by Steve | Jul 2, 1977 | Archive - 1977
Archive: How to Study the Bible
reprinted from The New International Version, New Testament
Copyright © 1976 by The Zondervan Corp.
There is no other book in the world quite like the Bible. It is an exceptional piece of literature. You can read it to enjoy the artistic beauty of its poetry, the exciting action of its books of history, and the drama of its prophets. You can look to the Bible for comfort or guidance, inspiration or entertainment.
But the Bible is much more than this. It is also God’s special revelation, teaching us about God and pointing the way to salvation and eternal life through Jesus Christ. As God’s Word, the Bible speaks authoritatively to all our needs and desires and calls on us to listen and obey.
You can read the Bible just as you do other books, skimming off the surface meaning of various passages. But to get into the heart of what God is saying to you, you also have to study the Bible as you would a textbook. This type of Bible study is a vital part of growing to spiritual maturity. It may sound tedious, and it certainly will require diligent effort, but the rewards are well worth the time and energy spent.
As you study the Bible, you will gradually develop a strong Biblical frame of reference that will help you build your life on what God has said.
Because the Bible is God’s revelation of Himself, learning more about the Bible will also lead to a greater knowledge of God. This doesn’t mean just knowing about Godthough certainly that’s important. It means knowing God on a personal level and developing a closer relationship with Him.
Studying the Bible will make you more aware of God’s will for your life. These results eventually will become a cycle: as you come to know God better, you will respond to His claims on you and follow His will for your life. That, in turn, will draw you even closer to God and give you a stronger desire to obey Him. Through both of these, your love for God will grow and your Bible study will become an act of worship.
There are some important guidelines you will need to keep in mind as you get started in Bible study. First of all, you should have a definite plan to follow so you can proceed in an organized manner. Listed below are a number of Bible study methods to use. You’ll probably want to vary your methods in order to avoid a routine approach.
You should be careful to consider the context of a verse or passage before you try to interpret it. This includes the immediate context-that is, the larger passage of which this is a part. Consider the general subject of a passage before you look for a specific application. Knowing the historical and cultural background is also important for understanding the Bible.
And finally, you should be aware of the context of the entire book you are studying. Important questions to keep in mind are: Who wrote the book? Who was it written to? and What is its purpose?
Because you are learning to study the Bible for yourself, you shouldn’t rely too much on commentaries to explain passages to you. Prayerful reliance on the Holy Spirit will greatly increase your understanding. But don’t expect that every idea you come up with is given by the Spirit. Test your ideas against other passages. The Bible is its own best commentary.
No matter which method of Bible study is used, there are three basic steps to follow:
- Observation—what is this passage about?
- Interpretation—what does it mean?
- Application—how can I apply it to my life?
The following methods give you a good choice of ways to proceed. No one method is best. Pick one you feel comfortable with or use various ones.
1. ABC Bible Study
A-Analysis: Give each paragraph a title. Then give a title to the entire passage.
B-Best Verse: Pick a verse that summarizes the theme of the passage and memorize it.
C-Contract: Write out a prayer (a contract with God), mentioning specific ways you want to apply this passage to your life.
This method isn’t good for daily study because you’ll have too many contracts to remember. But it’s a good weekly or biweekly study.
2. Manuscript Study
Type out a passage (without paragraphs or verse numbers) and use the observation, interpretation, application method. Divide the passage into paragraphs or thought units. Underline key ideas. Outline the passage. It will come alive.
3. Book Study
Proceed through a book of the Bible in a systematic way. Learn the background of the book. Find its theme. Analyze each passage until you think you have a good understanding of the entire book. Ask “Who, What, Where, When, Why, and How” types of questions about everything you read. A notebook for jotting down ideas or information is often helpful.
4. Theme Study
Trace a theme or concept throughout the Bible; for example: prayer, forgiveness, sacrifice. A concordance or topical Bible is essential.
5. Character Study
Study the life of one character. Look up all passages referring to that character. It’s a good idea to start with characters such as Barnabas or Priscilla and work up to ones like Peter or Paul.
6. Word Study
Trace a word as it is used throughout the Bible. An interlinear Greek edition of the New Testament is helpful for any in-depth study.
For more detailed information on Bible study, you may want to read a book on the subject. Some good ones are: Getting Into God, by D. Stuart Briscoe (Zondervan); Independent Bible Study, by Irving L. Jensen (Moody); How to Study the Bible, edited by John B. Job (lnterVarsity); Effective Bible Study, by Howard F. Vos (Zondervan); and Search the Scriptures (Navigators). Various reference books are also helpful, such as a Bible dictionary, atlas, handbook, and concordance.
by Steve | Jul 1, 1977 | Archive - 1977
Without the Bible to guide us in the Christian life and the church, we are like an airplane without a compass … a ship without a rudder. That is why it is vitally important to consider
Archive: The Authority of Scripture
by G. W. Bromily, M.A., Ph.D., D.Litt.
