Jesus Called Peter "Satan"?

"Then Peter took him, and began to rebuke him, saying, Be it far from thee, Lord: this shall not be unto thee. But he turned, and said unto Peter, Get thee behind me, Satan: thou art an offence unto me: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but those that be of men." (Mat 16: 22-23)

"But when he had turned about and looked on his disciples, he rebuked Peter, saying, Get thee behind me, Satan: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but the things that be of men." (Mark 8: 33)

My own view of this question is to say that Jesus was not using "Satan" as the name of a person or being. "Satan" means "adversary" just as "devil" means "accuser." So, when Jesus said to Peter "get behind me Satan," he was saying "get behind me adversary." 

Every opposition to Christ and his will puts us into the category of "opponents" or "foes." But, Peter was saved, a man who was the "friend" of Christ, so how could he be his "Satan"? 

Satan, the fallen angel (Luke 10: 18), is the arch enemy of God and Christ. When any man opposes God he is putting himself in league with Satan, and imitating his rebellion. To the extent a person  "savours" (regards, sides with) the things of God, he is God's friend, but to the extent a person does not so savour it, he is God's enemy, or Satan. When we are in agreement with God in word and deed, then the Lord says "walk with me friend," but when we are opposing God, then the Lord says "get behind me enemy." 

The opposition of Peter resembled the opposition of Satan, the great enemy of God, and so Jesus saw in Peter's opposition a reminder of Satan's opposition.

Holiness & Salvation II

"And an highway shall be there, and a way, and it shall be called 

The way of holiness"

(Isa. 35: 8)

"For this is the will of God, even your sanctification, that ye should abstain from fornication: That every one of you should know how to possess his vessel in sanctification and honour...For God hath not called us unto uncleanness, but unto holiness." (I Thess. 4: 3,4,7)

Notice how holiness or sanctification is mentioned three times in these verses. Notice the several things declared to us in regard to it. 

1. God wills that men be holy. Those who have been made holy in conversion are also to continue seeking and striving for greater holiness, increased dedication. Sanctification is unlike justification. The former is continuous and progressive while the latter is not so; It is rather a one time act of acquittal. 

2. God wills that each Christian "know how" to "possess" his "vessel," or human body,* "in sanctification" or "holiness." 

The body and its members are to be "set apart" for use in the service of God and this is what makes them "holy." Thus we read of "holy hands." (I Tim. 2: 8) As an example we may think of the "hands" of the thief that once robbed, before his conversion, but now, after conversion, is seen "working with his hands the thing that is good" (Eph. 4: 28) having hands dedicated to doing good, or doing service to God. Not only the hands, but believers are to "present their bodies a living sacrifice" with all its members, dedicating them to the work of God and thereby becoming "holy." (Rom. 12: 1) 

(*Some think by "his vessel" a man's wife is meant, and though this is plausible I nevertheless think it applies to a person's physical body.)

3. Holiness involves separation as we have seen, and in this sense also it is associated with cleansing and moral cleanliness. In cleansing filth is removed. Cleansing the heart, mind, and soul involves the removal of moral filth.

4. Holiness involves a "calling" and is in fact called a "holy calling" (Heb. 3: 1) It ought to be the regular habit, vocation, or work profession, of "everyone who names the name of Christ." (II Tim. 2: 19) "Calling" is from the Greek word "klesis" and generally means a summons or invitation (Strong, Vine, etc.) but may include also the idea of having been gifted and divinely inclined to a particular work. In the KJV it is translated as "vocation" in Eph. 4: 1, though generally as "calling." 

The calling of the Christian, his vocation, is what the scriptures call "your labor in the Lord" (I Cor. 15: 58). The Lord says to everyone of his servants - "occupy till I come." (Luke 19: 13) Living a life of service to God is the "occupation" or "vocational calling" of every heaven born soul. It becomes his "chosen profession." In the parable the laborers (Matthew 20: 1-16) were "called" (summoned or invited) to "go out and labor in the vineyard." In being converted the believer is called to a life of special work and service, to new activities and fields of labor. A man who is doing no work for the Lord, who is not engaged in regular spiritual activity (work), is no real believer.

Salvation Through Holiness

"But we are bound to give thanks alway to God for you, brethren beloved of the Lord, because God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth: Whereunto he called you by our gospel, to the obtaining of the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ." (II Thess. 2: 13-14)

As mentioned previously, believers are said to have been "chosen in Christ before the foundation of the world" for the end purpose of making them "holy" and "without blame." (Eph. 1: 4) The above text further enlarges upon the relation of election and salvation to holiness. The salvation to which believers have been chosen involves being "sanctified" or "made holy." If someone dies without experiencing this "sanctification of the Spirit," then he is lost. Further, holiness is joined with "belief (faith) of the truth." Where there is holiness there is belief of the truth; And, where there is not faith in the truth, then there is no holiness of the Spirit.

Not only were believers chosen and called to a salvation that has an unbreakable bond with holiness, but the death of Christ for believers was also in order to their holiness. 

"Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it; That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word, That he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish." (Eph. 5: 24-27)

Notice again the coupling of "sanctify" with "cleanse" and "washing." Believers were chosen before the world began to become holy and Christ died to effect it. The end design of having been chosen and called is that each believer may be by the Lord "presented" as "holy and unblameable and unreproveable in his sight." (Col. 1: 21-22) This looks forward to the completion of man's promised salvation. Perfect holiness comes to none in this life. It is begun and is increasing, but its completion awaits the resurrection. 

Progressive Holiness

"Having therefore these promises, dearly beloved, let us cleanse ourselves from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God." (II Cor. 7: 1)

The word translated "perfecting" is from the Greek word ἐπιτελοῦντες (epitelountes) and means "bring to an end, to finish, complete." But, why exhort believers to do what God has said that he will do? Has God not assured the new convert that he is not only saved, but that God will keep him saved and also to save him completely in the end? Has he not promised to perfect him in holiness? Then why command believers to do it? Is it not because the one does not exclude the other, though seeming to do so? Is it not because, as Augustine said, and as the Bible shows, God gives what he commands?

"For they verily for a few days chastened us after their own pleasure; but he for our profit, that we might be partakers of his holiness." (Heb. 12: 10)

In the preceding verse the believer is himself exhorted to perfect holiness but in this passage it is God who is perfecting that holiness. One of God's means for this work is to discipline or correct his erring and rebellious children. What that chastening accomplishes is the progressive sanctification of the believer.

When one is saved he "puts on the new man, which after God is created in righteousness and true holiness." (Eph. 4: 24) From this verse one might think that conversion brings all the holiness one will ever need. But, the new man is perfectly holy, but the believer does not always "put on" the new man, thus his practical holiness is never perfect in this life. The Christian can truly say that he has been made holy and yet he also may say that he is daily being made holy. In putting on this "new man" each day the Christian is himself being renewed (or made new). 

"...by the "new man" is meant, the new nature, the new principle, or work of grace in the soul, elsewhere called a new creature; and it bears this name in opposition to, and distinction from the old man, or corruption of nature, before spoken of...such who have it, have new hearts and new spirits given unto them; they have new eyes to see with, and new ears to hear with, and new hands to handle and work with, and new feet to walk with; and they live a new life and conversation..." (Gill's Commentary)

Notice too how righteousness is connected with holiness (and holiness with cleansing, as we have seen). Also notice the words "true holiness." Is there a false or fake holiness in contrast to real holiness? Yes, and we all need to beware of it.

Holiness & Power

"And declared to be the Son of God with power, according to the spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead." (Rom. 1: 4)

"And when Peter saw it, he answered unto the people, Ye men of Israel, why marvel ye at this? or why look ye so earnestly on us, as though by our own power or holiness we had made this man to walk?" (Acts 3: 12)

What these verses have in common, besides the fact of their mention of holiness (particularly the holiness of Christ), is their connecting power with holiness. Those saints who have had the most power to work miracles have been holy men and women. The power of Jesus to do the miracles he did came from his holiness and his being filled with the Spirit. 

