For Christians in Perilous Times waiting for Jesus’ Call at the Rapture

The Irrationalism of Infidelity – PARTICULAR OBJECTIONS

The Irrationalism of Infidelity

PARTICULAR OBJECTIONS

Genealogy in Matthew
14 names instead of 18, and in saying that there were only fourteen generations.Matthew has omitted three kings, but this does not prove he made a mistake in doing so. The point he is showing is Christ’s legal connection with the throne of David.  The term “begat” is employed in Hebrew for a descendant. Matthew left out three kings, the children of an apostate woman, recommencing with him in whose reign the prophecies of Messiah dawned brightly on Israel, and he has counted his genealogies correctly.Inconsistency in names e.g. Ahaziah and UzziahLittle problem when looking at the Hebrew and its transliteration into Greek.Was Jesus the biological son of Joseph?The legal descent is evident. Matthew does not for a moment leave a cloud on the fact that Jesus was not Joseph’s son.  He says, “The husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ.” He is not giving the natural descent, and Christ’s miraculous birth follows. Different genealogy in Luke

Luke gives that of Mary.  If Mary had no brother and was the daughter of Eli, the Lord was descended from Eli; and Joseph would be called τοῦ Ηλὶ (tou Eli) as heir and representative of Eli.
Alleged Mistakes in Acts 7:16
Click above for original
Discourse of Gamaliel, Acts 5
Click above for original

The Slaughter of the Infants
This event is not recorded by Jewish historian, Josephus.It is hardly likely that a Jewish infidel historian should have recorded a particular act of local cruelty, which would have been the strongest testimony possible that Jesus was the Messiah.   Indeed the omission of one local cruelty in a village is nothing extraordinary. The killing a few children was nothing to the hard-heartedness of Josephus and Herod, if there was no particular reason. If there was, it was the last thing Josephus would mention.
Zacharias, Son of Barachias
Click above for original

Names of the Apostles
Different names in different listsSome had two names, very common among the Jews.  Levi had also the name of Matthew, as Saul had that of Paul, Simon that of Peter.  Thaddaeus, Lebbaeus and Judas (not Iscariot) would appear to be the same person.
Harmonizing the Gospels
Click above for original
The Rivers in Paradise
Click above for original

The Sentence on the Serpent: Serpent Worship
The sentence of the serpent is just a fableGoing on its belly and eating dust (Gen 3:15)  shows the complete humiliation of the serpent.  In its fullest extent it is a symbol of death.   The whole thing is scorned but it gives the source, explanation and judgment of what has characterised the human race, everywhere and at all time.   Man has worshipped the serpent, perhaps more than anything else, with the possible exception of the Sun in Greece and Rome.  Ophiolatry, or serpent worship, is found in China, Egypt, Babylon, England (Stonehenge), Ireland, France, North and South America, Russia, Scandinavia, India and Africa.  People kept serpents as household gods, wore ornaments as talismans, and tattooed images of the serpent and the sun on their skin.  It is often portrayed erect, being fed with sweet cakes, with a naked woman as priestess in attendance.    The Hivites who were driven out of Palestine by Joshua were serpent worshippers. Scripture presents that old serpent as the one who elevated himself as god of all the world.   Yet the serpent is a venomous prostrate reptile.   So when we see the whole world of these traditions of the serpent, of the worship of the serpent (erect), a sober mind must deduce the immense moral importance of this phenomenon, as exposing, the terrible and real secret of it all – the ruined condition of rebellious and disobedient man.  Scripture has not invented these facts.Also, the notion of gaining wisdom from serpents is universal.  Satan seized upon the idea of God in men’s minds, and, where possible has connected man’s obscure traditions with himself.  The sun is seen as the benefactor; the serpent the one giving intelligence, and both became associated with the idea of the unity of deity and the universe.  Moreover, in Egypt above the serpent-worshipping temple of Isis there were the words  ‘I am all that hath been, and is, and shall be; and my veil no mortal hath ever removed’.   All wisdom was purported to be there.Sometimes the worship of the sun drove out serpent worship, yet it was always remained connected with it.   Apollo (the sun), established his worship at Delphi by slaying Typhon, an immense serpent, who was also said to have been cast down from heaven by Jupiter.  He then gave oracles in his place, Delphi.  Scandinavian mythology is similar, the great serpent being Loke.  Hercules, Thor and Krishna kill serpents. (or dragons).  It would appear that idolatry came in after the flood.  There is a vague tradition of a reign of bliss under Saturn, his three sons, Jupiter, Neptune, and Pluto, becoming the supreme gods of heaven, earth, and sea.   In some way these correspond to Shem, Ham and Japeth.  They carried a statue about in a kind of ship.  Indeed they used the same word for ‘temple’ and ‘ship’. There is the pain of childbirth, a pain borne by the woman, the man being exempt.  But faith can lay hold of the real meaning of the statement that the woman’s seed will crush the head of the serpent.
Two Accounts of the Creation
Click above for original
Opinion of Dr. Arnold of Rugby
Click above for original
Joseph
Click above for original

The Longevity of the Patriarchs
Objection:  the longevity of the patriarchs is unrealistic.Answer: It is a question of the sovereign power of God, it is absurd to argue otherwise.  Men can live 969 years like Methuselah, or 500, or 200 or 70.   But the reduction coincides with idolatry and the worship of man.
The Ark
Click above for original
Infallibility
Objection:  You cannot say that anything is infallible.Answer:  God alone is infallible; for “infallible” means one who cannot fail. Truth is not the same as infallibility; truth is the opposite to error, not to fallibility.