Rector, St. Thomas’ English Episcopal Church, Edinburg, Scotland
Condensed from the New Bible Dictionary
Published by Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., Grand Rapids, Michigan
Used by permission
The first of two articles
Our thinking concerning the authority and inspiration of Holy Scripture must start always from the fact that the Bible itself assumes everywhere that it is a message directly given by God Himself. In this first section it must be our main task to substantiate that fact and to discuss its implications. But one preliminary question must first be answered. When we assert the unique authority of the Bible, is it legitimate to appeal to the Bible’s own testimony in support of that assertion? Is it not a most outrageous form of question-begging to make the Bible itself the first and final arbiter in its own case? Are we not guilty of presupposing the very thing which we are asked to substantiate?
The answer to this question is, of course, that we do not turn to the Bible for proof, but for information. Rational arguments may be advanced in favour of the unique authority of Scripture, but in the last analysis we accept that authority by faith. We accept it only in so far as the Bible itself requires it.
In other words, it is only as the inspiration and authenticity of the record are a (necessary). part of the revelation that we confess the Bible as the supreme rule of faith and life. If the Bible did not make that claim, we should have no call to believe it. Nor could we have general confidence in the teaching of Scripture. But if the Bible stands before us as the authoritative Word of God, the Word which itself claims authority, then it is as such that we must reckon with it, receiving that Word and the authority of that Word, or resisting it.
Does the Bible make any such assertion of authority? If it does, what does that assertion imply?
With regard to the first question, the answer is so vast that our main difficulty is that of compression. In the Old Testament as in the New Testament the claim to a more than human authority is everywhere implicit, and in many places it finds direct and open expression. It is claimed, e.g., that Moses received from God both the moral law[1] and also more detailed commandments, even extending to arrangements for the tabernacle. The prophets maintained that they were not speaking their own words, but the message which God Himself had given to them. The Lord Jesus Christ spoke with authority because He was conscious of speaking not merely as the historical Teacher but as the eternal Son. The apostles had no doubt as to the authoritativeness of their pronouncements, whether they were quoting our Lord or developing the Christian message under the guidance of the outpoured Spirit.
It may be objected that in the majority of these cases the claim to authority is made only on behalf of the message delivered and not on behalf of the written record in which that message has been handed down to us. Thus it may well be true that the prophets or Jesus Christ spoke with divine authority, but sometimes we have their words only at second hand. The fact that inspiration is claimed for them does not mean that inspiration is claimed for those who compiled the record of their activity and teaching. If this is so there is no guarantee that what is written in the Bible is a verbatim or accurate account of the message actually delivered.
Against this objection we may set the fact that in the New Testament especially, and with reference to the Old Testament, definite authority is claimed for the written word of the Bible. This point emerges clearly in many parts of the teaching of our Lord Himself. Thus He answers the tempter with the threefold ‘It is written’. On the mount of transfiguration He tells His disciples that it is written of the Son of man that He should suffer many things and be set at naught. To the Jews who searched the Scriptures He gave counsel that ‘it is they that bear witness to me’. After the resurrection He interpreted to the disciples in all the Scriptures the things concerning Himself, showing that all things must needs be fulfilled, which were ‘written about me in the law of Moses and the prophets and the psalms’.
These and similar statements make it quite plain that Jesus Himself accepted the inspiration and authority of the written Word, especially in so far as it gave prophetic witness to His own death and resurrection. It is also clear from verses like John 14:26 and John 16:13 that He expected and promised a similar inspiration in the case of the apostolic testimony[2] yet to be made.
When we come to the apostles we find that their testimony to the divine authority of the Bible is equally clear. In all the Gospels great emphasis is laid upon the inspired foretelling of the work and Person of Christ. The apostle Paul quotes extensively from the Old Testament, and his preaching to his own people is very largely an attempt to prove the Messiahship of Jesus[3] from Old Testament history and prophecy.
The statement in 2 Timothy 3:16 sums up the whole attitude of Paul. Whatever translation we adopt it is plain from v.15 that the apostle has the Old Testament in mind and that he thinks of it as peculiarly inspired by God. The other apostolic writers quote just as frequently from the Old Testament, and in 2 Peter open testimony is borne to the inspiration of the Bible in a way very similar to that in 2 Timothy. In 2 Peter 1:21 the word of prophecy is traced back to its final author in God the Holy Spirit: ‘Because no prophecy ever came by the impulse of man, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God’.
Again, in 2 Peter 3:16 there seems to be a further allusion to the written Bible as an authoritative word which must be approached with reverence and humility. The latter verse is particularly interesting in that it couples together the Epistles of Paul and the other Scriptures, a fairly plain hint that the apostolic authors were conscious of adding to and completing the authoritative Canon of the Old Testament.
Surveying the evidence, we may allow that the passages that treat directly of the inspiration of Scripture are few in number, and that there is no particular assertion of the status or authority of every individual book. On the other hand, we may note that, with the exception of Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther, Ecclesiastes, Song of Solomon, Obadiah, Nahum and Zephaniah, all the books of the Old Testament are quoted in the New Testament. And when we take into account the attitude of the New Testament to such quotations there can be little doubt that the ‘Thus says the Lord’ of the prophets was taken to apply to the records of prophetic activity as well as to oral words delivered on this or that specific occasion. The written word was treated as the inspired and authoritative form in which the content of divine revelation[4] had been expressed and handed down.
When we ask concerning the implications of this witness, several important points emerge. First, it may be noted that no specific theory of inspiration is introduced. From the two texts, John 14:26 and 2 Peter 1:21, it seems that there is a twofold activity: that of the human author on the one hand, and that of the inspiring and controlling Spirit on the other. Certainly there is no doubt as to the final initiative and supremacy of the Spirit. But there is also no suggestion of the obliteration of the personality and individuality of the human author.
Again, we may notice that inspiration is seen particularly in the insight of the Old Testament writers into the future activity of God. The prophet was a forthteller, no doubt; but the ultimate test of his prophecy was the correctness of his insight into the divinely-directed future, and that necessarily meant foretelling. Even in the Old Testament itself the prophet who foretold incorrectly was discredited, and in the New Testament the main value of the Old Testament is the prophetic witness to Jesus Christ. If it is true that that witness supports the Messianic claim[5] of Jesus, it is also true that the Messianic work of Jesus vindicates the prophetic claim of the Old Testament. A very large proportion of the Old Testament citations are concerned with various forms of that prophetic witness.
A third point is that the historical setting of the Old Testament is everywhere accepted as authentic. Our Lord, for instance, does not question the connection of Moses with the Law, or the Davidic authorship of Psalms 110. The apostles accept all the main events of Old Testament history from Adam and the Fall (I Timothy 2:13; 14) to the crossing of the Red Sea (I Corinthians 10:2), the Balaam incidents (2 Peter 2:16), the fall of Jericho (Hebrews 11:30), the deliverances under the judges (Hebrews 11:31), and the miracles of Elijah (James 5:17).
In face of this clear testimony the suggestion has been made that our Lord and the apostles simply shared the common assumptions of their age and made use of the historical happenings only in illustration of their theology. It certainly cannot be denied, however, that, in the New Testament, belief in the authority of the Old Testament does involve an acceptance of its historical as well as its religious or doctrinal truth. It is worth remembering, too, that if that acceptance means acceptance of the supernatural control and intervention of almighty God, nowhere do we have a clearer or more decisive instance of such intervention and control than in the central facts of the Christian gospel, the life and death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. …
We must be careful, of course, not to read into the self-attestation of Scripture more than is actually there. With regard to authorships and dates, tradition has often been vocal where the Bible itself is silent. The extent of the Biblical silence is sometimes rather surprising. We know little about the compilation of the historical books of the Old Testament. We are not told the exact date and circumstances of some prophetic writings (e.g. Malachi). We do not know who wrote many of the Psalms or the book of Job. We are not told that Hebrews was written by Paul. The text itself does not tell us that Luke wrote the Third Gospel and Acts, or that the apostle John wrote the Fourth Gospel, although the case for Luke and John rests on sound and legitimate inference. It is as well sometimes to remember that there is this line between a direct Biblical testimony and even the reliable evidence of tradition. Otherwise we may easily identify the authority of Scripture with that of historical statements which are outside the scope of Scripture itself.
When all this is said, however, it must be said too that the Bible does lay serious claim to divine origin, status, and authority. It states clearly that its message is of God. It traces back its authority through the human writings to the Holy Spirit. It accepts the supernatural both in prophetic utterances and in historical events. It makes no artificial distinction between the inward content of the Word of God and its outward form. By its self-authentication as God’s Word written, the Bible challenges us directly either to faith or to unbelief. In our approach to the Bible other considerations may obtrude, but the basic challenge certainly cannot be ignored.
It was upon the foundation of the self-witness of the Bible that the Reformers[6] built their doctrine of Holy Scripture. They adopted this procedure because first and foremost their theology was a theology of faith, a revealed theology. Their starting-point was, therefore, the response of faith to the challenge of the Biblical message. They accepted that message on its own terms, and in loyalty to it they tried to understand the Bible as the Bible understood itself. …
The Reformed method is regarded as both illegitimate and futile by those who think that theology should be constructed upon purely rational foundations. But the Reformers themselves were theologians of faith, making use of reason only in response and obedience to the divine revelation. This meant that they were theologians who were pledged in faith to receive the testimony of the Word of God written, even in matters concerning its own nature and being.
The Reformers believed, then, that the Bible was given by God, and that it was inspired both in content and also in form. They did not take any radical step when they propounded this view. The mediaeval church had held a similar view. But they did take the step. Everywhere in their writings we find evidence of a wholehearted acceptance of inspiration and authority of the Bible. This is so in spite of the free comments which have led some modern scholars to regard Luther and Calvin as early critics, or at any rate as men who distinguished between the living content of Scripture and the detailed wording, in contrast to their supposedly more legalistic successors.
In fact, however, both Luther and Calvin extolled the authority of the letter too. Their remarks on the minor problems should not blind us to the fact that for them Scripture was the divinely-authoritative record upon which all true theology must be founded. The special attitude of Luther to James is linked with his doubts as to its authentic canonicity;[7] so that it does not affect his general understanding.
The Bible was inspired and authoritative, but it was also sole-sufficient in matters of faith and conduct. It would be an exaggeration to say that the Reformers set up the Bible as the only authority in the church. But it is no exaggeration to say that they regarded the Bible as the supreme authority from which all other authorities derived and to which they were all subject. Because it was itself from God, the Bible contained everything necessary both to salvation and to the Christian life. Nothing was to be believed or taught in the church unless it had the sanction either of the plain text of Scripture or of clear inferences from it. The Calvinists extended the direct rule of Scripture even to the details of church order and worship, and the Lutherans and Anglicans all ascribed a negative authority to the Bible in these spheres—i.e. they would not permit anything which was excluded by Scripture or repugnant to it. …
All parts of the Bible are inspired and authoritative, the Reformers taught, but not all parts are of equal importance. The Mosaic legislation in Leviticus had not the same spiritual or theological value as the Gospel of John, or even the Decalogue [Ten Commandments]. In this respect the Bible is in some sense analogous to the Church as the Body of Christ. All the members constitute the Body and are necessary to it. But although all the members are necessary they are not of equal importance. Some members are more used than others, and some may be regarded as vital: without them the body would perish altogether.
So it is with the Bible. We cannot mutilate the Bible without loss, but some parts are more dispensable than others. If the evangelical message is given, it is possible to be a Christian with only a fragment of Scripture; to be a full-grown Christian it is necessary to have the whole counsel of God.
A certain difficulty arises when the attempt is made to discriminate between the more and less relevant important passages, for purely subjective considerations threaten to control and perhaps distort our judgment in this matter. Zwingli and Luther both gave helpful rules which are not so very different; the importance and relevance of a passage depend upon the measure in which it serves, first, to promote the glory of God and, second, to reveal and exalt the Lord Jesus Christ. It is because some parts of the Bible do this more directly and plainly than others that they are to be regarded as the more important passages of Scripture. But in the last resort all Scripture is in some way directed towards this twofold end.
The Reformers emphasized the importance of the letter of the Bible, but not at the expense of the sovereignty of the Holy Spirit in His use and application of the Bible message. In the thought of the Reformers the Holy Spirit was not merely the Author of Scripture. He also determined the application of Scripture to its twofold end, and gave to the believer an inward persuasion of the authority of its message as revealed truth. On the first of these further points it need only be added that, while the meaning of the Bible is plain, for an inward apprehension something more is needed than ordinary rational intelligence. For genuine understanding there is required the illumination of the Holy Spirit which is for the individual the necessary complement of God’s outward revelation.
Some modern theologians have seized upon this illumination as true inspiration according to the Reformed conception: i.e. the Bible is inspired only in so far as the Holy Spirit uses this or that passage to accomplish an inward enlightenment in the individual Christian. In the Reformers themselves, however, there seems to be few traces of the equation of the individual enlightenment with inspiration as such. The Bible is an inspired record of the divine self–revelation whether this or that individual receives its witness or not. The revelation and the recording of it in written form are both objective acts. Illumination by the Holy Spirit is the subjective complement of these acts within the individual and for the salvation of the individual. As it is God the Holy Spirit who gave the objective record, so it is God the Holy Spirit who effects the subjective illumination. The message and the application of the message are both of God.
The fact that there is that inward enlightenment is the final guarantee of the authenticity of the record, whether in its general teaching or in its self-attestation. Although the Reformers accepted the Bible in faith, they were not unaware of the rational problems involved. The problems were perhaps not so acute then as they are today, but they were sufficiently acute to call for some general answer.
The Reformers could advance many reasons in favour of their acceptance of the Bible. They could point, as Calvin did, to those characteristics and qualities which mark it off as an inspired record: its literary quality, its antiquity, its combination of depth and simplicity, its preservation and historical power, its accuracy in the foretelling of the future. In the last analysis, however, the real reason for belief is the inward knowledge of the truth of Scripture which is necessarily present when the Holy Spirit applies that truth to the soul. To the self-attestation of the Bible there is added the inward testimony of the Holy Spirit. But the argument is a rational argument only for the believer. In other words, the truth of the Bible’s claim cannot be made a matter simply of intellectual and academic debate. As a fundamental axiom it must be/known by experience. It must be known from within. It must be known by faith. Like the Bible itself, this knowledge is given by the Holy Spirit.
With their emphasis on the Lordship of the Holy Spirit the Reformers safeguarded themselves against dead literalism and scholastic rationalism[8] in their understanding of Holy Scripture. They yielded to none in their loyalty to the given form of the Bible. They had a high view both of the Bible itself and also of its inspiration. They believed that the Bible itself is inspired truth. They believed that it is the Word written, a Word given and applied by the Holy Spirit. They taught that the Word must always be respected and received and obeyed. Yet they remembered always that God is the Lord of Scripture and that it is His voice which must be heard if the Bible is to do its work. The Bible is not just an academic textbook of divine truth, the Euclid of the Christian faith. The text is indeed given by God, but it is always in the hands of God and always applied by God. The Bible must be respected and received and obeyed not because it is a fixed and static letter, but because under the Holy Spirit that letter is the living Word of the living God. …
Part 2, in the next issue, will describe three of the main ways that the authority of the Bible is being questioned.
[1] That portion of God’s Law, recorded in the Old Testament, which was not eventually set aside by the atoning death of Jesus Christ. The Ten Commandments summarize God’s moral law which is binding upon Christians.
[2] Testimony of the original apostles, including Paul, as accurately recorded in the New Testament. It serves as the basis of authentic Christianity in each generation.
[3] The mission of Jesus assigned by His Heavenly Father, was to be Israel’s Messiah, her Anointed King, who was prophesied in Scriptures known to us as the Old Testament. Isaiah 53 shows Messiah as the “suffering servant” of God. The crucifixion of Jesus fulfilled this and many other inspired prophesies of the Old Testament.
[4] The truth which God has revealed in Jesus, His Word made flesh, and in the Holy Scriptures, the Word as written.
[5] Assertions by New Testament writers that Jesus of Nazareth, crucified and resurrected was, in fact, the Messiah (Christ} of Israel, who had been pro-Prophesied in the Old Testament.
[6] Leaders of the 16th century Protestant effort to “reform” the church. Most famous were Luther, Calvin, and Zwingli. John Wesley, who lived in the 1700s was a later reformer.
[7] Rightfully part of the Old and New Testaments. Canon is the full content of the Bible excluding The Apocrypha, which Protestants may study but do not consider fully inspired Scripture, as the Old and New Testaments.
[8] A highly intellectualized approach to Christianity, where logic, reason, human wisdom, and/or argument take the place of Biblical faith and trust.
by Steve | May 15, 1977 | Archive - 1977
Archive: The Missing Magnet
By Charles W. Keysor, Editor
The word from Mary Lee Clark Church in Oklahoma City is: “If you can’t stand before God and be proud of our church, then we have nothing to offer others.” So said the North Texas United Methodist Reporter for Dec. 5, 1975 in a lengthy article about evangelism.
She seems to be saying that the church is its own best attraction … that the church is a magnet which will draw people and somehow meet their ultimate needs.
As the Body of Christ, the church is important—but not in itself. The church’s importance is that of the candlestick which holds forth the light. The One who is the light of the world, Jesus Christ, is the glory of the church. Without Him being emphasized in all the church is and does, then the church is unattractive as a lampstand without light.
One barrier to effective evangelism is evident here: substituting the church for Jesus Christ as Christianity’s primary attraction. Stressing the church rather than Jesus Christ we offer people an empty lampstand instead of the light of life.
Jesus said, “I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto myself.” (John 12:32) HE is the church’s magnet!
HE provides the drawing power! Often the church forgets this. Often we get to lifting up other attractions, expecting they can increase attendance, membership, contributions, and committee activity.
Late in 1975, newspapers across the country printed a story about an “advertising blitz” used first by the First United Methodist Church in Pittsfield, Maine.
“We think the church has got to become more aggressive,” said the Rev. Robert Hannum, 44. “All types of institutions are competing for people’s time. We have to make them sit up and take notice.”
The local newspaper published three ads for the church each week with pictures and slogans including: “Same Day Service: In by 10, Out by 11.” Also advertised were free babysitting and transportation for churchgoers and the fellowship available at Sunday morning services.
How shall a church make its appeal? Shall it lift up its preacher as the big attraction? Some do. The trouble is, preachers change and the next one may not be a crowd-pleaser. What then? More serious, preachers are human. Having clay feet, they make poor objects of veneration. For when the preachers’ faults become evident, then disillusionment quickly comes.
Only Christ is perfect. That is why only He can be safely lifted up with no fear of disillusionment or letdown.
Shall a church advertise its warm, cozy fellowship? How, then, will it differ from a civic club, a garden club, or any worthwhile community organization? (In fact, their fellowship may be cozier and more profitable from a business standpoint.)
The uniqueness of Christian fellowship is Jesus Christ, alive and real among us. He said, “For where two or three are gathered in my name, there I am in the midst of them.” (Matthew 18:20) Unless we praise Him openly and acknowledge His presence frequently, then church fellowship sinks to the level of mere religious cordiality.
Shall we appeal on the basis of well-furnished nursery and classrooms? Elegant sanctuary? Rich-voiced organ and mellifluous choirs? These are means, not ends. They are vehicles for transmitting and enlarging faith, for facilitating worship of the living God. No matter how elegant, church facilities cannot answer the deepest need of human hearts. Jesus can, and does!
Shall a church offer pride in its tradition? Shall it boast of 1, 000 members (but don’t admit that half are nominal!)? Of having on its membership rolls the richest and most influential people in town? Shall it lift up its perfected organization charts, its well-oiled machinery, the awesome size of its budgets and the diversity of its investment portfolio? Shall its programs for justice and human betterment be lifted up?
In none of these can the church compete with the world, on the world’s terms. Trying to outdo the world is always the church’s undoing.
Actually, the church has only one exclusive attraction. Only one reason for commanding people’s attention and loyalty. That is Jesus Christ, the church’s rightful Head. He is eternal. He set aside His glory and was virgin-born into a crude country stable. He became like us in all ways, except that He did not sin. For He was equally God and Man combined. Thus He participated fully in our sorrows; He was punished for our iniquities, and He tasted death on our behalf. Yet the grave could not hold Him! On “the third day He rose from the dead; He ascended into heaven, and sitteth at the right hand of God the Father Almighty; from thence He shall come to judge the [living] and the dead.”
With such a One to exalt and elevate, how foolish we would be to rely upon other appeals! Unless He is, indeed, lifted up in all the church is and does, then the church has little to commend it—to the people or to God.
by Steve | May 6, 1977 | Archive - 1977
Archive: On Finding Roots
By Charles W. Keysor, Editor
Several years ago I was browsing in a used book store. Back in some dimly-lit shelves marked “religion” I chanced upon two musty, leatherbound books published in 1853. In them were 150 sermons by John Wesley! I had stumbled onto a collection of all Mister Methodist’s surviving sermons—a sort of theological King Tut’s tomb, rich with treasurers for the mind and soul.
Happily I paid the bookseller $8.00 (who says there are no more bargains?) and have been enjoying them ever since. I began reading sermon #1 and have slowly worked my way down to #107, finished early this morning.
Often I have encountered God on the yellowing pages of Wesley’s “Sermons on Several Occasions.” It is as though 200 years had been magically erased and God was speaking to me across the gulf of two centuries.
To use an “in” expression, I have been getting in touch with my roots, my heritage as a United Methodist. In the process I have caught a glimpse of Methodism, pure and powerful, as God kindled it originally in the mind and soul of a great Christian.
Wesley’s language is sometimes archaic. And some of his 18th century quotations and illustrations are baffling to me, a man of the 20th century. But most of the time I find his insights about God and the human condition astonishingly fresh and, often, painfully relevant. Many times I have gently closed the old leather book, looked out the window, and said to myself, I wish all my Good News friends could read this!
I can no longer resist the urge to share a few of the Wesley gems I have discovered. Space permits only a tiny sample. I hope this will be an appetizer. I hope you will be tempted to shut off your television set and get better acquainted with a truly great man of God.
- “As you cannot have too little confidence in yourself, so you cannot have too much in [God].” (# 98, On Redeeming the Time)
- “Let not love visit you as a transient guest, but be the constant temper of your soul. See that your heart be filled at all times, and on all occasions, with real, undissembled benevolence; not to those only that love you, but to every soul of man. Let it pant in your heart; let it sparkle in your eyes; let it shine in all your actions.” (# 105, On Pleasing All Men)
- “Every Christian is happy; and he who is not happy is not a Christian. … If religion and happiness are in fact the same, it is impossible that any man can possess the former without possessing the latter also.” (# 82, Spiritual Worship)
- “It was impossible for Lazarus to come forth, till the Lord had given him life. And it is equally impossible for us to come out of our sins, yea, or to make the least motion towards it, till He who hath all power in heaven and earth, calls our dead souls into life.” (#90, Working Out Our Own Salvation)
- “Oh that God would give me the thing which I long for! That before I go hence and am seen no more, I may see a people wholly devoted to God, crucified to the world, and the world crucified to them! A people truly given up to God, in body, soul, and substance! How cheerfully should I then say, ‘Now lettest thy servant depart in peace!’” (# 92, Danger of Riches)
- “They that bring the most holiness to heaven will find the most happiness there: so, on the other hand, it is not only true that the more wickedness a man brings to hell, the more misery he will find there; but that this misery will be infinitely varied, according to the various kinds of his wickedness.” (# 78, Of Hell)
- “Whoever improves the grace he has already received, whoever increases in the love of God, will surely retain it. God will continue, yea, will give it more abundantly: whereas, whoever does not improve this talent, cannot possibly retain it. Notwithstanding all he can do, it will infallibly be taken away from him.” (# 95, An Israelite Indeed)
- “Nothing is so small or insignificant in the sight of men, as not to be an object of the care and providence of God: before whom nothing is small that concerns the happiness of any of His creatures. There is scarce any doctrine in the whole compass of revelation which is of deeper importance than this. And at the same time, there is scarcely any that is so little regarded, and perhaps so little understood.” (# 72, on Divine Providence)
If you do not have the good fortune to find Wesley in a used book store as I did, you can meet him in these pages:
Wesley’s 52 Standard Sermons. H. E. Schmul, Salem, OH. $6.96.
Forty-Four Sermons. John Wesley. Allenson, Naperville, IL. $6.75.
A Pocket Book of Wesley’s Sermons (13 sermons) condensed by Charles Britt. UM Discipleship Resources. 75¢ each, 10 or more 65¢
The Journal of John Wesley (condensed). Moody Press, Chicago, IL. $ 3.95.
by Steve | May 5, 1977 | Archive - 1977
Archive: Facing Spiritual Starvation
by Charles W. Keysor, Editor
Browsing through some back issues of Good News I read again an editorial written back in 1970: “How Laymen Can Survive.” I was struck by the fact that its subject, spiritual starvation of the laity, is still with us. In fact, it remains the major source of anemia in United Methodism—probably the main reason we have lost over 1,000,000 members since 1968.
There is need to think afresh about spiritual starvation, for many United Methodists exist in what is best described as a spiritual Sahara.
First, the problem.
Without sound, consistent preaching and teaching of Bible truth, how will non-Christians be saved? How will children in our Sunday schools come to know Jesus Christ personally? How will those who are Christians “grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ?” How will the church seem different from any civic organization? How will it answer people’s deepest and most intimate questions if its message has lost an eternal dimension?
Across the church, anguished voices protest the famine of Scriptural Christianity. Anyone with ears not stopped shut can hear the cries. Listen …
“I was about to give up because our church is so far removed from … the teaching of Jesus.” (Oklahoma)
“In our section of the country, a great number of United Methodists have left our denomination simply because they could not live on the ‘straw’ they were getting.” (Washington)
“We asked the bishop for a Gospel preacher. People, I think, are hungry for this kind of food.” (Texas)
“We work for revival in a church that is almost dead.” (Iowa)
“I can no longer sit under poor preaching and denial of the Word of God. Our minister says that Revelation is ‘rubbish’ and Paul’s conversion is ‘cheap dramatics.'” (Minnesota)
The voices of starving laypeople! Hundreds of such outcries have come to Good News since 1966—from United Methodists around the world. The problem is universal; it is the death-cry of a once-great church that is starving spiritually.
What is the answer?
