and which has been translated into several foreign languages and which has had a large circulation and is used as a text book in a number of institutions, the same view is not only advanced but proven from Scripture. This view, however, was not original with the writer of WHAT THE BIBLE TEACHES. For the Editor of the Christian Ad vocate to speak of a view so widely held and so clearly proven as “an exhibition of exegetical stupidity by a teacher of the Church” greater than any other he has ever heard of does not injure Dr. Riley in any way but is simply an exhibi tion of his own lack of familiarity with current thought and of his own rancour of heart. We have not seen Dr. Riley’s reply printed in the California Chris tian Advocate but it may have been. We give it here that it may have a wide circulation. Keeping the Bible from the People T HE Devil hates the Bible: He does everything in his power to discredit it. He is back of all the attempts of the Destructive Critics to under mine faith in the Word of God. This is not to say that the Destructive Critics are consciously doing the Devil’s work, but they are doing it none the less really. But openly discrediting the Bible is not the Devil’s only method; where he cannot discredit it, he tries to keep people from studying it. One of his methods is by getting them to study something else. This was the method that he pursued very largely in the Church of Rome, to put the Bible in the background (where it does not openly oppose and seek to destroy it). He has led the Church of Rome to substitute catechisms, lives of saints and other things for the Bible. But the Devil has done the same thing in the Protestant Church, he has induced people to study devotional books instead of going right to the source from which all true devotional books derive whatever is good in them. One of his most subtle efforts to induce men to forsake the Bible or to substitute something else for the Bible is found in the International Graded Lessons. In the issue of the Sunday School Times of June 6th; Mr. Trumbull has a most excellent article upon this matter which we here reproduce, in as far as it bears on the present subject. The article is in answer to a question. The question was as follows:
THE KING’S BUSINESS 367 I*1 Notes on Open Letters for April 25 you make the unqualified statement that ‘the Graded Lessons as prepared have included features that are regrettable and harmful.’ If your statement had been that some people who have, had to do personally, with some of these Graded Lessons have regretted and considered harmful some things they found in them, and at other points have noted what seemed to them regrettable and harmful omissions from them, no one could fairly challenge your statement. No one, also, could fairly question your right to express your own editorial opinion as to the harmfulness and fegrettability of any features in the Lesson Committee’s lists. In this case, however, your statement, as it stands, appears to be a judgment which you utter on behalf of the whole Sunday-school-constituency, as if it were something that no sensible person would deny. Permit me, therefore, to challenge it flatly. Please name the features which you deem regrettable and harmful.” Mr. Trumbull’s answer is as follows: ,n rj Just Where Is the Peril? Because there are elements here that tend to minimize or ignore the unique and supreme character and authority of the Bible as the inspired Word of God; that tend to blur the line between the natural and the supernatural; that tend to place nature study on the same plane as Bible study in gaining a knowledge of God; and that tend to a lack of emphasis on certain vital doctrinal teaching of the Gospel of Christ. ' Extra^Bïblièal lessons have been freely inserted throughout this Graded -Series,—that is, lessons the material for which is drawn chiefly from other liter ature thân ithe Bible. In brie instance,—in the Sèfcond Year Intermediate,—a ■full six rrçontHs is devoted, tô thé study of “Later Christian Leaders,’’ including such characters as Luther,- Calvin, John Weslèy, the Earl of Shaftesbury, and Florence Nightingale ; and three months of the six are devoted to the study of a single modern missionary, Alexander Mackay: A note from the Lesson Committee’points out that thé material upon which these three :months? lessons are; based ¡is 'found in the well-known book, “Uganda’s Whité Man of Work,” the Committee having previously said; “It is intended that a more careful analysis of a single character shall prepare the pupil for; the nine-months’ study in the life of Christ which will immediately follow in the lessons for the Third Year Intermediate-” Just what effect will it; have upon fourteen-year-olds to bring in a book of this sort as, in a