Scripture comes from God; it presents the truth; it is infallible. But there is no need to defend it to the infidel who rejects it. However, There is a difference between infallibility and perfect truth. If I question the infallibility of scripture, I am making a statement about the book. However when I reject perfect truth, I avoid facing what affects my conscience.

In strict logic, only one who is incapable of erring, is infallible in what he says,
The Entrance of Death
Click above for original
The Fall
Click above for original
Objections dependent on “Science”
Although JND used the word ‘science’, this objection surrounds more the anthropological background to beliefs worldwide.

It is not related to technological developments about which JND could not have known. These are however irrelevant to this discussion. I do not believe anything of the bible has been disproved by the discoveries of the past 150 years.

Objection – The biblical account is inconsistent with modern knowledge.

Answer. There is no inconsistency. As regards man, the science of physiology can only examine man as he is — in a state of mortality. This is not, according to scripture how God created him. To suppose that God could not have sustained man in an immortal condition, is to put limitations on God, who cannot be limited. We are taught that following the fall, man became a dying creature, subject to ‘wear and tear’.

If we look into ancient texts we find various references consistent with the account in Genesis. For example Plato wrote, ‘They lived naked in a state of happiness, and had an abundance of fruits, which were produced without the labour of agriculture, and men and beasts could then converse together. But these things we must pass over, until there appear some one to interpret them to us.’ [I cannot locate Source – maybe the Republic]. Fragments of truth, amidst the mass of superstition, exist in Egyptian, Greek, Mexican and Hindu fables. However, none of the written accounts are older than about 700BC [National Geographic refers to Mycenaean writing around 1450BC, the time of the exodus, but that makes no difference].

The millions of years of Hindu chronology, or the more moderate thousands of Chinese dynasties, have disappeared before increased information. Indeed, we have some Chinese dynasties and some dark Hindu traditions, which tend to confirm the early Mosaic accounts.

God, however, has given us a concise, simple account of immense moral import, infinitely elevated above the whole range of the heathen fables which pervert its elements, placing the supreme God — man —  good — evil —  responsibility — grace —  law — promise —  the creatures — marriage, all in their place. The Mosaic account brings out the innocence at creation, the knowledge of good and evil, conscience, judgment, the closing of the way to the tree of life, and the promise in the woman’s seed.

In so many fables there is the conflict between good and evil, with good prevailing. However in scripture, the drama was a reality; all involving one man and his failing companion. Yet from her who failed recovery was to spring; grace was to be brought out and magnified.

Another thing is evident, that Mesopotamia, and the country north of it, is the area from which the world was peopled.   Assyria, Babylon, and Egypt, Persia, Greece, Rome, all are grouped round it. Indeed the Phoenicians even went to Ireland. [Skeptics might argue nowadays that early man came from Africa, but this is not the subject here].

No creature can subsist per se, that is, independently of God.

The Song of Deborah
Objection:  The prophetess Deborah, in an inspired psalm, pronounces Jael to be blessed above women, and glorifies her act by an elaborate description of its atrocities.Answer:  Scripture is inspired by God.  God gives His mind on any particular subject to anyone spiritually capable of understanding it.However, just because scripture provides a record of peoples’ words, that does not mean that what they said was inspired.   We have Satan’s words, wicked men’s words, and human accounts of various facts, recorded by inspiration, but not themselves inspired.    Scripture gives us a picture of what man, and particularly Israel, is.  It does it, not just by dogmatic statements, but by giving us a historical development of what man has does and felt in various circumstances.  If the Bible had merely given us God’s judgment, we never should have had the testimony to our consciences that we have.  Scripture affords us man’s actual history under the various dispensations of God.   We get an inspired testimony of what God’s mind is, adapted in grace to our consciences.  A gracious father speaks to his child according to what suits the child, yet always in a way worthy of himself.  That is how God has dealt with Israel and all men. How else could He have done so?In the Old Testament we have a perfect, divinely-given picture of man, in various relationships with a gracious God.  His whole condition is brought out, so that by a divinely given history, we might know ourselves, and at the same time appreciate the whole course of God’s dealings with man.  Ultimately, in perfection God Himself is manifested in Christ in supreme grace.  Man and God get into a relationship according to the security of His nature, and the perfectness of His love.  When we were yet without strength, in due time Christ died for the ungodly. (Rom. 5:6).We should not have the knowledge either of man or God, and His wondrous, perfect and patient ways, if we had not seen men presented at exactly as they were.  A statement of morality by God would, no doubt, have shown what man ought to be.  We have that in the law.  But that would not have shown us what man is.

People who were used to communicate things, such as Deborah, were pious and animated in their hearts by God’s Spirit.  In their dispensations, they were just not as instructed, as we have been in ours.  