The church needs to come to its senses. It must begin doing what Jesus said was the basic responsibility of Christian leaders: “Feed my sheep.” (John 21:15-17) Unfortunately, much of the feeding in United Methodism has to do with non-spiritual matters. Until the Holy Spirit brings dramatic changes in many hearts and minds, the sheep won’t be fed. This means that laypeople face three stark alternatives:
(1) Quit and find a church where Gospel priorities are not ignored.
(2) Continue starving spiritually, i.e. commit suicide.
(3) Take the initiative and create what the church institution itself seems unwilling or unable to provide: opportunities for spiritual growth.
This third alternative seems most likely to please God. Obviously, He does not want His children to commit spiritual suicide! We do not think He wants believers to quit the church, far-gone as it may be. Had God wished this, Jesus would have departed from the Jerusalem Temple. But He did not. Instead, our Lord worshipped and taught in the Temple, even though He was vigorously critical of its leaders (Matthew, chapter 23). The example of Jesus requires us to remain and be used as God’s leaven.
It is often true that we don’t depend radically upon God’s grace until we face some personal crisis. That was Paul’s thought when he wrote: “For the sake of Christ, then, I am content with weaknesses, insults, hardships, persecutions, and calamities; for when I am weak, then I am strong.” (II Corinthians 12:10)
Could widespread spiritual starvation thus be a blessing in disguise? Could this crisis force UM laypeople to take the initiative and begin exercising their ministry as a “priesthood of all believers?” Could the present emptiness lead, in sheer desperation, to some spiritual awakening of the people?
Recently a pastor from another denomination talked with a UM layman. “How come,” this minister asked, “that I see some of your lay people conducting Bible studies and active in witnessing? My people come to church and sit and listen—but I can’t get them to DO anything!”
Our United Methodist extremity may, indeed, be God’s opportunity!
Somehow we must find a way to stand faithfully and at the same time create opportunities for Christian growth. How can this be done? How can the widespread apathy and hostility toward things spiritual be overcome?
We begin with this word from the Lord:
If God is for us, who is against us? Who shall bring any charge against God’s elect? It is God who justifies, who is to condemn? Is it Christ Jesus, who died, yes, who was raised from the dead, who is at the right hand of God, who indeed intercedes for us? Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? Shall tribulation or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or sword? … No, in all these things we are more than conquerors through Him who loved us. (Romans 8:31,33-35,37)
Because of this great assurance we dare to say, with the Apostle Paul, “I CAN do all things in Him who strengthens me.” (Philippians 4:13)
I know a husband and wife who are claiming this victory. Their church situation is far from ideal. Nevertheless, they teach an adult class and once each week there is an “open house” in their home. Young adults feel free to drop in for friendship—and for spiritual questing. This has been happening for several years; and as a result a number of young adults have awakened spiritually and have grown in Christ. Many have brought their new-found faith to the church, where some have begun teaching. Thus more Biblical Christians are involved in the church as the couple’s home-class ministry bears Gospel fruit.
It can be done—without a majority! Without ponderous committees. Without denting the church budget. All that is needed, really, is a few people who are willing to pioneer … who love God’s truth … and who believe that God-plus-one is a majority.
Who says Christians should always expect everything to go easily when we are doing God’s will in a world that is hostile to Him? (James 4:4)
At this point a prophetic word must be spoken. Many people act like helpless babies. They always insist that they must be FED … by the preacher, by the Sunday school class, by prayer/sharing groups. The emphasis is always on what others can do to help ME; never, apparently, is there a thought of being responsible for self or others. Like tiny babies, these want only to be spiritually bottled, burped, and bedded.
Have they no Bibles? Are they unable to read and think? Are they strangers to the Holy Spirit, the supreme Teacher? Can’t they read Christian books, draw strength from Christian friends? Is there no deep and abiding relationship with God, who has promised that no believer would be ever alone—in this world or the next? Is there no solace in prayer? Is there no finding of self by losing of self in service to Christ and His Gospel?
To lie back complaining passively, “I am not being fed!” is a copout … an excuse to escape taking responsibility to grow as a Christian in spite of obstacles. We are, remember, supposed to “work out your own salvation with fear and trembling; for God is at work in you, both to will and to work His good pleasure.” (Philippians 1:12,13) Wallowing in self-pity, we easily forget Whose we are—and in Whose strength we stand.
John Wesley faced heavy opposition when he began preaching the Gospel in the 18th century Church of England. Doors were slammed in his face. He was condemned as a trouble-maker and “enthusiast.” Yet he persisted. He kept on because God had laid upon him the obligation of the Gospel. Never quitting the Church of England, Wesley formed Methodist Societies where starving people could find Christ and could then grow in grace.