sense, parallel material to the Bible’s record of the life of our Lord Jesus, Christ? To be sure, Scrip,tu,re material is sug gested for each of-these- extra-Biblical lessons, -bu t,the- Scripture material is subordinate, and the extra-Biblical material is the main theme for study. As is well known, in response to a widespread protest the Lesson Commit- .tee in 1911 issued Biblical lessons to run parallel tagll the extra-Biblical lessons in the Graded Series, and “to make, suçh other minor (modifications as seemed to it desirable.” These Biblical lessons, do not replace the extra-Biblical lessons; they take; their place beside the extra-Biblical lessons in the lists, already issued.” The International;-Lesson ,:G9mh]ittee therefore stands before the .Sîuiiday-sçhool world committed rto offering the Sunday-school constituency material from other- sources than, the, Bible as its chief material for study in numerous Sunday-school sessions»- This-js regrettable and harmful. Is It Not à Bible Course? ■ has. been; done deliberately and intentionally, and with deep-seated conviction on the. part of those who favor it. , At the conference on the Inter- Hftft^nal Lessons held .in Philadelphia thi|’ spring, a prominent leader in the work of the Graded Lessons, said publicly,* and with intense earnestness : “We
368
THE KING’S BUSINESS deny at every point that our course is a B ible course ; our course is a child teaching course Now The Sunday School Times recognizes that it has no right to speak for the entire Sunday-school constituency. But it believes that it does speak for the great majority of the Sunday-school constituency when it says that the historic Church of Christ does not accept the suggestion that other literature shall be placed upon a par with the Bible as the material for study in the Sunday-school session. If the church succeeds in working out plans whereby the larger religious education of the child and of the community can be provided for under Sun day-school auspices, extending through week-days as well as on Sunday, then of course missionary biography and other uninspired literature would have a perfectly proper place as material for study. But that is not the issue in the present situation. As we speak of “the Sunday-school” today, we refer to the very limited opportunity for Bible study offered in the session of an hour or so on Sunday, where the actual Bible-studying, Bible-teaching, period is about 30 minutes. This is the church’s chief and only Bible-teaching ser vice, at present, in the vast majority of churches. To give any other form of material than the Bible the right of way in this restricted period is a perilous thing. The church must have a service of Bible study and Bible teaching. Its very life, and the life of the home and the community, depend upon this. Nothing that is “extra-Biblical” can be permitted to encroach upon that vital part of the church’s work. It will be a sad day indeed when this question is considered even debatable by the majority of'the members of the church of Christ on earth. It is important to recognize also that there is no real dilemma between the Bible and child-teaching. We do not have to choose between the two. We must have them both, and we can. The Bible is God’s best provision for child teaching. The Limitations of Nature Study. There is a real danger, also, in using nature as the chief material for Sun day-school teaching, even with the youngest Beginners. Nature study has its valued place as material to illustrate the Bible’s truths. Our Lord used it in that way. But there is no such revelation of God in nature as there is in the Holy Scriptures. Nature is natural; the Bible is supernatural. The two are in no sense equal revelations of the heart of God and of the Gospel of Christ. Indeed, nature is a sin-distorted, sin-cursed thing. God made this very plain when He said in the Garden of Eden, “Cursed is the ground for thy sake;. . . . thorns also and thistles shall it bring forth to thee,” as He told Adam and Eve how they had degraded even the earth beneath their feet through their sin. It may not be necessary or wise that the little child should be taught this ; but it is very necessary that the teacher should have this in mind in using nature material to illustrate the ways and the love and the protection of the Heavenly Father. It puts sharp limitations upon our use of nature material, and it suggests that such nature material, in and of itself, should not be the leading material in any lessons.for Sunday-school study. Do We Believe in the Supernatural? Apart from the question of nature studies as such, there is present in the International Graded Lessons the modern steadily encroaching atmosphere of the “natural” as over against the “supernatural.” The atmosphere in many