Deborah’s song is not a communication of God’s thoughts, but of Deborah’s feelings.  Doubtless, her heart was moved by the Spirit in thankfulness for the deliverance of God’s beloved people, but there is no sign of its being a communication from God to His people.  It was consistent with the light she possessed, and coloured by the general condition of the people.  Like Hannah, she appreciates God Himself known in mercy to His people.  The song does not rise above the measure of Israel’s blessing.  Things were to be extended under David, Solomon and the prophets. 

The Old Testament is a spiritual instruction for us, so that we can know God, and His perfect ways, more fully.   I may know some scientific facts, and rely on these but I have the perfection of Christ to judge by.  To use the Word rightly depends on my spiritual progress and moral state.  This is exactly as it ought to be.

We are tempted to judge things from the standpoint of a clearer revelation.  I may pass a moral judgment on many things in the Old Testament, because God has given me the true light, and the darkness is now passed.  He who is light, has given me the light to judge these things.   Christ has given the perfect key by which to judge of it all

The Sacrifice of Isaac
Objection:  Abraham’s preparedness to sacrifice Isaac makes him no different from idolaters of the worst kind – practicing human sacrifice.Answer:  Abraham’s sacrificial act is not presented as a rule of morality nor of conduct in any way, but as a special case in which Abraham’s faith was put to the test.   There is no kind of analogy with “those who sacrificed their children to Moloch.”* Jer. 32:35.   In their horrid barbarity, they sought to assuage their consciences to placate their vengeful god.In Abraham’s case it was different.   God had placed the promises in Isaac.   Abraham was now tested, to show that he had such confidence in God, that he would give up all the promises as possessed and obey God implicitly, whatever the cost.  When this was proved, God would not suffer Isaac to be touched.According to Hebrews 11 Abraham believed that God would somehow raise up Isaac again, in order to accomplish His promises.
Mr. Newman’s Notions of Inspiration
Click above for original

The Flood
Objection: Where did the waters of the flood come from?Answer:    It is argued that the water in the deluge came from the clouds, and perhaps from the sea.  These are, of course, the same – one cycle.  Scripture uses language that is unique to this event – “all the fountains of the great deep were broken up, and the windows of heaven were opened”.  (Gen 7:11)   The passage speaks neither of clouds nor sea.   It speaks of the fountains of the great deep being broken up, and the windows of heaven opened.   It is never said the water drained back into the sea, but that “the waters returned from off the earth continually.”  (Gen 8:3) .  It also ways that the fountains of the deep and the windows of heaven were stopped, and the rain from heaven was restrained.   Call that a “miracle” or what you will; certainly some very overwhelming outbreak of waters came from an extraordinary source.According to the narrative of creation in Genesis 1, what had already been created was one vast mass of waters, called “the deep.”  It says, “And darkness was upon the face of the deep.  And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. (Gen 1:2)   The unknown mass of waters which engulfed the earth is not stated, or the what the waters were that were above the firmament or expanse.  The waters of the deluge must have come from either above or below the earth, not from on it.The ark was big enough.  A vessel of more than 42,000 tons, being 450 feet long, 75 broad, and 45 high (135x23x14m) could easily have received the animals that did not live in water.Note by SosthenesAt JND’s time there were many things he could not have known.

  • It is now known that many comets and their tails are made of ice.  If the earth had gone through the tail of a gigantic comet then there would have been an enormous amount of water around for a limited period of time.
  • It is also known that many planets and exoplanets, including the earth have an enormous amount of water in tier crusts.  These were ‘broken up’, so the water could have been released on to the earth.  However how the water disappeared would remain a mystery.  But nothing is impossible to God.
  • It has also been calculated that there were 35000 species on the earth at that time.  The ark has been estimated to be just sufficiently large to accommodate 70,000 animals and provisions for them.
  • At that time when the largest boats were sailing men-of-war, the idea of a boat that size was not conceived.  Now in the days of supertankers the ark is a modest construction.

 
Abraham and Sarah, and Isaac and Rebekah, in Egypt
Click above for original
“Small Phrases”
Click above for original
Quotations from the Old Testament
Click above for original
The Prophecy of Enoch
Click above for original
Paul’s Recognition of the Old Testament
Click above for original
The Introduction to Luke’s Gospel
Click above for original
Demoniacal Possession
Click above for original
Character of John’s Gospel
Click above for original
Star of the Magi
Click above for original
Herod’s Massacre of the Children
Click above for original
Egypt and Nazareth
Click above for original
Character of Luke’s Gospel
Click above for original
Character of John’s Gospel
Click above for original
Cures effected by Napkins
Click above for original
Catching away of Philip
Click above for original
Curse on the Barren Fig-Tree
Click above for original
The Tribute-money
Click above for original
Useless Miracles
Click above for original
Divine Sympathies—Rending of the Veil
Click above for original
The Earthquake
Click above for original
The Miracles of Elijah and Elisha
Click above for original
The Death of Uzzah
Click above for original
Abimelech, and Esau
Click above for original
Abraham’s Visitors at Mamre. Elijah’s Ravens
Click above for original
Arnold on the Gospels
Click above for original
Elohistic and Jehovistic Sources of Mosaic History
Click above for original
Difficult Narratives
Click above for original
Noah and the Flood
Click above for original
Pharaoh and Abimelech
Click above for original
Double Account of Circumcision
Click above for original
Of the Name of Isaac
Click above for original
Jacob named Israel. Bethel
Click above for original
Beersheba
Click above for original
The Name Jehovah, Elohim, El-Shaddai
Click above for original
Twofold Miracle of the Quails
Click above for original
The Water: Aaron’s Rod: the Rock: Meribah
Click above for original
Double Consecration of Aaron and his Sons
Click above for original
Double Promise of a Guardian Angel
Click above for original
Death of Aaron
Click above for original
Joshua arresting the Sun and Moon
Click above for original
Song of Moses
Click above for original
Fragments of Poetry
Click above for original
Book of the Law found by Josiah
Click above for original
The Samaritans
Click above for original
Hezekiah’s Prophets
Click above for original
Dean Graves
Click above for original
Sham Science
Click above for original
Mr. Newman’s Hebrew Monarchy
Click above for original
Deuteronomy
Click above for original
The Revelation, especially Chapter 17
Click above for original
The Author of the Epistle to the Hebrews
Click above for original
The Song of Solomon
Click above for original
Esther
Click above for original
Insignificance and Significance
Click above for original
Paul misrepresented
Click above for original