Peter was an holy man and yet he testified that the miracle he performed (along with John) was not due to the holiness of Peter or John but was owing to the holiness of Christ. If we would "have power with God" as Jacob (Gen. 32: 28), then we need to partake each day of the holiness of Christ. We must separate ourselves each day from all things that defile.

Garrett Believes In Salvation By Works?

The other day I spent nearly an hour talking to a young man who has converted out of Hardshellism. This man has spent much time talking to Hardshell elders about Stephen Garrett and the Old Baptist Test blog. He filled me in on some of the things that are being said about me within the Hardshell cult. One of those things was the charge that I believed in salvation by works. Here was my response to him and now to them publicly.

1. They know better. Anyone who reads any amount of my writings will know how untrue is that accusation. However;

2. James says that faith without works is dead. 

3. Paul says we are created in Christ Jesus unto good works. If there are no good works, there is no new creature.

4. Let them try getting into heaven with a dead faith and no good fruit.

It was also said that "Stephen Garrett believes in Lordship salvation." And, here was my short response:

1. Well, yes I do, especially if by that term they mean "perseverance."

2. This was the view of the forefathers of the PB church, and still is among some.

Time Salvation is Arminianism

How does changing the scope of a “salvation” text, perceived to be accomplished by works, from eternal to temporal, relieve it of its Arminian features?

Is not any transaction accomplished by works Arminian, regardless of whether the consequence be eternal or temporal?

Is it the proposition of those who believe in this so-called salvation by works, that such is not Arminian, so long as the consequence is temporal?  But if the same scheme was of eternal consequence, now suddenly it is Arminian?!!!

If of works, then how is it of grace? (see Rom. 11:6)

If of works, then how is it not Arminian? Do tell.

Does not categorizing a text as Calvinistic or Arminian have solely to do with the actual accomplishment of the salvation, rather than the duration of its consequence?

Was not Elder David Bartley correct in 1905 when he said those who teach this heresy “seem to think that they take away the objectionable feature of Arminianism or conditional salvation, by confining it to time, and so they qualify this legal doctrine of salvation by works by inserting the word "time" between the two words, conditional salvation, and make it read, "Conditional time salvation"; that is to say, salvation in time is conditional. If so, then salvation in time is not by grace, nor of the Lord.”?

Are we supposed to think that a conditional eternal salvation would be salvation by works, but a conditional time salvation is not?

 A-R-M-I-N-I-A-N-I-S-M.

Holiness & Salvation

"worship the LORD in the beauty of holiness" 

(Psa. 29: 2)

In thinking upon this important subject let us begin with these words:

"Follow peace with all men, and holiness, without which no man shall see the Lord." (Heb. 12: 14)

Holiness or sanctification is a necessity if we are to be finally and eternally saved. That is exactly what the words emboldened above affirm. Further, holiness essentially involves godliness. In beginning this short study, let us begin with a sermon on this verse by the great C.H. Spurgeon who said (emphasis mine):

"There has been a desperate attempt made by certain Antinomians to get rid of the injunction which the Holy Spirit here means to enforce. They have said that this is the imputed holiness of Christ. Do they not know, when they so speak, that, by an open perversion, they utter that which is false?" 

The Hardshell Baptists are "Antinomians" on holiness, at least those today who deny means and the necessity of faith, progressive sanctification, and perseverance for salvation.  These Antinomian Hardshells will be found to have alternative and novel interpretations on the meaning of our text. Some will indeed argue that the holiness is like righteousness, a thing imputed without works, but this is not the teaching of this or other texts on this subject, as Spurgeon said. 

Other Hardshells might argue that the reference to "seeing the Lord" does not denote salvation in the end but a seeing the Lord in fellowship here in this life. But such interpretations are rather misinterpretations.

Spurgeon continued:

"I do not suppose that any man in his senses can apply that interpretation to the context, "Follow peace with all men, and holiness." Now, the holiness meant is evidently one that can be followed like peace; and it must be transparent to any ingenuous man that it is something which is the act and duty of the person who follows it. We are to follow peace; this is practical peace, not the peace made for us, but "the fruit of righteousness which is sown in peace of them that make peace." We are to follow holiness,-this must be practical holiness; the opposite of impurity, as it is written, "God hath not called us unto uncleanness, but unto holiness." The holiness of Christ is not a thing to follow; I mean, if we look at it imputatively. That we have at once; it is given to us the moment we believe. The righteousness of Christ is not to be followed; it is bestowed upon the soul in the instant when it lays hold of Christ Jesus."

I fully agree. The holiness or sanctification that the text advocates is a practical holiness and involves conformity to the will and law of God in one's daily practice and behavior. For an article on this subject see my posting "Fate of those who "live ungodly"? (here) 

Spurgeon said:

"This is another kind of holiness. It is, in fact, as every one can see who chooses to read the connection, practical, vital holiness which is the purport of this admonition. It is conformity to the will of God, and obedience to the Lord's command. It is, in fine, the Spirit's work in the soul, by which a man is made like God, and becomes a partaker of the divine nature, being delivered from the corruption which is in the world through lust. No straining, no hacking at the text can alter it. There it stands, whether men like it or not. There are some who, for special reasons best known to themselves, do not like it, just as no thieves ever like policemen or gaols; yet there it stands, and it means no other than what it says: "Without holiness,"-practical, personal, active, vital holiness,-"no man shall see the Lord." 

I agree with Spurgeon that the holiness commanded and required in order to "see the Lord" (in final and complete salvation) involves godliness, obedience, and conformity to the word and will of God, or involves the life of a person, his practice or habit in life. 

Spurgeon said:

"Dealing with this solemn assertion, fearfully exclusive as it is, shutting out as it does so many professors from all communion with God on earth, and all enjoyment of Christ in heaven, I shall endeavour, first, to give some marks and signs whereby a man may know whether he hath this holiness or not; secondly, to give sundry reasons by way of improvement of the solemn fact, "Without holiness, no man shall see the Lord;" and then, thirdly, to plead hard, in Christ's stead, with those who are lovers of gain, that they may bethink themselves ere time be over, and opportunity past." (here)

The various destructive judgments upon the antediluvian world, and upon the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah, are intended as "examples" of God's wrath and condemnation upon "ungodly" people. (See II Peter 2: 4-7; Jude 1: 4-7) Remember that holy people are not ungodly living people.

Old Testament Hebrew word for "holiness" is "qōḏeš" (Pronunciation - ko'-desh) and means "apartness, holiness, sacredness, separateness." (Strong) It is used of the holiness of God, and of the holiness of places and things. 

The New Testament Greek word for "holiness" is "hagiasmos" and translated as both holiness and sanctification. Its meaning is not any different from the Hebrew although Strong mentions purification as connected therewith and also the "effect of consecration" which entails "sanctification of heart and life." 

"Holy" (adjective) is from "hagios." Wrote W.E. Vines:

Holiness, Holy, Holily: akin to A, Nos. 1 and 2, which are from the same root as hagnos (found in hazo, "to venerate"), fundamentally signifies "separated" (among the Greeks, dedicated to the gods), and hence, in Scripture in its moral and spiritual significance, separated from sin and therefore consecrated to God, sacred.

Summing up, we may say that holiness or sanctification first involves separation and many biblical texts speak of this aspect of holiness. For instance:

"Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you, And will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty." (II Cor 6: 17-18)

God's separation of a sinner from other sinners, from the world, involves the sinner himself, through God's power and grace, separating himself. We are commanded in scripture; "be ye holy" and "be ye separate." It is also not so much a physical separating, but a separating that occurs in the heart and mind, and is reflected in our daily habits.