THE KING’S BUSINESS 369 colleges today is an atmosphere that denies the supernatural. There are evi dences, here and there throughout this scheme of lessons, of such a handling of the Bible as one would give to any other book. Such lesson titles, for ex ample, as “Gideon, the Man Whom Responsibility Made Great’’ (First Year Intermediate), “Abraham—The Challenge of an Ideal” (Second Year Senior), “The Development of Religious Ideas in Early Israel” (Second Year Senior), are hints of this; as is also the note on Lesson^ 17 to 22 of the First Year Intermediate, “David, the Man Who Showed Himself Friendly” ; “the aim is to show that David’s power to make and retain friends explains his career and his character.” This ignoring of God’s sovereign grace as the secret of David’s -career is not sufficiently offset by the close of the note, that David’s “intimate, constant, and child-like fellowship with God was the supreme friendship of his life, exalting and directing his actions.” And there is a certain inadequacy in some lesson topics, a failure to reveal the stupendous riches of the Scripture truth that is to be taught. An example of this is seen in the Third Year Senior topics for the study of the Epistle to the Galatians: “Paul’s Assertion of Independence,” “The Bondage of Tradi tion,” “The Christian Idea of Freedom.” The wording of these topics does not do justice to the great eternal spiritual truths of bondage to sin under the law versus the life of victory-by-freedom in Christ which this Epistle so glori ously brings out. What of the New Birth? Many would have been glad to see somewhere in these lessons, among the many statements of aim and purpose of the courses for the different years, a declaration of aim that the pupil shall come to recognize man’s lost condition as constituting our need of a Saviour. This is nowhere stated. It is stated that the lessons have the aim of bringing the pupil to the personal acceptance of Jesus as Saviour and Lord; and that is good. But a clear declaration of the universal need of the new birth would have given increased doctrinal strength to the series. This lack is accentuated by such expressions as the following: “The average age of thirteen calls for a new type of lessons which shall make their appeal to the new sense of selfhood and the new hunger for a satisfying personal ideal.” The emphasis seems to be chiefly “to deepen the impulse to do right,” rather than to show (not necessarily to the youngest children, but certainly somewhere during the series) the hopelessness of any one’s doing right except through the regenerating presence of the Holy Spirit made possible by the acceptance of Christ as Saviour. Facing Our Responsibility. These blessings and perils in the International Graded Lessons have been considered in this discussion entirely apart from the question whether any seventeen-year scheme is a wise or unwise one. The Sunday School Times believed that a much simpler plan would be better. It would welcome a thor ough test of some such three-grade course on a uniform Scripture basis as Dr. Amos R. Wells set forth in the Times of March 21. It would welcome some opportunity, through collateral Scripture work in the Home Readings or other wise, for more comprehensive Bible study. It hopes that the Chicago. Conven- Concluded on Page 418
Waiting on God for the Coming of His Son* ^ • By ANDREW MURRAY, W E L L IN G T O N , SO U T H A FR ICA ' "Be ye yourselves like unto men that wait for their Lord.’’ :Luke 12:36. “ Until the appearing of ’our Lord Jesus Christ,' which; in His own time, He shall shezo, who is the Messed and only Potentate; the King of kings-, and Lord of lords’’-^!'Timothy 6:44, 15, ( R . V) . v * > ' y "Turned to God from idols to serve the living and true God, and tozwait for His Son from heaven .”—-1 Thessalonians 1:9, 10, W AITING on God in heaven, and waiting for His Son from heaven, these two God hath
coma; and there is such scope in the study of coming .events. for imagina tion and reason and human ingenuity, that nothing but deeply humble smit ing on ,God cán save us, from ■‘mistakr ing the interest and pleasure of intel lectual study for the true love of Hiv; and His appearing. All ye that say ye wait for Christ’s coming, be gurç that ye wait on God now. 'All ye who seek-to wait on God now to reveal His- Boh'in you, see to it that ye do so a s men waiting for thé revelation of His Son from heaven. The hope of that: glôrious appèaring will strengthen'you in waiting upon,God forrwhat He :is to do in you now: the samé omnipo tent love that is to reveal the glory is !working in you even now to fit you for it. “The blessed hope and the appear ing of the glory of our great God arid Saviour Jésus Christ,” 'is one of the great bonds of uriion giveribtd'God’s Church': throughout 'the ages. -“He shall come to be glorified in His.saints, and’to be marvelled at in all them that believe.” Then we shall all meet, and the unity of the body of Christ be seen in. all-its divine glory. It wilbhe the meeting-place ând the, triumph of di vine lové. Jesus receiving His Own arid presenting them to the Father. H'is ozim meeting Him and worshiping in speechless love that- blessed face. His ozjpn meeting each , óther in the eestaiy of God’s ozvn love, I,et its wait, long for, and love the’appearing