A Letter to those who might know me

I am therefore seeking, with God’s help to produce some simplified summaries of helpful articles, papers and ministry, presented in a way that is more intelligible to Christians in the 21st century, and accessible using current technology, and above all free of sectarianism, the ministry being for the whole Church of God. I seek humbly to keep to the essential message, and cover it adequately without introducing my own ideas and thoughts. The site is in its early stages www.adayofsmallthings.com. Please have a look at it.

Not the ruler of the synagogue but a brother
Sosthenes

Dear brother or sister in the Lord

Having retired I have been seeking direction from God as to how to use my time, abilities and resources to His glory, whilst recognising limitations, both physical and above all spiritual.

As some may know I have done some translation work on JND’s letters, so his ministry has been opened up to me more freshly.  For many years I had regarded it as beyond me in many ways, and I would still say that it is as Peter said of Paul ‘hard to be understood’.

If that is true of me, what of my fellow believers, most of whom have not enjoyed the privileges I have had of being under teaching, and able to participate in reading meetings where this ministry, and that of others, were valued and generally felt to be of the Spirit of God.

I am therefore seeking, with God’s help to produce some simplified summaries of helpful articles, papers and ministry, presented in a way that is more intelligible to Christians in the 21st century, and accessible using current technology, and above all free of sectarianism, the ministry being for the whole Church of God.  I seek humbly to keep to the essential message, and cover it adequately without introducing my own ideas and thoughts.   The site is in its early stages www.adayofsmallthings.com.  Please have a look at it.

In order not to draw attention to myself, I am using a pseudonym, Sosthenes (he just wanted to be a brother). Sosthenes Hoadelphos on Facebook; @BroSosthenes on Twitter.

Yes – this is the real ‘me’!

The ministry itself, of course, is not infallible:  and my simplified summaries are certainly not.  Without getting into arguments I would value the comments as to content or style by any who feel I have not explained things well, or have missed the point.  Let the righteous smite me; it shall be a kindness Psalm 141:5.

I look forward to your comments, either by e-mail (Sosthenes@adoss.co.uk) or by making comments on the site.

With love and greetings in Christ.

Your brother

Sosthenes

August 2013

The Love of God 1 John 4:9 
by J. N. Darby

God presents what He is to men, so we know that He is holy, righteous and love. He is love, and love draws me. Love is the divine nature.

I need to be separate from evil: “Without holiness no man shall see the Lord.” (Heb 12:14). It is not said, ‘He is holiness’. Indeed I as a sinner would be repelled by mere holiness. He is holy. He is just, and He is of purer eyes than to behold iniquity. (Hab 1:13) He may be the God of judgment, but He blesses His own so that they might be eternally happy in holiness, for He is holy love.

A summary by Sosthenes

J N Darby
John Nelson Darby

God presents what He is to men, so we know that He is holy, righteous and love.  He is love, and love draws me.  Love is the divine nature.

I need to be separate from evil:  “Without holiness no man shall see the Lord.” (Heb 12:14).  It is not said, ‘He is holiness’.  Indeed I as a sinner would be repelled by mere holiness.  He is holy. He is just, and He is of purer eyes than to behold iniquity.  (Hab 1:13)  He may be the God of judgment, but He blesses His own so that they might be eternally happy in holiness, for He is holy love.

Whatever our state may be, God is perfect in His love, and He would make us learn, enjoy and walk in it now, not when we get to heaven.

Our selfish, unbelieving nature hinders us down here, but this only serves to magnify God’s grace and love.  In spite of all, He brings us to the knowledge of perfect love because “Perfect love casteth out fear, for fear hath torment” (v.18).   If, when thinking of God, we fear, we have torment.  That is the conscience.   Man may seek to bury his conscience, but only succeeds in hardening it.

If we seek peace in ordinances, it is not love but fear. The effect of true ministry is to put the soul in direct contact with God.  False ministry brings in something between the soul and God.