It involves consecration or dedication to God. It is religious in nature. This "making holy" involves these things:

1. Makes a thing uncommon, unique, and special by separating it from the common group. It thus involves distinguishing something, to "make it to differ from another" in a positive way. (I Cor. 4: 7)

2. Changes the purpose and destiny of the thing thus separated. An holy spoon in the Temple was a spoon that was separated from other spoons, not because it was different but because the act of separating it for service to God, or sanctifying it, was what separated it and made it different, made it holy.

3. Changing the thing separated and sanctified both constitutionally and practically. Constitutionally by the act of separating the thing, and practically by changing its function and purpose, and its nature. 

Holy Living

"For God hath not called us unto uncleanness, but unto holiness." (I Thess. 4: 7)

Notice how again holiness is connected with cleanliness as it has been connected with godliness or godly living. Not only is holiness a necessity for eternal life but it is the end of our election and calling. We are "called to holiness." A man who is unholy in his conduct has not been called, or perhaps I should say, has not answered the call. 

God "chose us" to salvation before the world began "that we might be holy." (Eph. 1: 3-4) This holiness involves living a holy life, as these texts affirm:

"But as he which hath called you is holy, so be ye holy in all manner of conversation; Because it is written, Be ye holy; for I am holy." (I Peter 1: 15-16)

Notice how being "holy" is something external in the practice and behavior as well as a state or condition of the heart and mind. Peter later in his second epistle speaks of "all holy conversation and godliness" (II Peter 3: 11) where "conversation" involves "manner of living," what a man says with his deeds in addition to what he says with his words.

The prayer of the elect and called is given by a holy man in these words:

"That he would grant unto us, that we being delivered out of the hand of our enemies might serve him without fear, In holiness and righteousness before him, all the days of our life." (Luke 1: 74-75)

The kind of holiness required in order to see the Lord in glory, and to live with him forever, involves service in holiness and righteousness.

Paul exhorted the early converts to "yield your members servants to righteousness unto holiness" so that they might "have your fruit unto holiness, and the end everlasting life." (Rom. 6: 19, 22)

God help us to do so!

Hardshell Evil Surmisings

"He is proud, knowing nothing, but doting about questions and strifes of words, whereof cometh envy, strife, railings, evil surmisings, Perverse disputings of men of corrupt minds, and destitute of the truth, supposing that gain is godliness: from such withdraw thyself." (I Tim. 6: 4-5 KJV)

The word "surmisings" is from the Greek word ὑπόνοιαι (hyponoia) which denotes "suspicion, conjecture, guess." It could be viewed or translated as "underthoughts" or evil "suggestions." It may also denote "wicked opinions." This is its only use in the NT. It is appropriately associated by the apostle with being puffed up, doting, strife about words, etc. "Our ‘suspicions;’ this word again is new to N.T. usage. Altogether we have four peculiar words in this verse, puffed up, doting, strifes of words, surmisings..." (Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges)

The word is plural being "surmisings," and this in spite of the fact that Spellchecker says it is incorrect! 

Though not all commentators connect "evil surmisings" with doctrinal inventions and novelties, yet some do, such as Dr. John Gill, and I too. Heresies are but "evil inventions" from the minds of "inventors of evil things" (Rom. 1: 30) .

Gill said this in his commentary on our text:

evil surmises; groundless suspicions: or from hence follow, as the words may be rendered, "wicked opinions": concerning the being, perfections, purposes, and providence of God; concerning the person and offices of Christ; concerning the law and Gospel, grace and good works; and so the Syriac version renders it, "an evil opinion of the mind".

Hardshells are inventors of false doctrine, of evil surmisings in doctrine. Just think of the novelties of "Two Seedism" and "Time Salvation"! This blog and my other writings are filled with the evidence that makes this verdict accurate. What think ye?

Amen Dr. Piper

"What Is the Gospel For?" by Dr. John Piper (here) has some interesting comments that I would like to share with you. Piper said:

"The gospel is a free offer of Christ for faith, not works. The gospel is a free offer to all for faith; Christ is offered to you for faith alone."

We are sorry that our Hardshell and Strict Baptist brethren do not agree, but I agree. I would be happy to debate or dialogue with any on this subject. Do the scriptures teach that Christ and salvation are "offered" (made available) in the gospel to all? I say yes. Piper says yes. Our forefathers who wrote the 1689 London Confession would say yes. Only the Hyper Calvinists would disagree with Piper. 

Notice also how Piper connects salvation with faith, the union we have with Christ is a faith union.

Piper said:

"Justification — you weren’t justified when Jesus died; you’re justified when you believe, when it becomes yours. And then the purchase of the justification and the performance of the righteousness two thousand years ago is applied. That’s why I’m using the word application: it’s applied to you."

But, our Hardshell brothers do believe that the elect were either justified in eternity past or when Christ died, and deny that sinners are justified when they believe. Any of our Hardshell brothers want to discuss it?

Piper said:

"Or eternal life — you didn’t have eternal life when Jesus died; you have eternal life when you believe. And then, what he bought out there, what he wrought out there, becomes yours through the connection with Jesus through faith. So, the gospel is the application to believers of all that he purchased and achieved two thousand years ago."

Well, amen to that! It is what even the founding fathers of the Hardshells taught but later their children abandoned it.

Marketers As Persuaders? Sophists?

Many people major in "communication studies" in college. Some even obtain doctoral degrees in this science (or art? or both?). But, how can a person make money learning how to communicate, how to persuade? 

Students of all the various kinds of majors should learn how to communicate in their chosen fields of study. After all, it is affirmed that you have greater chance of success and promotion in your chosen field, and in life, when you are able to speak well, or able to persuade others. This is why every student, in any major, from biology to physics, is required to take some speech and communication courses. 

Those who major in communication and speech are taught the art and science of persuasion. This includes studies in rhetoric, oratory, argumentation, debate, language, linguistics, etc. 

The Sophists

"Buy the truth, and sell it not; also wisdom, and instruction, and understanding." (Prov. 23: 23)

This verse does not condemn "selling" the truth in every sense. This is evident from the text itself for it is evident that if one "buys" the truth, he must buy it from someone, i.e. a seller. What it condemns is selling the truth in the sense of no longer possessing it yourself. We can keep the truth we buy while at the same time selling the truth to others. 

Those who promote ideas, philosophies, theories, etc., attempt to persuade others to accept them. When someone rejects such, he will often say "I am not buying it." To "buy" in this sense means to accept as true. Also, if we are to "buy the truth," it must be bought from a seller. So, selling the truth, selling instruction, and selling understanding is not forbidden but rather encouraged. The text, after all, speaks of not only buying and selling "truth" but of buying and selling "wisdom," "instruction" (education), and "understanding." 

This is not condemning the charging of tuition for an education. It does condemn ridding ourselves of truth, education, and understanding and also condemns the selling of ideas and facts which we are not worth anything, like selling a bad product. Further, there is often a "price" to be paid for obtaining knowledge and truth which is not monetary, such as hard work. 

Are preachers not compared to salesmen and merchants? Peddlers? Perhaps even "snake oil salesmen"? I wrote on this in "Sophist Preachers" (here). Are not political partisans sellers of their ideas? And, is it not a fact that the most "popular" of such are speakers gifted in Sophistry? Skilled in the art of persuasion? And, just how do the best persuaders "ply their trade"? 

Hitler is considered one of the greatest "orators" of the twentieth century, and most of his persuasion (or selling tactics) were clearly after the manner of the Sophists and of the best "snake oil salesmen." He certainly did "persuade" many to follow his cause! 

But, as great as are the persuasive skills of politicians, religious leaders, educators, lawyers, and of the various "hucksters," and "con men," yet some of the best and highest paid are in "advertising" or "marketing." In fact, people today can go to college and major in business marketing, even getting Phds.  Thus you can read up on "Persuasion Marketing" (here) which is part of what are called "persuasion industries." 