joined together, and no man may put them:asunder. The waiting of God for .His presence and power, in daily : life will be the only true preparation for waiting for Christ in: humility and, true holiness. Tire waiting for Christ coming from heaven to take us to heaven will give the waiting on God its true tone of hopefulness and joy. The Father who in His own time will reveal His Son from heaven, is the God!who, as we wait on Him, prepares us for the revelation of His Son. The present life and the ' coming' glory are inseparably connected in God and in us.- There is sometimes a dan ger of separating them. Tt is alzvdys easier to be ' engaged zvith the religion pf the past or the future than to-be' ’faithful in the religion of toddy. ‘ As ’ we look to what God has ddne in the past, or will do in time to corrfe, the personal claim of present duty and present submission to His working may be escaped. Waiting on God must ever lead to waiting for Christ .as the glorious consummation of His work; and waiting for .¡.Christs must ever remind us of.the duty of waiting upon God as our only proof ,t|iat the waiting; for Christ, is jn spirit .and in. truth. , There is-.such a danger oh qur. being occupied with the-things. that ope. coming more than with Him zi'hq. is to ♦From “W aitin g on God.” " SJTfr S 'S & a * €
THE KING’S BUSINESS
371
of our Lord and Heavenly . Bride groom. Tender love to Him and ten der love to each other is the | true and only bridal spirit. I fear greatly that this is something forgotten. A beloved brother in Hol land was speaking about the expect ancy of faith being the true sign of the bride. I ventured to express a doubt. An unworthy bride, about to be married to a prince, might only be thinking of the position and the riches that she was to receive. The expect ancy of faith might be strong, and true love utterly wanting. It is not when we are most occupied with prophetic subjects, but when in humility and love we are clinging close to our Lord and His brethren, that We are in the bride’s place. Jesus refuses to accept our love except as it is love to his disciples. Waiting for His coming means wait- ing for the glorious coming manifest ation of the unity of the body, while we seek here to maintain that unity in humility and love. . Those who love Most are the most ready for His com ing. Love to each other is the life and "Ms anal, toatt tljott mthj i O H, the bitter shame and sorrow, That a time could ever be, When I let the Saviour’s pity Plead in vain, and proudly answered, “All of self, and none of Thee.” Yet He found me, I beheld Him Bleeding on the accursed tree, Heard Him pray, “Forgive them, Father,” And my wistful heart said faintly, “Some of self, and some of Thee.”
beauty of His bride, the Church. And how is this to be brought about? Beloved child of God: If you Would learn aright to wait for His Son from heaven, live even now wait ing, on God in heaven. Reniember how Jesus lived ever waiting’ on God. He could do nothing of Himself, It was God who perfected His Son through suffering ' and then exalted Him. It is God alone who can give thee the deep spiritual life of one who is really waiting for His Son: wait on God for it. Waiting for Christ Him self is, oh, so different for waiting for things that may come to pass! The latter any Christian cari do: the for mer, God must work in thee every day by His Holy Spirit . Therefore all ye who wait on God look to Him for grace to wait for His Son from heaven. And ye who would wait for His Son, wait on God continually to reveal Christ in you. The revelation of Christ in us as it is given td them who wait upon God is the true preparation for the full revelation of Christ in glory, imt faalm 62:5
Conquering Love By THEODORE MONOD
Day by day His tender mercy, Healing, helping, full and free, Sweet, and strohg, arid dh so patient, Brought me lower while I whispered, “Less of self, and more of Thee.” Higher than the highest heaven, Deeper than the deepest sea, “Lord, Thy love at last has conquered, Grarit me now my soul’s desire, “None of self; and all of Thee.”
The Fundamental Principles of Christianity in the Light of Modern Thinking* By REV. JOHN M. MACINNIS, B. D. VI. THE GATEWAY INTO THE GLORY.—Luke 24:26.