The soul must have the blessed consciousness of perfect peace with God.  God brings you into the joy of His perfect love in His presence; “Who shall separate us? … More than conquerors.” (Rom. 8:35)

The family character of the children of God is light and love.  It is God’s nature, and seen in both in Christ and in all God’s children.  I must have the new nature to know this; but how do I get it?  Where is it found?  In Jesus Christ Himself, image of the invisible God. (Col 1:15).   In Christ I find a perfect manifestation of His love. “Herein is love, not that we loved God, but that he loved us” (v10).

There is no mention of anything required of us, but the simple fact of what we were “dead in trespasses and sins.” (Eph. 2:1)

Though He is a God of judgment, He brought out the means of our approach: through Christ’s sacrifice.  Abel’s faith testified how man was to approach to God, so from Abel downwards God showed mercy.

Man as man refuses to come to God “none righteous.”  (Rom. 3:10) When Christ comes, it is another thing altogether.  God now approaches man in grace; not man approaching God.  He visited men in their sins, “that they might live through him.” (v.9)  All around was darkness, degradation, and idolatry. God took them out of that condition that they might live through Christ. “God has given to us eternal life, and this life is in his Son.”  (1 John 5:10). Thus we are brought into His presence.

We live through His only-begotten Son. He is bringing us into His presence, before the One in whom all His delight was from eternity.  It is the eternal enjoyment of it to know eternal life in the Son; but down here we often question it, because we do not see this love in us. He is “a propitiation for our sins.” (1 John 2:2)

God has loved me not only when I wanted it, but because His knew what I wanted.  He has not mistaken my case; Christ on the cross made the propitiation for my sins.  So I can say, “Herein is love.” (v.10)  I have found God, and my soul rests there. The cloud has been taken away for ever. If you say, ‘I have committed such and such a sin’; I answer, ‘It is for the sins you had or still have that Christ died; for He died for your sins.’

He cannot bear sin, and therefore He must put the sinner in his sins away, because He cannot bear the sins.  I learn to judge sin according to God, because I am brought into the light.  I find many sins in myself. He is the propitiation for my sins. I believe this, and then I enter into communion with Him. Why do I find fear and torment when I find sin in myself?   Can I not trust that love?  Have I not believed the love God has towards me?

God does not expect fruit from man, but His grace produces fruit.  We should feel sin, and know it has been blotted out.  We are told that  “The glory thou hast given me I have given them, that the world may know that thou hast loved them as thou hast loved me.” (John 17:24)  “There is no fear in love.” (v.18).   It is a matter of communion and we live through Him. “… Perfect love casteth out fear.”

I am not honouring God, if I do not trust the work of Christ in love on the cross.  I come to Him just as I am, and then I know God.  He enables me to trust in blood of Jesus Christ His Son – the perfectness of His work in putting away sin.

 

The Lord is Coming Very Soon

Page replaced by

https://adoss.co.uk/lord-with-our-ears-and-hearts-open/

 

 

The Bethesda Circular – JN Darby

This is the text of a letter, written by J N Darby in regard to the ‘Open Division’ of 1848. It refers to the action of several prominent brothers including George Müller and Henry Craik, who met at the Bethesda Chapel in Bristol. It specifically referred to their action in receiving some from the meeting in Plymouth where B W Newton taught heretical doctrine as to the person of Christ, and from which Darby and others had to withdraw.

 

J N Darby
John Nelson Darby

This is the abridged text of a letter , written by J N Darby in regard to the ‘Open Division’ of 1848.  It refers to the action of several prominent brothers including George Müller and Henry Craik, who met at the Bethesda Chapel in Bristol.  It specifically referred to their action in receiving some from the meeting in Plymouth where B W Newton taught heretical doctrine as to the person of Christ, and from which Darby and others had to withdraw.

Beloved brethren,

I feel bound to present to you the case of Bethesda. It involves to my mind the whole question of association with brethren, and for this very simple reason, that if there is incapacity to keep out that which has been recognized as the work and power of Satan, and to guard the beloved sheep of Christ against it — if brethren are incapable of this service to Christ, then they ought not to be in any way owned as a body to whom such service is confided: their gatherings would be really a trap laid to ensnare the sheep. But I will not suppose this, my heart would not; nor will I suppose that the influence or reputation of individuals will induce them to do in one case what they would not do in another. I press therefore the position of Bethesda on brethren. It is at this moment acting in the fullest and most decided way as the supporter of Mr. Newton, and the evil associated with him, and in the way in which the enemy of souls most desires it should be done. The object of Mr. Newton and his friends is not now openly to propagate his doctrine in the offensive form in which it has roused the resistance of every godly conscience that cared for the glory and person of the blessed Lord, but to palliate and extenuate the evil of the doctrine, and get a footing as Christians for those who hold it, so as to be able to spread it and put sincere souls off their guard. In this way precisely Bethesda is helping them in the most effectual way they can: I shall now state how. They have received the members of Ebrington Street with a positive refusal to investigate the Plymouth errors. And at this moment the most active agents of Mr. Newton are assiduously occupied amongst the members of Bethesda, in denying that Mr. Newton holds errors, and explaining and palliating his doctrines, and removing any apprehension of them from the minds of saints, and successfully occupied in it.…