Daily through "commercials" and "advertisements" of every kind efforts are being made by marketers to persuade us to buy a product or service. If one produces a good product, which fulfills the needs of people, certainly he will want to "advertise" that fact (and hopefully not only for financial reasons) and inform the people of all the good about the product (and if honest, all the possible dangers or side effects). He will want to say that the price or cost to acquire the product is far less than the benefit from it, or a "good deal." On the other hand, people with a bad product also try to persuade people to buy their products, and often they do so knowing that they are peddling imperfect wares.  

The point is this, the best persuaders are often those who produce the commercials and advertisements we see every day. By "best" I mean the ones who get the best results (most popular, most sales), which is, of course, the Sophist definition. And, the marketing world is full of skilled Sophistic persuaders. Who hasn't bought a product because of its advertising hype and "puffing"? These professional marketers know all about Aristotle's book on rhetoric and on the emotions. Do not the commercials appeal to our emotions? 

Sad to say, many churches and preachers have sought to imitate the Sophist marketers.

In closing let me cite this text and make a comment upon it:

"Therefore disputed he in the synagogue with the Jews, and with the devout persons, and in the market daily with them that met with him. Then certain philosophers of the Epicureans, and of the Stoicks, encountered him." (Acts 17: 17-18a)

In the "market," or "agora," where people were selling all kinds of products, there were the "philosophers" such as named (and no doubt some not named, such as the Sophists). These were peddling or marketing their philosophies, seeking students and followers (people who would pay them for their teaching), just as those that sold products. But, Paul had something to offer them too!

p.s. I was blessed to spend over a week in Greece back in December of 1984 and visited Athens and saw the ancient "agora" and "Parthenon," as well as the hill where Paul stood in Acts 17 (called the Areopagus, vs. 19) and delivered this famous sermon. I also visited Corinth and Delphi. It was a blessing.

Another Old Hymn & Hardshellism

The following hymn has been in "Primitive Baptist" hymnals ever since their beginning. It was sung even by their forefathers of the of the 18th century for the author, Isaac Watts (1674–1748), published it in his lifetime. Thus, we can know something of the views of those old Baptists who sang it in their assemblies, especially in the 18th and 19th centuries. 

First, let us give the words of the hymn.

1. Broad is the road that leads to death, 

And thousands walk together there; 

But wisdom shows a narrow path, 

With here and there a traveler. 

2. Deny thyself and take thy cross, 

Is the Redeemer's great command: 

Nature must count her gold but dross, 

If she would gain that heav'nly land. 

3. The fearful soul that tires and faints, 

And walks the ways of God no more, 

Is but esteemed almost a saint, 

And makes his own destruction sure. 

4. Lord, let not all my hopes be vain, 

Create my heart entirely new, 

Which hypocrites could ne'er attain, 

Which false apostates never knew.

First, note how the context of the hymn deals with eternal destinies and not with mere temporal salvation or temporal punishment. How do we know this from the words of the hymn? Is it not because it speaks of paths leading to either life or death? And, because it speaks of "gaining that heavenly land." 

And, who is excluded from gaining that heavenly land, of obtaining life eternal? Is it not the soul that does not persevere in faith and allegiance to Christ? Does it not exclude the soul that "tires and faints" and that "walks the ways of God no more"? Does it not exclude the "hypocrites" and "false apostates"? 

Further, how many will be led to eternal life? Few. How many say the Hardshells? Nearly all!

Also, what is required for obtaining that heavenly land and eternal life? It is to "deny thyself" and to "take thy cross," which are evangelical phenomena. It is necessary that one be identified with the minority and walking in the narrow way, which is the Christian way, the way of Christ, the way of holiness. 

My Hardshell brothers who deny the necessity of evangelical faith and repentance for salvation, and of the necessity of perseverance in faith and holiness, do not believe what this hymn teaches but their forefathers who sang this hymn believed what it taught. 

It is written in a minor key because there is a sense of pity and gloom over the fact that so many are lost and so few are saved, and grief over lost sinners. Do our modern Hardshell brothers grieve over the lost condition of their neighbors? 

The song has specific lines where the singers are speaking to those on the broad road. The exhortation to deny oneself and take up the cross is a call to evangelical repentance and conversion and it is addressed to those who are lost and on the broad way, to the unbelievers, hypocrites, and apostates. Do Hardshells so exhort lost sinners? Do they warn them of their destiny while they travel the broad road?

Again, what does the believer in the words of this hymn say about his views of salvation?

Here is good sacred harp singing of it. Many churches in old times would have sung it in sacred harp. Some sang it very slowly. Others, a little faster. I don't like to see it dragged out too much.

Christ Speaking Through Preachers?

"Since ye seek a proof of Christ speaking in me, which to you-ward is not weak, but is mighty in you." II Cor. 13: 3)

"He who hears you hears Me, he who rejects you rejects Me, and he who rejects Me rejects Him who sent Me.” (Luke 10: 16)

"But ye have not so learned Christ; If so be that ye have heard him, and have been taught by him, as the truth is in Jesus." (Eph. 4: 20-21)

How do these texts relate to the Hardshell "direct speaking" view of regeneration? When the Hardshells of today read these verses, what do they think they say on the subject?

Hardshells reject the idea that Christ speaks through a preacher, and deny that when one hears a preacher preach the word of God he is hearing Christ. But, why would they reject the idea that Christ speaks through ministers of the word? Because they have said that Christ only speaks directly, apart from human beings and human means, and to admit what is clearly affirmed in the above words would be to destroy all their talk about "direct speaking" of Christ.

Notice what Gill said of the Ephesian text:

"and have been taught by him: not personally, but by his Spirit and ministers; for Christ is not only the subject of the ministry of the word, and whom the Spirit of God teaches and directs souls to for righteousness, pardon, cleansing, and for every supply of grace; but he is the efficient cause of teaching; and there is none who teaches like him: and those who are taught by him, are taught." (Gill's Commentary)

Notice how this Old Baptist spoke of different kinds of "causes" (a thing decried by Elder Beebe).

Questions for Hardshells

1. Is Christ still teaching you? Still speaking to you? And, this directly and apart from teachers?

2. If yes, then why do you need to hear preachers or teachers?

Discussion On I Cor. 4: 15

The following is an e-mail which was part of many that a Hardshell preacher and I exchanged about ten years ago. Back then I asked this preacher if he would discuss things publicly on my blogs or let me make his e-mails public, but he declined. One of the passages we discussed at length was I Cor. 4: 15 and Paul's statement that he had "begotten" the first Christians in Corinth "through the gospel." Here is what I wrote in one e-mail.

Dear ----:

 

Your interpretation makes Paul a "father" because he was an instructor in Christ, but this is not tenable because he does not equate "father" with "instructor."  What is the normal use of "begotten" in scripture?  Is it not a reference to being born again?  Why is I Cor. 4: 15 an exception to the rule?  Is there something in the context that forbids one from believing that the "begetting" is the same begetting mentioned throughout the new testament?  Or, are you just opposed to what Paul said and therefore must give it an abnormal definition? 

 

What did Gill say about this "begetting"?  Did he not say it was regeneration or the divine begetting (being born again)?  Was his view not the view of the true Old Baptists?  If not, who opposed him in it, back in the 18th century?  Did the Philadelphia Association not recommend the commentaries of Dr. Gill to the Baptist ministry?

 

So, Paul was a "father in the ministry" to every Corinthian member?  Does Paul not say he had begotten the Corinthians, all of them, and not just the ministers? 

 

What is there in the context to make one think Paul was not talking about eternal salvation? 

Since then I have looked at many commentators on this passage and all connect it with the new birth that Jesus spoke about in John 3 in talks with Nicodemus. This is seen in the commentary of John Gill. Further, the view of Gill on this passage was the accepted view of the first "primitive" or "old school" or "Hardshell" Baptists. 

It shows very poor exegetical skills for one to make "father" to mean "teacher." The Corinthians had ten thousand teachers but had only one father, and so this fact disproves the Hardshell assertion. Egad. Is that not simple?