T HE glory of Christ is that He is the Saviour of men. The gateway into that glory is the cross. Not any particular theory of the cross but the fact of the cross. Even so profane a man as Bernard Shaw in his own irreverent way rec ognized this fact. In his introduction to “Major Barbara” he irreverently says, “The central superstition of Christianity is the salvation of the world by the gibbet.” This grates upon the feeliiigs of the Christian heart, but with all its irreverence we cannot miss the fact that it recognizes that the cross is cen tral in the New Testament conception of salvation. That is more than can be said for a great deal of inodern preaching and theology. However, we are glad to note that there is a very definite movement back to this center, and leaders in thought are rec ognizing in a new way that the cross is central in the redemption of the world. Rev. Richard Roberts speak ing for this new tendency says, “In the cross, God began the world over again, lifted it out of the side tracks into which it had drifted, and put it; on those lines of development which He had ordained for it from the very first.” This is what Prof. James Den ney means when he says, “Jesus not only was something in the world, but He did something. He did something that made a fundamental difference and put us under an infinite obligation H-He died for our sins.” A candid study of the New Testament forces these men to recognize this fact. Jesus ♦A ddress delivered a t th e M ontrose Bible C onference, M ontrose, P a. C opyright, 1913, by Jo h n M. M aclnnis.
put the cross at the heart of things when He instituted the Lord’s Sup per. By it He virtually said “show forth my death as the central thing in my program of redemption.” It is meant to turn our eyes towards the consum mation, while at the same time it most emphatically reminds us that the gate way into the glory of consummation is the cross on which He made atone ment for sin. This is strictly in keep ing with Christ’s teaching throughout His ministry. He made it very clear that He came to seek and to save the lost and that in order to do this He must suffer death. This was a stum bling block to His disciples. Never theless, Jesus insisted on putting the cross at the forefront to the very last. Whatever men may think, to Jesus the cross was central, fundamental and essential in the salvation of the world. The church of the Acts unhesitat- ingly gave this central place to the cross in its life and preaching. They proclaimed through the crucified Christ remission of sins and justifica tion and new life. They stated the simple fact, but made no attempt to give a philosophy of it. If they had a theory of the death of Christ they did not attempt to elaborate it in these teachings. They made the plain state ment that “He was made sin for us” and everything indicates that the fact was very real to them. However, as in the case of other great central truths in Christianity men very early in "the history of the Church began to reason concerning the significance and meanings of this mysterious death. Irenaeus, Clement
THE KING’S BUSINESS
373
of Alexandria, and others belonging to that particular Greek school endeav ored to explain it as a mystic act on the part of Christ whereby men are brought into unity with God. Origin taught that man through sin became subject to Satan and God offered Christ as a price which was paid to Satan for the freedom of men. The fathers of the Latin Church, where the judicial idea was prominent, conceived of the death of Christ as a satisfaction to divine justice. Augustine was the most prominent scholar among those accepting this theory and in his inter pretation of the fact his emphasis was practically altogether laid upon this phase of it. It was in the time of Anselm, how ever, that this subject came to occupy the chief place in the discussion of Christian dogmas. In his great book, “Cur Deus Homo,” he worked out what is known as the commercial the ory of the atonement. The theory is that man through his sin robbed God of His due and therefore became in debted to Him. Christ, as man’s rep resentative, paid this debt in His death on the cross. Abelard, a very fine man and able scholar, opposed this theory and developed what is known as the “Moral Influence” theory. He found the real significance of the deatfi of Christ in the example He set and the good moral influence this example had upon men. The theologians of the Reformation went back to Augustine and took up the judicial conception of the atone ment and emphasized that the death of Christ was essential to satisfy the interests of a moral universe in which the justice of God must be recognized and satisfied. In our day three types of theory find support in various quarters of the church. _First, there is the “Penal Substitu tion” theory which is that Jesus died
in our stead in order to satisfy the justice of a righteous God. Second, there is the “moral influ ence” idea, which means that it was not essential for Christ to die in order to save the world, but He submitted to death for the sake of the moral in fluence He would have over the race. Third, there is what we might term the “Mystical” or “biological” theory, which in many respects resembles the old Greek theory. Christ was matte what we are, and because of that re lation it was necessary for Him to die in order that He might make us what He is. No one theory, nor all of the the ories that we have referred to put to gether, can be said to cover all the facts involved in the simple statement of Scripture. The fact is more than any theory concerning it. It is more than all the theories that men can have concerning it. It has to do with the relations between God and man, and therefore touches the infinite reaches of the life of God as well as the com plex life of man. God was in Christ reconciling the world to. Himself. The death of Christ is a part of that process of reconciliation. The reconciliation was made necessary because man sinned against God. In our study of sin we saw that it is rebellion against God resulting in a failure to be what God intended man to be. This failure means an alienation of life which means discord, sorrow, and death. In order to be reconciled to God all these facts have to be reckoned with. Sin with its guilt must be dealt with and new life given so that man may be what he was intended to be. As a matter of history these are the very things that Jesus did in His cross. The apostles preached the remission of sins through His death, and men accepted their statement, confessed their sins, asked forgiveness and
374
THE KING’S BUSINESS
found peace. That has continued through the centuries. However the fact is going to be explained no rea sonable man who knows anything about the history of the Church can deny the fact. Whether we fully un derstand the philosophy of the thing or not, the fact is of infinite worth to humanity. That it is an ethical thing is demonstrated by the fact that it al ways results in ethical life. -Not only do men find forgiveness at the cross, but they also find new life and power there. It is here that they make con nection with the Christ life. It is here they begin to live this new life, and it is here they get the dynamic by which the ideals of the life are made possible. . There is no question but that Christ died. Neither can there be any ques tion about the fact that the disciples believed that He died for the sins of the world. In that death He was made sin for us. It is just as clear that when men come to God asking for forgiveness on the ground of what Jesus did in that death they feel that they are forgiven and that thev pass into a new relation with God. In this new relationship they feel the imnulse and power of a new life. Thev are a new creation in Christ Jesus/ That part is just as much history as is the fact of the death of Christ. Not only that but this experience in human life is a vital part of the fact of the death of Christ. God did something vital and fundamental in the cross and its significance must be understood in the light of the experience of the men and women who have come into vital con tact with it. The thing that we know is that here sin, the thing that sepa rated man from the life of God, is re moved and the life is so related to God that the life of God begins to flow through it. To use Christ’s own illus tration we are made branches of the vine so that the very life of the vine flows through us and bears, fruit in
our lives. That recreates the branches and makes it possible for them to real ize the very purpose of their life. In stead of being robbed of its individ uality the branch by this new rela tion with the vine realizes itself at its best. In one jplace where I lived we had an apple tree in our yard which had at least three different kinds of apples on it. All the branches bearing apples got their life from the same trunk and roots, but they determined the look and flavor of the fruit. The same life in each branch, but different in its expression. That means that nature recognized the individuality of each branch and helped it to be itself at its best. That is what God wants to do for each life and the cross is the operation, or pro cess by which men are grafted into the life of God. We may not under stand the mystery and philosophy of fhis wonderful process, but we can know the experience and results of it. We know that we are reconciled to God and that His life is in our life, and that experience is both practical and ethical. That is the historical and experimental interpretation of the atonement and it brings the fact into vital relation with life, and that is the fundamental and essential thing. In the light of this we can see how fundamentally true it is that the cross is the very heart of redemption, and we can understand how Christ and His immediate followers made it cen tral in their preaching. This also en ables us to appreciate how vitally true are the words which we already quot ed from Richard Roberts. “In the cross, God began the world over again, lifted it out of the side ,tracks into which it had drifted, and put it on the lines of development which He had or dained for it from the very first.” . Therefore, if we would lift the burden of anguish from the bleeding heart Concluded on P ag e 418
Studies in the Gospel According XXX' ' X to John* : By R. A. TORREY ’ (T hese Studies are for car,efiil study, n o t rapi|d and heedless reading) • II. The Public Ministry of Jesus Leading Those Who Were of the Truth to Believe in Him as the Christ, the Son of God. Ch. 1:19— 12:50 (continued). rv 9. The Lord Jesus’ testimony as to say, “Her reply seems to have to the Woman of Samai;ia that involved thè assumption that the He was the Christ, and the Wo- promise could not be made good.” - It man s testimony, He ‘‘told me involved nothing of the kind. She had ^ i ®VGr I did, (ch, not at all grasped‘all the heights and continued). ' depths of our Saviour’s' thought; far 1 c P H . • from it, but still there was a cesire for •V. 15. 1he woman saith unto him, the water that this wonderful man r ^ T’ ^ ord)> Swe me this water, could give. Her prayer was genuine. that I thirst not, neither come hither right to the point, and it was heard; H B H h way Either) to draw.” promptly heard and wonderfully'ans- ihe relation between the woman of wered, though not in the way she ex- Samaria and our Lord is now cbiahg- pécted ( v s /16-26, 29-32). 1 s- inf: . He had begun by asking her for Though something of the meaning a drink, but she is awakening to the of-the Saviour’s words are beginning act that she has a deeper need ,than to dawn upon her, yet this woman still He has, and of a better water than she thinks of her physical wants, and hopes can give. So now she asks Him who to escape from the labor involved in first asked her. The woman had not going every day to Jacob’s Well The gra’sped the wonderful depths of our gift that Jesus could bestow seemed to words thought, she had still a very her to have two excellencies: (1) It superficial idea of the, water that He would satisfy her own heed; ( 2 ) It could give, but a more or less faint would satisfy others, and so she would glimmering of the truth is dawning be relieved from the necessity of go- upon her.. Her request wàs shallow, daily to draw water for them. In and more or less unintelligent, but her this she was right as far as she went, desire was real. She really wished for but it would satisfy her own need in the water that Jesus could give. Her a far different sense from what she request was not unlike that of those thought and satisfy the need of those who said in John 6 :34, “ Evermore she served in a far different sense give us this bread,T and yet she was from what she thought. ' V. T 6 , “■Jesus (rather, He) saith was testing-or ironical; but this does unto (rather, to) her, Go, call thy not ■fit the context at all, nor does it husband, and come hither.”* fit in with a true understanding of - This was a startling turn to the con- human nature. The story as'told by versation and at the first glance our . John is in wonderful accord with true Lord’s words seem to' have little Con- psychology: the story could not have nectiotr with the woman’s request' but been made -up. One has gone so far in reality they have ' the closest and »Copyright, by R. À. Torrey, 1914 . deepest connection with the request. not quite as shallow as they. Lightfoot- and. others have suggested that she
376 THE KING’S BUSINESS She had asked for the water that, theThe look and tone with which our
Lord Jesus alone could give; before she could receive it, she must be brought to a consciousness of her own sinfulness and of the deepest need of her own soul. What the woman had asked for was the “living water” of which Jesus spoke, and, as we have al ready seen, the living water is the Holy Spirit, and conviction of sin al ways precedes the reception of the Holy Spirit (cf. Acts 2:37-39). In this, as in many other things in the interview, our Lord shows Himself as the master personal worker and a model for us all. The one who would win souls will never cease to find new instruction in the careful study of this interview of our Lord with the woman of Samaria. Before we can do gen uine and deep and lasting work with any person whom we would lead into the light, we must first of all bring them to a sense of their own sinful ness and consequent need. Dr. J, A. McClymont’s comment on these words are worth quoting; He says, “The meaning of this command has been much discussed. The most natural view seems to be to regard it as the first step taken by our Lord to comply with the woman’s prayer. A well of repentance had to be dug in her heart. A^ sense of guilt had to be awakened within her before there could be any real reception of the grace and truth which He had come to bestow. She had referred indirectly to her home when she spoke of not having any longer to ‘come hither and draw’ and Jesus now speaks the word which brings to her recollection the great sin of her life,” As in all his conversations with men and^women. our Lord illustrates here His omniscience. He had never seen this woman before, yet her whole life in all its details lay bare before His gaze. This will come out more clearly as we proceed with the conversation.
Lord spoke the words doubtless added much to their power. The woman must have felt that He was looking down into the deepest depths of her hidden life of sin, and thus she was being prepared for the disclosure oi Himself as the Messiah, which He was soon to make. When He used that one word “husband” He touched at last the one key that would awaken her soul from its dormant and stupid state, bring her to a sense of her own deep need and prepare her for a reve- •lation of Himself as the Christ. At first Jesus had been to her but a de spised Jew (v. 9) ; then He had come to be One who might possibly, though she would scarcely entertain the thought, be greater than Jacob (v. 12) ; still further on He had come to be One who must be addressed with respect and whom she, in a measure, realized had something to give that she needed (v. 15); but now as He stands looking into the depths of her soul and says, “Call thy husband,” a great wonder takes possession of her, “Who can He be?” This wonder will deepen as the conversation goes on (cf. v. 29). If this is not a true inci dent, who is the master artist who draws the picture? It was in no wanton delight in wounding that our Lord uttered the word “husband.” The wound was a wound of love. He would wound in order that He might heal. Vs. 17, 18. “The woman answered and said, I have no husband. Jesus saith unto (rather, to) her, Thou hast well said (rather, saidst well that), I have no husband; for thou hast had five husbands; and he whom thou now hast is not thy husband; in that saidst thou (rather, this hast thou said) truly.” ; . ' The woman had no intention of lay ing bare, her life to the Lord. She in-
377
THE KING’S BUSINESS
years and Jerome speaks of a Roman wife who had thirteen husbands. Even men like Macaenas, Cato, Augustus and Cicero divorced their wives for mere trifles. It was in’ this sort of a world that our Lord promulgated the strict law regarding divorce found in Matthew 19:8, 9. Divorce was not shocking even to moral teachers in that day, but it was shocking to the One who was here speaking. But in this woman’s case there was a worse evil than divorce, the woman’s sixth man was not a husband in any sense at all. She was living in open, flagrant and notorious sin. How did our Lord know this wom an’s history ? He was a perfect stranger, just passing through, had. never met the woman before. He knew it because even in His humilia tion He knew all men, He knew what was in man (cf. John 2:24, 25; Mark 2 :8; Luke 5 :22; ch. 6 :64; 1 :48; Luke 22:10-12). Who then was He? Be yond a peradventure, God manifest in the flesh (cf. 2 Chron. 6:30; Jer. \ 7 : 9, 10). It is this same omniscient Lord that men must some day meet in the judgment (2 Cor. 5:10; John 5:22; Acts 17:30, 31). V. 19. " The zooman saith unto (rather, to) him, Sir (or, Lord ) / perceive that thou art a prophet.” Our Lord’s deep insight into the woman’s innermost heart and life made it clear to her at once that He was beyond question a true prophet of God—as in the case of Nathanael our Lord’s deep insight into his own hidden life and the facts of his life, that he supposed no one knew, made it clear to him that the Lord Jesus was the Son of God, the King of Israel (ch. 1:47-49). In the case of Nath anael, our Lord’s omniscience had found him without guile; in the case of this woman, our Lord’s omniscience had found her thoroughly sinful; but
tended no explanation that she was living' with a man who was not her husband. She hoped that she might cover all, and yet as the eyes of our Lord were looking into her soul, she must have said, “I have no husband” in a shrinking, fearful way, fearful that He might know all and would lay all bare. The Lord’s direction for her to call her husband might, she thought, be an exposure of His ignor ance and a disproof of the knowledge and power that He seemed to claim. On the other hand, the direction might come from His deep and thorough knowledge of her whole life. It was an anxious moment for her when she said, “I have no husband.” What would He say next? The form of our Lord’s reply (see R. V.) seems to suggest that He paused at least for a little while before He answered. In quoting the woman’s words our Lord transposed their order (though this does not appear in the English Ver sion) and by this transposition laid the emphasis upon the word “hus band.” His words exactly rendered in the order in the Greek would be, “Well saidst thou that husband I have not.” In the woman’s words, the em phasis was upon “I have no” not upon husband, thus by a simple change in the order of the words, our Lord laid bare the whole secret and horror of the woman’s life. The woman had “said well” but she had not done well. This woman’s case may not have been worse than that of many others in her neighborhood as far as divorce was concerned; for, while divorces are said to have been fewer among the Samaritans than among the Jews, in those days divorce was shockingly prevalent everywhere on the slightest pretext. Seneca says that Roman wives counted years by husbands di vorced. Marshall tells of a woman in Rome who had ten husbands. Juve nal tells of one who had eight in five
Page 1 Page 2 Page 3 Page 4 Page 5 Page 6 Page 7 Page 8 Page 9 Page 10 Page 11 Page 12 Page 13 Page 14 Page 15 Page 16 Page 17 Page 18 Page 19 Page 20 Page 21 Page 22 Page 23 Page 24 Page 25 Page 26 Page 27 Page 28 Page 29 Page 30 Page 31 Page 32 Page 33 Page 34 Page 35 Page 36 Page 37 Page 38 Page 39 Page 40 Page 41 Page 42 Page 43 Page 44 Page 45 Page 46 Page 47 Page 48 Page 49 Page 50 Page 51 Page 52 Page 53 Page 54 Page 55 Page 56 Page 57 Page 58 Page 59 Page 60 Page 61 Page 62 Page 63 Page 64Made with FlippingBook Online newsletter