I do not charge Mr. Müller with himself holding Mr. Newton’s errors. He declared that he had said there were very bad errors, and that he did not know to what they would lead. Upon what grounds persons holding them are admitted and the errors refused to be investigated, if such be his judgment, I must leave every one to determine for themselves. I only ask, Is it faithfulness to Christ’s sheep? … Members of Ebrington Street,[Newton’s meeting in Plymouth], active and unceasing agents of Mr. Newton, holding and justifying his views, are received at Bethesda; and the system which so many of us have known as denying the glory of the Lord Jesus (and that, when fully stated, in the most offensive way) and corrupting the moral rectitude of every one that fell under its power — that this system, though not professed, is fully admitted and at work at Bethesda. This has taken place in spite of its driving out a considerable number of undeniably godly brethren, whose urgent remonstrance was slighted. …

I do not desire in the smallest degree to diminish the respect and value which any may feel personally for the brethren Craik and Müller, on the grounds of that in which they have honoured God by faith. Let this be maintained as I desire to maintain it, and have maintained in my intercourse with them; but I do call upon brethren by their faithfulness to Christ, and love to the souls of those dear to Him in faithfulness, to set a barrier against this evil. Woe be to them if they love the brethren Müller and Craik or their own ease more than the souls of saints dear to Christ! …

It has been formally and deliberately admitted at Bethesda under the plea of not investigating it (itself a principle which refuses to watch against roots of bitterness), and really palliated. And if this be admitted by receiving persons from Bethesda, those doing so are morally identified with the evil, for the body so acting is corporately responsible for the evil they admit. If brethren think they can admit those who subvert the person and glory of Christ, and principles which have led to so much untruth and dishonesty, it is well they should say so, that those who cannot may know what to do. [Darby’s emphasis]. I only lay the matter before the consciences of brethren, urging it upon them by their fidelity to Christ. And I am clear in my conscience towards them. For my own part I should neither go to Bethesda in its present state, nor while in that state go where persons from it were knowingly admitted. I do not wish to reason on it here, but lay it before brethren, and press it on their fidelity to Christ and their care of His beloved saints.

Ever yours in His grace, J.N.D.

Click here for the full text.

JN Darby and the so-called Plymouth Brethren

I am often asked about John Nelson Darby and his relationship with the so-called Plymouth Brethren or Exclusive Brethren. This is a subject I can speak of only with sadness, humility and ‘eating the sin-offering’

Darby was totally opposed to sectarianism, so anything that smacked of a humanly organised church was anathema to him. He did not ‘found’ the Plymouth Brethren as such.

Why John Nelson Darby would have left the Exclusive Brethren Sect

SAMSUNG DIGITAL CAMERA

I am often asked about John Nelson Darby and his relationship with the so-called Plymouth or Exclusive Brethren.  This is a subject I can speak of only with sadness, humility and ‘eating the sin-offering’

Darby was totally opposed to sectarianism, so anything that smacked of a humanly organised church was anathema to him. He did not ‘found’ the Plymouth Brethren as such.

In the 1800’s a lot left the establishment and other sects and the those Christians came together in simplicity.  The term ‘brethren’ – small-B  – was used among them, and at that time Darby who was the most prominent, was in Plymouth –  hence the name.  In the course of time the Plymouth Brethren developed and what did that become?   Another sect!  I have read letters (in French) of JND in his latter days and he talked about leaving the brethren.

Taylor Hales Exclusive Brethren – the Plymouth Brethren Church

If you have read anything about the brethren you will now see a microcosm of Christendom.  At one extreme there are the Taylor-Hales Exclusive Brethren, who frankly have every feature of a sect – some say even a cult, though I would not go that far, since fundamentally they believe the simple gospel.  They have a public profile in which they now call themselves the ‘Plymouth Brethren Christian Church’ (PBCC) with hierarchical leadership, strict rules, central organization, their own schools and businesses.  They practice an extreme level of separation, for example, forbidding normal relationships between split families. Sadly money and alcohol feature widely, and they have made headlines for the wrong reasons.   This trend developed during the 1960’s when I was a boy, and I can be thankful to God to have been delivered from it in a crisis in 1970.  My wife was too.  This sect is relatively strong in UK, Australia (where it is headquartered), New Zealand, and parts of USA/Canada and West Indies. What makes me sad is to think of the number of sincere lovers of the Lord caught up there, some of whom I knew in my earlier life.  I am sure John Darby would have been heart-broken – but with his knowledge of man after the flesh, not surprised – to see what that sect has come to.  I am absolutely certain that Darby would have had nothing to do with the Plymouth Brethren Church.

Open Brethren and Others

At the other end are the Open Brethren, which in many ways are similar to the Baptists but without pastors.  Meetings are independent of one another, some stricter than others; some have embraced the charismatic movement.  They are heavily involved in missionary work.

Then sadly there are a few dozen little groups in between!  Some groups Kelly-Lowe-Glanton/Continental and Tunbridge Wells groups are quite strong in America, and the former in Continental Europe. It has been due to man’s failure that there are so many –  “I don’t agree with you so I’ll leave – and I’ll take some with my views” and division spreads with a lot of personal feeling.  That is not of God.  Oh that there could be healing!  But if we tried humanly to put groups together that would not be of God either.