Paul was a means in the conversion or new birth of the Corinthians. More properly, it was the gospel that begat, and so the words "through the gospel" are what is to be highlighted. Begotten of Paul, yes, but at the same time begotten by the gospel, or of God.

Elder Gilbert Beebe in one of his earliest writings against this passage and its teaching regarding gospel means decried those of his brethren who argued for how Paul was an "instrumental cause," or means, and that God was the "efficient cause." Some of his brethren argued that this was the historic teaching of their forefathers on this verse and all Beebe could do was ask - "where do we find 'instrumental cause' and 'efficient cause' in the bible?" Such ignorance and blindness!

Wrote Beebe:

2. The second query, if so it may be called, has the form of a reminiscence. Brother S. remembers when Old Baptist preachers talked much about primary and efficient cause, and also of secondary causes, and so do we; but we do not recollect of ever hearing them refer to any scriptural authority for making such distinction; and as we read of no such distinction in the good book, as having been used by the standard writers of the New Testament, we are of the number who “hardly know what such language means.” We know of but one cause adequate to the production of life and salvation, and that cause is both Alpha and Omega, First and Last, Beginning and Ending, the Almighty. If our brother knows of another, or a second, he is welcome to it.

Notice a few things about these words of Beebe. First, he admits that his forefathers did not hesitate to talk about instrumental and efficient causes (along with other kinds of causes, like "second causes"). So, does he not by this admission show that his view is novel and new? 

Second, note that he refers to his PB brothers (Brother S) and "Old Baptist preachers" who spoke of the new birth as being effected by the gospel, by gospel preaching or preachers, and that in the sense of being an instrument. His argument against there being different kinds of causes is just stupidity. 

Here are some other things Beebe said in this article titled "Means" (Sept. 15, 1846 in Signs of the Times" - see here):

"He does not claim that be was the instrument which God had used in begetting them, or that his preaching had been an instrumental cause or means of their regeneration, for that would not have constituted them his children, nor him their father."

That is a good point, but it reminds me of that logical maxim - "whatever proves too much proves little (or nothing)." 

Beebe also wrote:

"Those who can believe that even Paul can or could produce the quickening and regeneration of a soul, must be strangers to the work. We once held a public debate with an Arminian Presbyterian preacher, who contended that Paul actually regenerated all the members of the Corinthian church, but we never expected to have lived long enough to hear the absurd and ridiculous assertion made by a professedly Old School Baptist."

I never knew that Beebe ever held any debates, so his reference to it is interesting. 

No orthodox teacher of the word would ever affirm that evangelists actually do the saving, the birthing, the regenerating, or the re-creating. Only God does this. But to insist that it is impossible for God to use a means is ridiculous. In fact, Beebe even acknowledges this when he says - "In the sense in which they were begotten of God, they were not begotten by Paul." Exactly! 

If one looks at all the places in the new testament where the words begotten, begat, and born are used, he will see that they often refer to a physical birth, or to Christ being the only begotten of the Father, or to spiritual birth, or a being "born again." Further, sometimes "birth" is viewed in two senses, one in which the father "begets" (plants seed or sperma), and the other in which the mother produces or brings into the world the fetus. In all those places where this spiritual begetting is mentioned there is no suggestion that this is what teachers do every time they teach, or denotes a teacher/pupil relationship. Begetting does not mean "producing students" or "educating students," but "producing children."

The burden of proof is on Hardshells to show how the Christian world is all wrong on I Cor. 4: 15 and so far not Beebe nor any other Hardshell has been able to show how the birth of that text is not the new birth.

Daily Look Into Scripture

"These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so." (Acts 17: 11 KJV)

How few are they who search or daily look into the holy scriptures! Many do not fail to read their horoscope daily, but do they daily search the scriptures? Which will be of greater profit to them? People read the news reports, e-mails, text messages, daily and regularly. Oh that they were this anxious and habited* to read and meditate upon God's word every day! What a bad choice it is to choose other things to study rather than God's word! It is tragic irony! People would be so much better off to search the scriptures daily than any other daily habit! 

People daily eat and drink. But, taking God's word within our thoughts is our feeding our minds. "The mind is a terrible thing to waste," indeed; And, those who do not search the word of God daily are wasting their minds. The bible is often compared to food, such as meat and milk, bread and honey, etc. It is comparable to a feast of delicious things. Jesus said that his flesh and blood were to be eaten and taken into the mind and spirit. In this regard we may say that with all of us it is either feast or famine. Most are famished when it comes to knowing the word of God. Only a small few daily feast upon holy scripture. This fact reminds us of the word of God in Amos.

"Behold, the days come, saith the Lord GOD, that I will send a famine in the land, not a famine of bread, nor a thirst for water, but of hearing the words of the LORD." (Amos 8: 11 KJV)

Thankfully, a few in the world today can identify with this testimony of the weeping prophet:

"Thy words were found, and I did eat them; and thy word was unto me the joy and rejoicing of mine heart: for I am called by thy name, O LORD God of hosts." (Jer. 15: 16 KJV)

Daily eating the word! What joy! How delicious to the heart and soul!

People daily look into the mirror, when they first wake and begin to groom themselves. But, how many look daily into the mirror of God's word? The bible is a mirror as James indicated in these words:

"For if any one is a hearer of the word and not a doer, he is like a man who observes his natural face in a mirror; for he observes himself and goes away and at once forgets what he was like. But he who looks into the perfect law, the law of liberty, and perseveres, being no hearer that forgets but a doer that acts, he shall be blessed in his doing." (Jam. 1: 23-25 RSV)

The scriptures (or "law of liberty") are a mirror. This is the mirror that all need to daily look into! 

Notes:

*"habited" is defined as "A recurrent, often unconscious pattern of behavior that is acquired through frequent repetition: An established disposition of the mind or character."

"more noble" where "noble" means "high born"

Two different Greek words for "noble"

most noble Felix (Acts 24: 3 kratistos)

most noble Festus (Acts 26: 25 kratistos)

kratistos - mightiest, strongest, noblest, most illustrious, best, most excellent - used in addressing men of prominent rank or office

On the other hand, in our text and in I Cor. 1: 26, it refers to "the nobility," or people born into titled families, like royalty, or into the higher class of society. It is from the Greek word "eugenēs" and means "well born, of a noble family."

The truly "high born" or "noble" ones are they who are "born of God"!

Spurgeon On Hardshell Error

Most of those today who call themselves "Primitive Baptists" believe that being convicted of sin is an evidence of a saved or regenerate state. This is no minor error and it has adverse consequences. It is a novel view among Baptists. I have written on this subject many times. Listen to these words of the great C.H. Spurgeon (highlighting mine) on this issue:

"First, then, we will consider certain FALSE REPENTANCES. I will begin with this remark—that trembling beneath the sound of the gospel is not "repentance." There are many men who when they hear a faithful gospel sermon, are exceedingly stirred and moved by it. By a certain power which accompanies the Word, God testifies that it is his own Word, and he causes those who hear it involuntarily to tremble. I have seen some men, while the truths of Scripture have been sounded from this pulpit, whose knees have knocked together, whose eyes have flowed with tears as if they had been fountains of water. I have witnessed the deep dejection of their spirit, when—as some of them have told me—they have been shaken until they knew not how to abide the sound of the voice, for it seemed like the terrible trumpet of Sinai thundering only their destruction. Well, my hearers, you may be very much disturbed under the preaching of the gospel, and yet you shall not have that "repentance unto life." You may know what it is to be very seriously and very solemnly affected when you go to God's house, and yet you may be hardened sinners. Let me confirm the remark by an instance:—Paul stood before Felix with the chains upon his hands, and as he preached of "righteousness, temperance, and of judgment to come," it is written, "Felix trembled," and yet procrastinating Felix is in perdition, among the rest of those who have said, "Go thy way for this time; when I have a more convenient season I will call for thee." There are many of you who cannot attend the house of God without being alarmed; you know what it is often to stand aghast at the thought that God will punish you; you may often have been moved to sincere emotion under God's minister; but, let me tell you, you may be after all a castaway, because you have not repented of your sins, neither have you turned to God." ("The Repentance Unto Life" - here)

Was Felix giving evidence of regeneration? Hardshells say yes, all others say no.

Giving What He Commands

"O Lord, command what you will and give what you command" — Augustine.

Our modern "Primitive Baptists" (with few exceptions) have failed to accept this maxim and the ideas inherent in it. They have the idea that what God gives cannot be commanded. This also involves the idea that what is commanded cannot be a gift from God. They do of course, while maintaining these premises, often contradict themselves in regard to them.

Here is what I wrote some time ago on this point:

It is not uncommon for God to command the people to do what he promises to do himself. For instance, God promises, and actually does, "circumcise" the heart (Rom. 2: 29; Phi. 3: 3; etc.), yet he also says to people - "Circumcise yourselves to the Lord" (Jer. 4: 4: Deut. 10: 16). Also, he promises to give a "new heart" and to put a "new spirit" within people (Eze. 36: 26-27), yet he also says to them - "make you a new heart and a new spirit" (Eze. 18: 31). Only Hardshells see these things as contradictory. Because of their unscriptural presuppositions and false premises they cannot admit that the same thing is being denoted. Doing so would force them into giving up their anti means view. (Hermeneutical Problems for Hardshells VI - here)

In another posting titled "Hardshell Antinomianism II" (here) I wrote:

Trott also wrote:

"The "duty of the unregenerate to repent," comes next under consideration."

"My own mind I confess has been much difficulted to draw a clear line of distinction between the different relations and senses in which the idea of repentance, is presented to our view in the scriptures, and between the idea of its being a duty incumbent on men at large, and that of its being a free gospel blessing bestowed by the exalted Saviour on the spiritual Israel of God."

Trott struggled with the same issue that Hyper Calvinists have traditionally. How can faith and repentance be both commanded and a gift. Today's Hardshells, sadly, think that they cannot be both, that for something to be commanded excludes it from being God's gift, and vise versa. They do not understand, for instance, the words of Augustine:

"O Lord, command what you will and give what you command."

I have on previous occasions written against the Hardshell notion that men are not commanded to become regenerate.  See "Make You A New Heart".  It seems the Hardshells would have sided with Pelagius rather than Augustine. 

What think ye? Am I not right?

Resignation To The Will Of God

 "nevertheless not my will, but thine, be done" 

"And when he would not be persuaded, we ceased, saying, The will of the Lord be done." (Acts 21: 14)

"Saying, Father, if thou be willing, remove this cup from me: nevertheless not my will, but thine, be done." (Luke 22: 42)

It is a mark of a mature Christian to be always resigned to the will of God. I don't mean resignation in the sense of throwing up our hands and giving up. I don't mean being resigned to circumstances we can and ought to change. The kind of resignation I am talking about should be coveted and is described in the famous "serenity prayer." It says:

"God grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change; the courage to change the things I can; and the wisdom to know the difference."

Resignation involves accepting things that cannot be changed, not a giving up or quitting under fire. It does not involve resigning oneself to circumstances that can be changed. We need to change the things we can, all the time trusting in God's promise to provide strength of will and means to do so. Of course, this takes wisdom to know the difference between things we can and ought to change and things that we cannot change.

Resignation to the will of God is opposed to murmuring and complaining. Resignation involves contentment, of being satisfied, and having a mind free of worry. A heart and mind resigned to the will of God confesses: 

"LORD, my heart is not haughty, nor mine eyes lofty: neither do I exercise myself in great matters, or in things too high for me." (Psa. 131: 1)

Resignation to God's will involves learning and accepting our limitations. It means setting realistic goals for ourselves and not having goals that are unreachable. In doing so we save ourselves from unnecessary disappointment. 

Henry David Thoreau said: "The mass of men lead lives of quiet desperation. What is called resignation is confirmed desperation." 

I certainly do agree that people often resign themselves to circumstances that they think cannot be changed for the better and thus become despondent or in "confirmed desperation." Let us ask God for the wisdom to know what we can and ought to change and know also when to quietly accept the things we cannot change. 

Dr. John Gill provided an excellent treatise on "Resignation To The Will Of God" in chapter 16 of his Body of Practical Divinity. He defined resignation to the will of God as being "submissive to his will, both to do and suffer whatever is his pleasure to call them to."

"And Samuel told him every whit, and hid nothing from him. And he said, It is the LORD: let him do what seemeth him good." (I Sam. 3: 18)

Double Drawing

"Draw nigh to God, and he will draw nigh to you. Cleanse your hands, ye sinners; and purify your hearts, ye double minded. Be afflicted, and mourn, and weep: let your laughter be turned to mourning, and your joy to heaviness. Humble yourselves in the sight of the Lord, and he shall lift you up." (James 4: 8-10)

Sometimes it is good to look beyond all the arguing about all the intimate details in the salvation experience, such as occurs between Arminians and Calvinists, as it relates to such verses as the above. In other words, let us just encourage each other to draw near to the Lord in view of the promised blessing thereby (draw near to you). If we desire to know God, to enjoy God, let us then draw near to him in our hearts and minds knowing that he has promised to draw close to us. 

Christians, those who know God and who have experienced his presence in conversion, and in times of praise and prayer, nevertheless experience times when they and the Lord seem so far apart, times when they cannot sense or feel the "presence" of the Lord. To them the words of the apostle James are appropriate. The Christian needs to "come to the Lord" in his thoughts and prayers. 

"God is not far from anyone of us" said the Apostle (Acts 17: 27) to lost Pagans, who knew not the one true God and the way of salvation through Christ. The Christian should know this and therefore should not rely upon his feelings in ascertaining whether the Lord is still "with" him. What all need, whether saved or lost, is to realize this truth. Sometimes God is only a prayer away. Sometimes the things that are blocking the way to God need to be removed. 

Now think just a minute about how profound an experience it is for us to come to God, to truly know and realize his presence and Spirit. To use a vernacular expression, it just "blows my mind." Said Adam Clarke in his commentary on James 4: 8 - "The delicacy and beauty of these expressions are, I think, but seldom noted."

Doctrinal Thoughts

I do believe the words of our text applies foremost to those who are lost in sin, or to the unconverted. Why? Well, look at the description of those being addressed: the filthy handed, sinners, the impure in heart, the double minded. 

What is commanded and desired by God is the cleansing of the sinner, the purifying of his heart, thus it is applicable to the unsaved and filthy. The words describe salvation or conversion, of becoming pure and holy.

Conversion first involves being humbled in conviction of sin and there is a call in these words to be "afflicted," and to "weep and mourn." 

Conviction is described as being afflicted in soul, as laughter turned into mourning over one's sin and lost condition. Conversion, on the other hand is described as being purified, cleansed of moral filth. It is described as a being made holy, of having one's sorrow in conviction turned into the laughter of conversion. As conviction humbled the sinner, or brought him down, so conversion "lifts up" his soul and spirit.  

In a nutshell, the command is "Be convicted, repent, and be converted and saved." Let us understand that the apostles and the inspired writers had no reluctance addressing lost sinners in this manner. 

Their belief that salvation was by grace and by the power of God did not keep them from addressing sinners in the fashion of James. So too should it be with us.

Let us be thankful that our God invites us to come to him! How sad that most ignore this gracious invitation!

Acts 14: 27 & Hardshell Premises

"And when they were come, and had gathered the church together, they rehearsed all that God had done with them, and how he had opened the door of faith unto the Gentiles." (Acts 14: 27)

Premise: "when a text says that God (or Christ, or the Spirit) does something, then it means he does it apart from means." 

Hardshells assert this premise and argue this way, in many instances, when defending their no means view of salvation.

 

Paul refers to "all that God had done." What was that work of God? Was it not converting Gentiles to faith in Christ? Did God convert them to the faith directly apart from preaching the gospel? No. The text says God worked "with" or "through" them. Therefore we should no longer hear Hardshells say that a belief in means is a denial that God does the saving.

Who regenerated you, my Hardshell brother? Why God, and God alone you say, and this means God apart from human means or instruments. Who converted you? Brought you to faith and repentance? God alone apart from means? Or, God through means? Surely the latter and any honest soul must agree.

"Come To That Happy Land"?

Over the years Kevin and I have referred to many old Christian hymns that were sung by the oldest Baptists in this country and that are still in Hardshell hymn books and yet they are no longer in accordance with their teachings. The following song I used to sing when I was with the Hardshells, called "There Is a Happy Land" and is a hymn by Andrew Young (1807–1889), a Scottish schoolmaster, and first published in 1838. It is sung to a tune arranged by Leonard P. Breedlove. It has been sung in many films. It is in the PB "Old School Hymnal." Notice the words "come to that happy land, come, come away." That kind of invitation is not given to sinners by today's Hardshell preachers. Notice too the words of warning given to those who refuse the gracious invitation - "why will ye doubting stand, why still delay." Hardshell preachers do not talk this way to sinners. Notice too the words "oh, then to glory run." And, of obtaining both "crown" and "kingdom" by victory. Do Hardshells teach this?

There is a happy land, far, far away,
Where saints in glory stand, bright, bright as day.
Oh, how they sweetly sing, worthy is our Savior king,
Loud let His praises ring, praise, praise for aye.

Come to that happy land, come, come away;
Why will ye doubting stand, why still delay?
Oh, we shall happy be, when from sin and sorrow free,
Lord, we shall live with Thee, blest, blest for aye.

Bright, in that happy land, beams every eye;
Kept by a Father’s hand, love cannot die.
Oh, then to glory run; be a crown and kingdom won;
And, bright, above the sun, we reign for aye.

There are not too many who sing this well (at least on youtube), though I have heard it sung better on the radio and in church services. Still, here are some samples if you care to listen.

Peggy Duncan Singers (here)

The Lewis Family (here)

By Gadaya (solo with instruments) (here)

Sacred Harp (here)

Drawing Near To God In Meditation

 

"But it is good for me to draw near to God"

(Psalm 73: 28)

Said Spurgeon (emphasis mine):

“How can a man draw near to God?” someone asks. Well, we must begin thus. Draw near to Him by thinking of Him. God is not fixed in any one place so that we need to go on a pilgrimage in order to reach Him. “God is a Spirit,” and the way to draw near to a spirit is, first of all, to think of Him in our own spirit. I shall begin to have hope of any man’s salvation when he begins seriously to think about God, and about his own relationship to God. Will you do so, dear hearer? Take time to think about your Creator, your Preserver, your Provider, your Guardian, your Friend, your Judge, your Savior. To help you to think of Him, read His Word, for Scripture will both give you the best subject for thought and assist you to understand and know more of God." ("THE DOUBLE DRAWING NEAR" - here)

"Take time to think about your Creator"! Is that not what the song "Take Time To Be Holy" is encouraging all to do? That song says "Take time to be holy, speak oft with thy Lord," and "Abide in Him always, and feed on His Word," and "Spend much time in secret, with Jesus alone."

How do we draw near to God? Is it not in our innermost thoughts? In our meditations upon him and his word? So the apostle writes: "let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience and our bodies washed with pure water." (Heb. 10: 22)

Again, the drawing near is in our "hearts," which includes the thoughts of it. Many passages speak of "the thoughts of the heart." (See Gen. 6: 5; Psa. 139: 23; Matt. 15: 19). There is also mention of "the thoughts and intents of the heart." (Heb. 4: 12) Many think "heart" has to do with emotion alone, but this is wrong. The Greek word "cardia" may be used of the physical organ or of man's innermost being, where are his most inner thoughts and feelings.

To draw near or to come to God is to enjoy God's presence within a man's soul, mind, and spirit. This is described in many passages of scripture, such as Rev. 3: 20, where the Lord Jesus Christ says:

"Behold, I stand at the door, and knock: if any man hear my voice, and open the door, I will come in to him, and will sup with him, and he with me." (Rev. 3: 20)

How and when does this supping occur in the inner man? Is it not in times when we are thinking about the Lord? Then, let us think less of carnal things and more of the spiritual.

Spurgeon on Meditation

"Meditation On God"

 "the couch of the soul"

As a follow up to the previous article on "Meditation" I want to provide the reader with some things that the great Charles Spurgeon said (all highlighting mine) on this subject. Said Spurgeon:

"Now, if you equally knew how to count the great profit of meditation, you would deem it a positive gain to yourselves to spend some time therein, for meditation is most profitable to the spirit, it is an extremely healthful and excellent occupation. Far from being wasted time, it is a judicious employment of time." (MEDITATION ON GOD NO. 2690 - here)

That is certainly a raving recommendation to practice meditation! 

Spurgeon continued:

"Do not imagine that the meditative man is necessarily lazy, contrariwise, he lays the best foundation for useful works. He is not the best student who reads the most books, but he who meditates the most upon them...Meditation is thus a very excellent employment."

Again, what a good sale for the practice of both reading and meditating upon God's inspired word!

Spurgeon continued:

"First, I think meditation furnishes the mind somewhat with rest. It is the couch of the soul. The time that a man spends in necessary rest, he never reckons to be wasted, because he is refreshing and renovating himself for further exertion. Meditation, then, is the rest of the spirit."

The "couch of the soul"! Good analogy! That little meditative thought is delightful, is it not? It is the "rest of the spirit" indeed! This is not denying that "study," or deep thought, wearies the flesh, as Solomon says - "much study is a weariness to the flesh." (Eccl. 12: 12) Real lazy people do not generally spend time in deep contemplation about the sciences, or philosophy and theology, and they certainly do not spend their contemplative time for the purpose of recuperating and getting ready to go back to work. Spurgeon speaks of a meditative Christian who "knew how to spend a little time daily in the calm repose of contemplative retirement."

Spurgeon continued:

"At times, tis well to muse upon heaven, or if you are a man loving to revel in the prophetic future, turn over the mystic page, and study the sacred visions recorded in the Book of Daniel, or the Book of Revelation. As you do enter these hallowed intricacies, and do meditate upon these impressive symbols, you will rise up from your study mightily refreshed. You will find it like a couch to your mind."

Well, amen to that! All who have experienced such times of study and meditation can say amen.

Spurgeon continued:

"Again, meditation is the machine in which the raw material of knowledge is converted to the best uses. Let me compare it to a winepress. By reading, and research, and study, we gather the grapes, but it is by meditation that we press out the juice of those grapes, and obtain the wine. How is it that many men who read very much know very little?"

Here is a man who has spent time meditating upon meditation! He was blessed in the meditation! So am I. Are you? 

Spurgeon continued:

"I like, when I have read a book for about half an hour, to walk awhile and think it over. I shut up the volume, and say, “Now, Mr. Author, you have made your speech, let me think over what you have said."

This is a good insight into Spurgeon the man. I too have practiced the same habit many times when reading and contemplating the writings of scripture or of theologians and philosophers.

Spurgeon continued:

"Thus, you see that we need meditation to make use of what we have discovered. As it is the rest of the soul, so it is, at the same time, the means of making the best use of what the soul has acquired."

People need quiet time to deeply consider what they have read or studied. This idea is captured in the famous sculptor of the Thinker.

Spurgeon continued:

"Who are the men that can go into a controversy, and get the mastery? Why, the men who meditate when they are alone. Who are the men that can preach? Not those who gad about, and never commune with their own hearts alone, but those who think earnestly as well when no one is near them as when there is a crowd around them. Who are the authors to write your books, and keep up the constant supply of literature? They are meditative men."

Well said. Spurgeon shows that he is a man like David and other holy men and women in scripture who thought upon God and his word daily. True believers have always been "meditative" men and women.

Spurgeon continued:

"The best and most saintly of men have been men of meditation. Isaac went out into the fields at eventide to meditate. David says, “I will meditate in thy statutes.” Paul, who himself meditated continually on all that related to the Gospel, writing to Timothy concerning the important things needful in a good minister of Jesus Christ, says, “Meditate upon these things; give thyself wholly to them; that thy profiting may appear to all.”"

What a thing to contemplate, ironically! The best and most saintly have been given to the practice of meditation? If that is so, then the least saintly are they who meditate very little? How do you weigh in that balance?

Spurgeon continued:

"To the Christian, meditation is most essential. I would almost question the being of a Christian, and I should positively deny his well being, who lived habitually without meditation. Meditation and prayer are twin sisters, and both of them appear to me equally necessary to Christian life. I think meditation must exist where there is prayer, and prayer is sure to exist where there is meditation."

Oh let us keep these things always in mind!

Spurgeon continued:

"So is it with many of you, after you have caught the sermon, you allow it to run away. How often do you through lack of meditation, miss the entire purpose for which the discourse was designed! Unless you meditate upon the truths we declare unto you, you will gather little sweetness, you will acquire little profit, and certainly, you will be in no wise established therein to your edification. Can you get the honey from the comb until you press it? You may be refreshed while you listen to the sermon, but it is the meditation afterwards which extracts the honey, and gets the best and most luscious savor therefrom."

Oh such good counsel!

Spurgeon continued:

"Let me tell you that there ought to be special times for meditation. I think every man should set apart a portion of each day for this gracious exercise. A Christian will ever be in a lean state if he has no time for sacred musings before his God. Those men who know most of God are such as meditate most upon Him. Those who realize most experientially the doctrines of grace are those who meditate and soar beyond the reach of all sublunary things."

Amen!

The Bible On Meditation

"I remember the days of old; 

I meditate on all thy works; 

I muse on the work of thy hands." (Psa. 143: 5)

Christian meditation, what can we say of it? Is it anything like meditation in other religions? Is it a duty? Is it enjoyable? Is it like "transcendental meditation"? Is it in any way "mystical"? 

Not all meditation is religious. Mathematical theorists are often in deep thought. So too are philosophers, physicists, physicians, many other thinkers and scientists. 

Christian meditation involves thinking upon the word of God. In doing this we are thinking upon God himself. We are thinking about his person and his works. It involves what we may call "the life of the mind." 

Religiously Mystical?

"Mystical," says Merriam Webster: "involving or having the nature of an individual's direct subjective communion with God or ultimate reality."

Some eastern religions practice a kind of meditation where thought is excluded, where one tries not to think about anything, tries to free the mind and spirit of conscious thought (somehow, where the spirit transcends time and thought). Such meditation the scriptures know nothing about. 

However, there is indeed something mystical or spiritual about meditating as the scriptures describe, for in times of meditation the soul, mind, and spirit enjoys communion with God. In some sense the soul in communion with God, in his thoughts, does "transcend," or become enraptured, and many Christian hymns speak of this heavenly experience. It is where the soul becomes "lost in wonder." It is a kind of "ecstasy." The word "ecstasy" comes from the Greek "ekstasis" which literally means "standing outside oneself." It is in this respect that it is similar in meaning to words like "amazement," "wonderment," "awestruck," etc. In all these mental states the soul does in some ways "transcend," or "stand outside of itself," though not in the same way as those who practice the eastern or Hindu "transcendental meditation." 

Mostly Cognitive

Notice the three words used together in the above Psalm: remember, meditate, muse. Those are cognitive words. Meditation involves thinking. Musing involves deep or studious thinking. 

It is cognitive, involving thought. The purpose of it is to increase knowledge and understanding and experience God's presence. 

Musement or Amusement?

It is a sad thing that the mass of people spend far more time in amusement rather than in musement. I am not condemning amusement or recreation. All need a degree of this. Families need it. But, it is most often inordinate or excessive. But we all need to muse and meditate also! There are so many things we need to think a lot about! Right? We need to be good thinkers. Let us then be found often musing rather than being amused. It is in this way that we are "making the most of the limited time we have." (Eph. 5: 16) It is in meditation and musing upon God and his word that we commune with God and delight in him.

Commune With & Delight In

"But his delight is in the law of the LORD; and in his law doth he meditate day and night." (Psa. 1: 2)

Notice how in this text "delight" is connected with "meditate." It is unrelated to the physical, being mental, emotional, spiritual, and psychological.

"Delight thyself also in the LORD; and he shall give thee the desires of thine heart." (Psa. 37: 4)

Obviously the "delight" that one has "in the LORD" is connected with delighting mentally in his word. It is what goes on "in heart" or "in soul." Rejoicing and being happy is mental, and though it effects the body, is not what the body experiences. Paul referred to this when he wrote "But let every man prove his own work, and then shall he have rejoicing in himself alone, and not in another." (Gal. 6: 4) "In himself" refers not to something physical in his body, but something in his soul, mind, or spirit. A professing Christian who is not spending time meditating upon God and his word is not delighting in the Lord.

In the new testament the Apostle Paul exhorted Timothy: "Meditate upon these things; give thyself wholly to them; that thy profiting may appear to all." (I Tim. 4: 15) The words "meditate upon" are from the Greek "melatao," and it denotes a "meditative pondering." It means "to take care of, i.e. (by implication) revolve in the mind."

Notice these words from the Psalms:

"Stand in awe, and sin not: commune (speak) with your own heart upon your bed, and be still. Selah." (Psa. 4: 4)

"I call to remembrance my song in the night: I commune with mine own heart: and my spirit made diligent search." (Psa. 77: 6)

Here the Hebrew word for "commune" denotes "to put forth, mediate, muse, commune, speak, complain, ponder." Notice again the connection between meditative communing and the inner man, or the "heart" and "spirit." It is in the heart and spirit, in the mind, that God is enjoyed. A professing Christian who does not commune with God, does not think upon God and his word, shows that he does not enjoy God so much. It seems that those who have truly enjoyed communion with God find it addictive.

Another Psalm to consider on this subject is this:

“I will sing unto the LORD as long as I live: I will sing praise to my God while I have my being. My meditation of him shall be sweet.” (Psa. 104: 34)

Here is the "life of the mind" that we should all covet! Sadly, most would rather think upon carnal things and they are the worse for it. So testified the Psalmist: "The wicked, through the pride of his countenance, will not seek after God: God is not in all his thoughts." (Psa. 10: 4) Sadly, with most today, God is only an occasional thought. People do not want to think upon God. The words of the Psalmist clearly imply that if we are righteous, and not wicked, then we will have God "in all our thoughts." We will think upon him constantly. How do we occupy our minds? The answer would reveal much about us, right? 

Enjoying School

Most people do not realize that our word "school" is from the Latin schola and means "intermission of work" and "leisure for learning"! The Latin is from the Greek word skhole and it denotes "spare time, leisure, rest, ease, idleness"! I used to tell that to students when I spent a couple years as a substitute teacher and they could not believe it. School is intermission from work? Students see school as work! School is leisure? Students see schooling as anything but leisure!    

Throughout history the only ones who enjoyed school or leisure were the rich. They did not have to work and therefore had the freedom to choose how they spent their time. Yes, they spent it in physical pleasures, but they also spent it in learning, in reading, in studying things. 

So many today are blessed with the financial means to have more leisure time than any previous time in history. So sad that few take their "spare time" to think upon God and his word. 

"Finally, brethren, whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are honest, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good report; if there be any virtue, and if there be any praise, think on these things." (Phil. 4: 8 kjv)