Where I Stand

I can be thankful therefore, that in the goodness of God, I can enjoy happy normal Christian fellowship a few of the Lord’s people, many of which have come from other brethren groups, scattered through several countries with:  no headquarters (other than heaven), no leader (but Jesus), no written statement of beliefs (other than the Bible), and no name – (Can’t use Plymouth Brethren any longer, thank God).  I can say, that there is a general desire to be faithful to the Lord working things out simply.  Of course Satan is ever active to get us on the old human paths of human effort, legality or looseness, but the power of the Holy Spirit is felt, restraining what is wrong, and causing saints to enjoy a living ministry and amazing experience in the Service of God.

There is more about the Brethren on Wikipedia –with many inaccuracies.  Also on the site My Brethren , even if I do not concur with the editorship in everything!

All Preaching should be Lay Preaching

All preaching should be lay preaching, since scripture does not allow anything else. All men who are able, should speak in church, under the direction of the Holy Spirit. Women have other ways of exercising their spiritual gifts.

On Lay Preaching

A summary of John Nelson Darby’s article On Lay Preaching – click for original.  Collected Writings Volume 1 (Ecclesiastical 1)

 

Summary

lay-preachingAll preaching should be lay preaching, since scripture does not allow anything else.  All men who are able, should speak in church, under the direction of the Holy Spirit.  Women have other ways of exercising their spiritual gifts.

The Effect of the Gift of God’s Spirit

If God give His Spirit to laymen in order to preach, if the use of this gift is hindered, there is general loss and the Spirit of God is grieved.  Those who oppose lay preaching must maintain either that no laymen can have the Spirit of God in testimony, or if they have it, the sanction of man is necessary before it can be exercised.  No sanction can be proved to be necessary from Scripture; therefore, no such sanction can be granted.

The question is not, whether a layman might be qualified; but, whether as a layman he is disqualified, unless he has been, what is commonly called, ordained.   No such ordination was a qualification to preach in the early days of the church.

The question only arises as to their speaking in the church.  The only prohibition is . “Let your women keep silence in the churches” (1 Cor 14:34).  Not “Let your unordained keep silence”.  Paul says,  , “Every one of you hath a psalm, hath a doctrine, hath a tongue, hath a revelation, hath an interpretation.” (v.26).   Does he say nobody ought to speak except one who has been ordained? No!  He says, “For ye may all prophesy one by one, that all may learn” (v.31).   So, women are not permitted to speak, and the rest are.   This is God’s plan of decency and order.  They are not to all speak at once, or every day, as God leads them, and gives them ability, for the edifying of the church.

Women have spiritual gifts, and directions are given for their exercise; but they are not to use them in the church.  That is out of order, and not comely.

The Early Church

It may be asserted that these were times of extraordinary gifts of the Spirit, but this is a false argument.   The Spirit of God does not break the own order that He has established.   It would be most mischievous to say He did.  Ordination breaks that order.   Indeed, I believe that the laity is the only real instrument for building up of the church:  “The Head, Christ, from whom the whole body, fitly joined together, and compacted by that which every joint supplieth, according to the effectual working in the measure of every part, maketh increase of the body, to the edifying of itself in love.” (Eph 4:16)

It was clear that in Corinth there were many teachers, all teachers in fact.  The Corinthians were warned about that, not belittling the office of teaching, but rather the effect of the imbalance; it would result in ‘greater condemnation’.  However, it was clearly not necessary to be ordained in order to teach.  Aptness to teach may be an important qualification for an elder or overseer; but it cannot be said from Scripture to be disorderly for a layman to teach in the church, if God have given him ability.

In the early days of Christianity the gospel spread rapidly.  All the Christians preached: they went everywhere preaching the word; Acts 8:4.  It was not just speaking, it was evangelising the word.” And the hand of the Lord was with them, and a great number believed and turned to the Lord. (Acts 11:21).  There was no consideration as to whether they were ordained or not.  They were all lay preachers; there were no others.

Later Apollos preached.  Far from being ordained before beginning to preach, he knew only the baptism of John.  Only later, Aquila and Priscilla took him, and expounded to him the way of God more perfectly.   In Rome, many of the brethren preached the word without fear.  And there were itinerant preachers in  2 and 3 John.

Darby said he was not attacking ordination, only the assertion that laymen ought not to speak in or preach out of the church.   He challenged any one to produce any scripture positively, or on principle, forbidding laymen to preach without episcopal, or equivalent ordination.

Even in the tabernacle system, where priestly authority was established, Joshua objected to Eldad and Medad prophesying in the camp, though they had not come up to the door of the tabernacle.  The Spirit rested upon them.  Moses said, “Would God, that all the Lord’s people were prophets!” (Num 11:29).   Subsequently, Korah, Dathan, and Abiram desired the kingship of Moses and the priesthood of Aaron.  This was their fault.   These things are typical of our dispensation.  In one sense Christ is alone as priest; in another we are all priests.  This is the dispensation of the outpouring of the Spirit, qualifying for preaching any who can do so – in a word, speaking of Jesus.

The Outpouring of the Holy Spirit

At Pentecost, the Spirit was poured out on the one hundred and twenty, who were assembled together, and they began to speak as the Spirit gave them utterance.    Peter explained to the Jews, that it was the thing spoken of by Joel, the undistinguished pouring-out of the Spirit upon all flesh – upon people of all classes, servants and handmaidens, and their sons and their daughters prophesying.  And what has been the subsequent history?  The denial and loss of the only power of the dispensation.   The power of the Spirit, in which God would give competency to restrain evil, has been slighted; and human office has been relied on.  There has been the assumption of power, which had not been given to the church at all.   Episcopal appointment came in in order to protect orthodoxy.   However, if evil teaching exists, the remedy is not by hindering or rejecting lay preaching, but by the cordial co-operation of those who hold the truth; energetically sustained against those who do not hold the truth, whatever their office.   Thus the distinction is between truth and error, not between human office and the Spirit.  This is the most mischievous thing that the human mind could have devised.  Thankfully there are those who have been ordained who recognize the Holy Spirit, rather than their office in pursuing their ministry and do not prohibit those not ordained from exercising theirs.

Replacing the Spirit by Human Office is the most Mischievous Thing that the Human Mind could have Devised

The times call for decision; and the only thing which will withstand evil and error, is truth.  We, as saints acting under the Spirit, need to wield the truth as a common cause against error and self-will.   Then God can be with us. He must justify His own, when it is to His glory, and their blessing.   May He by His Spirit guide us into all truth!

 

 

Darby Simplified

the words of a few of the Lord’s servants, John Nelson Darby (JND) in particular, mostly in simplified and summary form, to provide encouragement and instruction for believers who are concerned to ‘walk in the light’ – and above all following, and keeping close to Jesus.

By Sothenes – who just wanted to be ‘a brother’ – For more see ‘Introduction’

Zech 4:10
Who hath despised the day of small things

 

I am seeking with God’s help to draw the words of a few of the Lord’s servants, John Nelson Darby (JND) in particular, mostly in simplified and summary form, to provide encouragement and instruction for believers who are concerned to ‘walk in the light’ – and above all following, and keeping close to Jesus.

By Sothenes – who just wanted to be ‘a brother’ – For more see ‘Introduction’

It will take some time to get through even the salient works of JND, but if there is anybody who would like to help with adding Mackintosh, Wigram, Stoney, Raven and others please let me know.

Also I would be very pleased for others to of through the Classics below, suggesting improvements and corrections with a view to their being published in hardcopy corm,

Summaries of Classics for the Church in Perilous Times
JohnNelsonDarby-avatar  J N Darby

The Faith once delivered to the Saints
JohnNelsonDarby-avatar  J N Darby Darby Simplified – The Nature and Unity of the Church of Christ
 JohnNelsonDarby-avatar J N Darby  Darby Summary – Separation from Evil, God’s Principle of Unity
  JohnNelsonDarby-avatar J N Darby  Darby Summary – Grace, the Power of Unity and of Gathering
  JohnNelsonDarby-avatar J N Darby Darby Simplified – On Ecclesiastical Independency 
  JohnNelsonDarby-avatar J N Darby Darby Simplified – Churches and the Church 
JohnNelsonDarby-avatar  J N Darby Darby Simplified – The Nature and Unity of the Church of Christ
  JohnNelsonDarby-avatar J N Darby Darby Simplified – The Notion of a Clergyman, Dispensationally the Sin against the Holy Ghost
 JohnNelsonDarby-avatar J N Darby

 The Present Hope of the Church
 JohnNelsonDarby-avatar J N Darby The Church and its Glory
 JohnNelsonDarby-avatar J N Darby The First Resurrection – or The Resurrection of the Just.
 JohnNelsonDarby-avatar J N Darby The Progress of Evil on the Earth and its Judgment
 JohnNelsonDarby-avatar J N Darby The Second Coming of Christ
 JohnNelsonDarby-avatar J N Darby The Two Characters of Evil: Ecclesiastical Apostasy, and Civil Apostasy
 JohnNelsonDarby-avatar J N Darby
 JohnNelsonDarby-avatar J N Darby
 JohnNelsonDarby-avatar J N Darby
 JohnNelsonDarby-avatar J N Darby
 JohnNelsonDarby-avatar J N Darby
 JohnNelsonDarby-avatar J N Darby
 JohnNelsonDarby-avatar J N Darby
 JohnNelsonDarby-avatar J N Darby
 JohnNelsonDarby-avatar J N Darby

 

Qui a méprisé le jour des petites choses? – Zech 4:10

des résumés pour mes amis francophones des quelques paroles vrais que le Saint-Esprit a donné à l’Eglise de Dieu

Aux amis français

Zech 4:10
Who hath despised the day of small things

J’ai l’idée de produire des résumés pour mes amis francophones des quelques paroles vrais que le Saint-Esprit a donné à l’Eglise de Dieu. Des hommes comme John Darby ont beaucoup travaillé en France, en Suisse et au Canada, et il y a encore beaucoup de gens qui apprécient leur enseignement. Ma connaissance de votre belle langue est loin d’être parfait, mais je ferai, si le Seigneur le permet quelques tentatives, et je serai obligé de l’aide des amis qui peuvent corriger mes textes!

Salutations dans le nom de notre Sauveur!

Sosthène

%d bloggers like this: