Waymarks 49
Report of Open Air Preaching
March 20th
This is not a very busy shopping centre when the market isn’t here. I prefer to come on such days, when one is not so crowded in. Even so I estimated 35 people a minute passing by and within earshot for an average of 45 seconds. Stay for an hour and 2100 people have heard at least three or four gospel texts.
One person shouted “shut up” but he may have been shouting at his spouse. Another couple sat on the wall next to me for the whole time I was preaching. They did not seem to notice me.
P- came by. His grandfather was an intellectual, a famous personality who was responsible for “discovering” Mother Teresa. P- once attended a local
March 28th
A lady was standing where I usually stand when I arrived today so I stood two yards farther along. She invited me to come closer so I assumed she recognized me as the street preacher. But it transpired she was looking for work and maybe I could employ her. Well, I don’t agree with lady preachers and I don’t employ assistants. She told me she was a carer. Do I really appear that old and decrepit? I declined her offer and sought to weave the gospel into our conversation. She listened and told me a little of her background and how she had arrived from
After this lady moved on I preached for 15 minutes. A young man giving out leaflets had stood nearby the whole time since I had arrived and when I paused preaching he introduced himself. I thought his leaflets might be offering a free holiday in the
April 15th WOLVERTON. The Square.
It is Sunday evening. Half an hour before our Gospel Meeting starts. We are ten minutes walk from the hall. There are a few people in the square. One man sends his little boy over for a tract and sits reading it while we preach. A youth asks are we JW or Catholic? Neither, we reply. He is presumably unaware that these two organisations do not engage in street preaching. He shouts out a few Bible references as he walks away from us. We “amen” all Bible verses. One is Ps. 83: 18 which he then corrects to John 83: 18.!! Maybe his parents are JW.
April 18th
It was difficult to find a place to stand today. The Victory Centre people were already there. I emailed them to query a statement in their leaflet, “Jesus said ‘You must be born again to return to heaven’ John 3: 3-8” and pointed out this was a false statement. I never had a reply.
I moved up to Market Hill. what a wonderful place to preach. Alas a kiddies merry-go-round was there with accompanying din so I retraced my path to the other end of
May 3rd
After I finished preaching a lady wanted to shake my hand. It was to give me some encouragement, she said. Well, after 33 years street preaching I am still grateful for encouragement. It’s good to know some people are listening. I asked the usual questions, “are you saved?”, “are you sure?” etc. She was sure. But it didn’t take long to discover how confused this lady was. She told me she was already experiencing
A further outcome of this conversation was her low regard for Scripture. What the Bible says is not too relevant for our exciting times. She said she would like to help me understand these things. She had after all been “saved” for two years. Her bible (only it was not the Bible, it was a NKJV) had contradictions in it. for example Matthew tells us Judas went out and hanged himself but Acts tells us that he fell headlong and all his bowels gushed out. she told me that Acts did not refer to Judas but to the man who picked up the pieces of silver that Judas had flung down.
Now I knew this poor woman was a Christ rejector on the way to hell. (both references are true of Judas OF COURSE.)
May 15th
I was here last Friday, by the entrance to theArndale, which is my usual place for preaching in
Today there was a far better reception. (no RAC man). One man sitting 20 yards away seemed to be listening intently. When a bench became vacant nearer to me he moved across. When I had finished preaching he came over to speak to me but I couldn’t understand him. Eventually I deduced he was Polish and had been in the
I gave him The Way of Salvation which he received as though I were giving him a large slab of gold. He told me his daughter would help him read it. Pray for a whole Catholic family being reached with the gospel. There are now 20,000 Poles in
I hope these reports of open air preaching encourage others to preach publicly. It need only be for a few minutes at a time. Why not the next time the wife wants to drag you round the shops tell her you will stay in the street to preach the gospel. This will give you a couple of hours which otherwise would be wasted.
AV Verses Vindicated
Matthew 27:46
And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eli,eli, lama sabachtani? that is to say, My God, My God, Why hast thou forsaken me?
(Mark 15: 34 Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachtani?)
This has been changed to ' why didst thou forsake me' by W Kelly and this has been taken up with some enthusiasm by some of our brethren. However, we find the following all in agreement with the AV:- Tyndale, JND, RSV, NIV, Doauy, and many others. So why change it? Because, we are told, it is in the aorist tense and never mind the weight of evidence against such a change. So I look it up in my Bagster's Analytical Greek Lexicon and learn that it is in '2nd Pers.sing. Aorist Indic. Active.' and Mr Newberry tells us the aorist is a 'point in the expanse of time'. So now we know. But note 2 Tim.4:10, for Demas hath forsaken me. The same Greek word is used and is also in the aorist tense. It may be that the act of forsaking took place in a moment of time but the condition of being forsaken continued up to the time of Paul's writing his second letter to Timothy
We believe the Lord was still forsaken as He uttered those solemn words Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani. If not, then uncertainty is cast on the efficacy of His atoning work, for Christ died for our sins and the words why didst thou forsake me? suggest that the forsaking had ended before He died. The AV translation is the only acceptable one.
The words from the cross are reported slightly differently in Mark 15:34:- Eloi, eloi, lama sabachthani? Which is, being interpreted, My God, My God, why hast thou forsaken me? This we are told, is in the vernacular whereas the words in Matthew are given in Hebrew.
Four hundred years before the birth of Christ the prevailing condition was this: Jews....had married wives of
Not all the Jews had done this. There was always a faithful remnant. But many of those who had returned after the captivity were of mixed marriage. Many didn't return anyway. So there were very few left who could speak in the Jew's language. But for a Jew not to speak in Hebrew was a disgrace before God. The offspring of the unfaithful spoke half in the language of
We digress for a moment. Christendom today worships the fish-god, which is why his symbol of a fish is seen on the back of every other car. Its speech is "half-
Malachi was a contemporary of Nehemiah. Malachi was the last of the OT prophets. There were no more until John the Baptist 400 years later. So conditions did not improve over those 400 years. God had nothing to say. No Scripture was given; no prophet was raised up.
However, during these four centuries between the OT and the NT era the Apocrypha was produced and, it is alleged, the Septuagint. This latter was supposedly the OT in Greek. Seeing that God was silent during this period in regard to His written word, and also in regard to His spoken word via the prophet, the Apocrypha and the Septuagint clearly did not come from God. They must both have come from the pit.
God broke His 400 years silence when John cried out Repent ye: for the
There are ten references to the Hebrew language in the NT and none to the Aramaic language, (not even in Acts 2:8-11). Paul spoke in the Hebrew tongue, Acts21:40. The risen Lord spoke to Paul in the Hebrew tongue, Acts 26:14. The words on the cross were in Hebrew, Greek, and Latin. There were no Aramaic words written on the cross.
Several verses in the New Testament appear at first sight [my italics] to refer to the Hebrew language and the Greek word translated as "Hebrew" (hebraisti) does indeed refer to that language in Rev.9:11 and
But it doesn't say "in their language" at Acts
Emerton suggests there probably was a Semitic language, not Greek, not pure Hebrew either, not even Aramaic, spoken by the Jews at this time. Only, the professor doesn't know what it was! But it certainly was not Aramaic, though there may have been a few Aramaic words in use in those times. If the world's leading authority on the subject is uncertain as to the precise language spoken by the Jews in first century
Scripture is twisted in modern versions to cater for the view that other than pure Hebrew was spoken in NT times. Some have called this hybrid Hebrew/Aramaic "the vernacular".
We conclude that the Lord spoke in Hebrew alone.
There is a coming day when all will speak a pure language. That will be one language spoken by all nations. Zeph.3:9. It will be pure, not a mixture of languages. It will not therefore be English, although this is plainly God's world language for these last days. I am quite sure it will not be Aramaic, Chaldee, Syriac, or Yiddish. It will be the language of God's ancient people,
Romans 9: 29
And as Esaias said before, Except the Lord of Sabaoth had left us a seed, we had been as Sodoma, and been made like unto Gomorrha
Paul was quoting Isaiah 1: 9, Except the LORD of hosts had left unto us a very small remnant, we should have been as
D Kaus, in his book Choosing a Bible, wites that Paul
uses the Greek word that means “descendants” (sperma, “seed”) instead of “survivors”, thereby inadvertantly changing the sense of the passage.
Kaus is stating that it is not the AV that is wrongly translated here, rather that the apostle himself got it wrong. It was a careless slip on his part, no doubt because he didn’t understand Isaiah’s prophecy. How thankful we should be that this unconverted critic can now help us!
He also wants us to understand that the Bible is NOT verbally inspired. That God is NOT responsible for its authorship, unless perhaps the Holy Spirit inadvertantly supplied the wrong word.
Take warning — if you do not believe in the verbal (word for word) inspiration of Holy Scripture, and if you do not believe that God has supplied us with an inspired English Bible today, there is little likelihood that you are a believer on the way to heaven.
Neither Paul nor Isaiah were speaking of mere survivors. Joel 2: 32 is instructive; And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of the LORD shall be delivered: for in mount
Isaiah did not write of those who managed to survive the judgment of
1 John 4: 1-3
Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world. Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God: and every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist.
Modern versions such as NIV,ESV etc attempt to dodge the charge of being antichrist by omitting “Christ come in the flesh”. They pretend that they acknowledge Jesus and this is enough. What do they acknowledge? It may be no more than believing a man lived 2000 years ago named Jesus and he lived a good life. They think if they remain silent about the Anointed One foretold in the Prophets to be born of a virgin in the City of
Silence on this vital issue will show the nature of the spirit to be that of antichrist. Thus the platform man denying 1 Tim. 3: 16, God was manifest in the flesh lets his audience know he has come in the spirit of antichrist.
John is teaching us that Jesus did not become the Christ subsequent to His birth at
By the Way....
In a recent poll to find the most popular books, the bible came out at No.6. This was not the AV or some other verion. It was just the bible, a pudding stone comprising all perversions and parodies of Scripture lumped together. The multi-million pound bible publishing industry has succeeded in knocking the Bible down from No.1. The AV Bible of course is not on the scale. It may be Rupert Murdoch, publisher of the NIV, is not too bothered with this. Much of his money comes from Myspace and pornography.
Harry Potter came in at No.4 □
What is the doctrinal position of the “Brethren”? If you want to know, visit “brethren on line”. A list of what is commonly believed among brethren is posted there. Of course this is not an official site any more than Believer’s Magazine is an official organ of the Brethren Movement.
At the head of the list is:-
- verbal, plenary inspiration of the original manuscripts of the Bible.
To which we add our amen! This is commonly believed among us. But, TAKE WARNING! this is a tacit denial that inspiration of the Scriptures exists today. To this many of our brethren will add their amen.
Our scholars and those who worship at their feet have not seen an original manuscript. They have not seen a copy of a copy of an original manuscript. Their statement is eyewash. Impressive words are used to bamboozle the untaught. Most of our platform men couldn’t even tell you what the word plenary means.
Here is what is at the head of my list. I believe in the:-
- verbal, plenary inspiration of Scripture.
Now, do you see the difference? Do you see that the first statement is the cry of apostasy? It is a meaningless statement because those original manuscripts have long since ceased to exist. Brethrenism shares the view of apostate Christendom. It is all confusion, of which God is not the author.
Until the middle of the last century it was commonly believed among us that we were in possession of The Scriptures, generally referred to as the Authorized Version for those of us who speak English. We believed its internal evidence that All Scripture is given by inspiration of God. One strong reason for believing this is that conversion brings a soul into a living relationship with the Author. The regenerate soul believes through the Scriptures that God pledged Himself to preserve His word and not a jot or tittle (i.e. written words) would not be lost.
Our modern brethren do not believe God has preserved His word. We now learn that scholars can alter their bible to suit their own views (they don’t alter MY Bible; it remains the AV) .
If my Bible is not inspired, it is not Scripture. I had better put it in the dustbin straight away. It is worthless.
Those original inspired Scripture manuscripts were handed down and faithfully copied by Godly men through the ages, therefore inspiration remained with those same words. Being God’s words inspiration cannot be lost through translation.
I sometimes like to imagine if copies had been made on transparencies from the original (Greek) up to our present time and then laid on top of each other, individual alterations would be greyed out as I looked through them and I would then see a standard text throughout – I would read the original! It would not make any difference if the first few got lost in the process.
Either we have a Bible we can trust implicitly or we have not. Make up your mind, your soul depends on it .□
Another doctrine of the Brethren was emphasised at a recent Bible Conference. The subject was “The New Testament Assembly”. Mtt.18: 20 For where two or three are gathered in my name, there am I in the midst of them was read and then the preacher spoke on being gathered TO the name. There was no explanation for the change. We were to understand only “B”rethren do this. The rest of Christendom doesn’t gather TO the name. They all gather to their own names. As Scripture nowhere teaches a gathering to the name it becomes a cult slogan. My Bible has in which is a faithful and accurate translation in this verse of the Greek preposition eis. We begin to understand a little better the Brethren oppostion to the Authorized Version.
We were later told that the local assembly is the court of final appeal. Some of us thought the Scriptures were the such. In practice if there should be conflict between the opinion of the “oversight” and Scripture then the oversight must be obeyed.
The Scripture gives guidance if court appeals have to be made. 1 Cor. 6: 4 is the answer: if then ye have judgments of things pertaining to this life, set them to judge who are least esteemed in the church. □
CANDLESTICK v. LAMPSTAND
Any Bible Teacher referring to the Seven Golden Candlesticks in his ministry today would be regarded as old-fashioned, out of touch, an untaught ignoramus. To be acceptable one must speak of the Lampstands, because, we are told, it is "where oil was burnt for light as in the Tabernacle". But there is no mention of oil in Revelation 1 to 3. But it is implied, we are told, because oil is a symbol of the Holy Spirit, present in the 7 Lampstands. Well then, if interpretation of scripture depends upon implications, you and I also may be free to infer whatever we like from Scripture and we can invent our theology as we travel along.
W. Scott would not even have the stands in his "Exposition". The 7 churches were their own lights. (so today the revisionists are their own gods. They worship their own scholarship). We are aware that the five wise virgins took oil for their lamps and we do know that the candlestick in the tabernacle held oil in its bowls. We know also that this candlestick is spoken of in Heb.9:2 and is the same Greek word as we find in Rev. 1: 12. We think that the A. V. translators, being linguists as yet unsurpassed, knew all this too.
John saw a candle-stick. He did not refer to any light, but to the light holder, so there is no need to change the word at all. Wax candles were in common use in John's day, particularly among the poorer classes. The church in
We trust that those who so dogmatically insist on "lampstands" never speak of "chandeliers" hanging from their lounge ceilings if they are on electricity.
| “Examine yourselves, whether ye be in the faith; (2 Corinthians 3: 5)
|
This box was published in The Reformer March/April 2007. It is indescribably sad. These were two great men of God but apparently neither of them has sufficient confidence in Scripture to believe in the eternal security of the soul.
Reformism shows itself a doleful and hopeless religion.
Reformism makes the apostle Paul a presumptuous man, for he wrote, I know whom I have believed, an am persuaded that he is able to keep that which I have committed unto him against that day. 2 Tim. 1: 12.
He knew his soul was secure unto coming again of the Saviour.
He also wrote unto us which are saved 1 Cor. 1: 18. He didn’t hope he might be saved. He knew he was saved. All those who are genuinely saved know it and do not doubt it. The Reformists rarely speak of being saved. They do not understand it. There is no salvation in Reformism.
Being in the faith is holding to the word of God.
Inspiration
(From The Bible at the Bar by W.M. Robertson; P& I; 1930)
1.The Whole, and every part of the Bible is Inspired. This is a matter that can only be settled by the Scriptures themselves. As we examine the Scripture testimony on any other doctrine, so we must on this. What saith the Scripture as to the extent or fulness of inspiration ? Let no one say that this is reasoning in a circle. "We take the testimony of a man for himself, provided his testimony on all other matters is true, " and to this test we are perfectly prepared to submit the Bible. Its testimony on other matters has been certified and confirmed by experience, observation, and scientific investigation. We have every warrant, therefore, for believing its witness in this matter. It is full and final. In the passage we have already considered, it is plainly stated that "ALL" Scripture is inspired of God. It is idle to say that in handling historical matters the writers did not require Divine assistance, because their data were obtainable from natural sources. If they did not need inspiration in securing historical data, they certainly required it in their selection of the same. One has only to compare the Bible account of Creation, the fall, the flood, etc., with the Babylonian and other traditions to see the force of this. Moreover, many of the historical portions of the Bible are also prophetic in character. The history of
2. The Inspiration of the Bible extends to its Words as well as its Thoughts, the Form as well as the Substance. This is commonly termed the verbal theory of inspiration, and is greatly assailed to-day. "No enlightened person, " we are told, "can any longer hold to the verbal inerrancy of the Bible. Scientific and Biblical research have for ever relegated this view to the scrap-heap of out-worn ideas. To be sure, the Bible is inspired, but so are the works of Tennyson, Browning, and other great writers. While the Bible admittedly contains the highest spiritual teaching known to man, much also is dross. While it contains God's Word, revelation is by no means complete in it. The poets, the scientists, and the philosophers also have a divine message, and, though there may be a difference, it is a difference of degree, not of kind. To believe, therefore, that every word of the Bible stands without error as God's revelation to man is, for the modern mind, simply impossible. "
This is characteristic of the attitude of a great many to-day. The objection, however, to verbal inspiration arises very often from a mistaken notion as to what the words imply. The opponents of verbal inspiration conjure up a picture of mechanical transmission, after the manner of a gramophone record that has just been impressed. and ever after reproduces the impressions that have been received. It is difficult, in fact, to doubt that, with many, deliberate and persistent misrepresentation is indulged in the more readily to discredit a view that conflicts with their preconceived notions. The view we hold is as far removed from a mechanical theory as can be. There were real ideas and rational processes behind the utterances of the Bible writers, just as there are real ideas and rational processes behind the utterances of ordinary men. Verbal inspiration
simply means that the language in which these ideas produced by normal rational processes, and yet produced by God, are expressed, is an adequate and accurate vehicle for their communication. If it were otherwise, how could God-given ideas find authentic expression ? It is manifestly absurd to talk of the thoughts or substance as inspired, but not the words or expression, because the thoughts are embodied in the words, the expression conveys the truth; and we know nothing of one except through the other, and as set forth by the other. Consequently, if the words or expression are not inspired, the thoughts or substance cannot be. This is in no way affected by the fact that God employed human agents for His purpose in producing Scripture. The Holy Spirit of God so operated on the finite spirit of man as to secure that what was written should be an exact expression of His mind. In a word, "Inspiration is an activity of God upon men, having for its object such an expression of thought in words as shall reveal to the sons of men the eternal purpose of God. " Dean Burgon's conclusion on this matter is worthy of the sanity and scholarship of the man. He says: "You cannot dissect inspiration into substance and form. As for thoughts being inspired apart from the words which give them expression, you might as well talk of a tune without notes, or a sum without figures. No such theory of inspiration is even intelligible. It is as illogical as it is worthless, and cannot be too sternly put down. "
Robertson’s book The Bible at the Bar, published by Pickering and Inglis, now out of print, shows that my brethren once believed in the Verbal Inspiration of Scripture, though the majority believes no longer. Scripture is synonymous with Holy Bible. P & I were once a leading “Brethren” publisher.
*****
Questions for the AV Bible Critic
1. Since you're smart enough to find "mistakes" in the KJV, why don't you correct them all and give us a perfect Bible?
2. Do you have a perfect Bible?
3. Since you do believe "the Bible" is our final authority in all matters of faith and practice, could you please show us where Jesus, Peter, James, Paul, or John ever practiced your terminology ("the Greek text says...the Hebrew text says....the originals say...a better rendering would be....older manuscripts read...." etc.)?
4. Since you do not profess to have a perfect Bible, why do you refer to it as "God's word"?
5. Remembering that the Holy Spirit is the greatest Teacher (John
6. Since you do believe in the degeneration of man and in the degeneration of the world system in general, why is it that you believe education has somehow "evolved" and that men are more qualified to translate God's word today than in 1611?
7. There is one true God, yet many false gods. There is one true Church, consisting of true born-again believers in Christ, yet there are many false churches. So why do you think it's so wrong to teach that there is one true Bible, yet many false "bibles"?
8. Isn't it true that you believe God inspired His holy words in the "originals," but has since lost them, since no one has a perfect Bible today?
9. Isn't it true that when you use the term "the Greek text" you are being deceitful and lying, since there are MANY Greek TEXTS (plural), rather than just one?
10. Before the first new perversion was published in 1881 (the RV), the King James Bible was published, preached, and taught throughout the world. God blessed these efforts and hundreds of millions were saved. Today, with the many new translations on the market, very few are being saved. The great revivals are over. Who has gained the most from the new versions, God or Satan? — Taken from AV1611.org. copyright free.
Princess Diana is in hell
On the first anniversary of the death of Princess Diana a Sunday School teacher informed his class that she had gone to hell. This caused the inevitable furore from parents and those objecting to plain facts being made known as revealed in the Scriptures.
The Archdeacon of Aston, the Ven John Barton, branded the preaching barmy and perverted theology. He said, “Diana was fallible but she tried to make a positive difference to the world.” No doubt this man was invited to comment because of his hostility to the truth of Scripture.
If Diana did not go to hell she went to heaven. Repentance toward God and faith toward the Lord Jesus Christ are essentials for entrance into heaven and she displayed neither. Rather, she was an immoral young woman and involved in Spiritism.
The Scripture tells us Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the
Those who think that Diana might have repented in her final moments are ignorant of the gospel and do not understand the effects of shock.
Diana died two hours after being involved in a car crash.In the accident she suffered severe damage to the left pulmonary vein resulting in massive blood loss. Her heart was badly damaged and she was unconscious.
If she is now in heaven we must conclude that though unconscious and rapidly dying she realized her sinful state and consciously repented of it turning to Christ, and recognising him to be the Son of God (essential for salvation) she put her trust in Him as her Lord and Saviour.
Enemies of the cross do not like these things taught publicly. But these accounts serve well to bring souls under conviction of sin and then to conversion.
The unbelief of J Ritchie Ltd* and its contributors
(See What the Bible Teaches; Judges; p. 327, C T Lacey.)
I quote from WTBT:
“[Gideon] struggled with the Lord’s estimation of him as a ‘mighty man of valour’ (Judges
False! The angel of the Lord had said, the LORD is with thee, thou mighty man of valour. Gideon took this to mean the LORD is with his people and not that the angel was buttering him up for a future task.
Quote again:
“As far as Gideon was concerned, his current activity hardly warranted the description of a ‘mighty man of valour’, but God saw it differently. He ‘threshed’ (knocked out – 2251) wheat by the winepress, to hide it from the Midianites.....That Gideon was obliged to knock out his little grain in [my italics] the winepress, a pit sunk in the ground or hewn in the rock, implies the soreness of the Midianite oppression.
Perversions of Scripture, from JND's New Translation (1878) onwards, and unbelieving commentaries (What the Bible teaches; Joshua, Judges, Ruth, edited by W S Stevely and D E West) would have Gideon threshing wheat IN the wine press, thus discrediting him and the angel of the Lord. There would have been nothing particularly valiant in this. It would have been physically impossible to THRESH wheat in a wine press, especially if he were using a stick, as some suggest. He might have trodden out a few grains for his own use but the reference to his valour tells us he was doing it for all
Gideon, instructed by the LORD to throw down the altar of Baal, because he feared his father’s household, and the men of the city, that he could not do it by day, that he did it by night. Judges
The suggestion that Gideon was cowardly is an evil insinuation. It was not a moral fear. If he attempted to throw the altar down in daylight he would be seen and the task would be made more difficult. He feared these men would try to stop him. How wise of him to do it by night! He knew he would soon be identified in the morning light anyway. He could hardly keep it a secret. He was at all times a valiant man.
The scholars will tell us that the Hebrew preposition may be translated "in" as well as "by", but they merely follow that parody of Scripture, the Septuagint. The use of "in" here makes a mockery of the truth. Reliable translations read "by".
*J Ritchie Ltd (owned by Lord’s Work Trust) sells The Message, a seriously perverted parody of Scripture).Also The Greatness of the Kingdom by Alva Mcclain. This book which lays the foundation of Progressive Dispensationalism is described thus by Ritchie Ltd,—
“ This 531-page hardback has no equal. We are thrilled to be able to offer to you this fully indexed volume. The
Hard –to-find indeed. It took them 42 years to find it. Who knows what Ritchie’s will produce 2049 AD?
For a critique on this subject, see Waymarks 47 and 48.
The New Evangelism
No longer is the gospel preached. This is because the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness. 1 Cor. 1: 18. We do not want Mr and Mrs worldly Wise to stay away from the Gospel\ Service so we shall catch them with our new evangelism. When they come we can tell ourselves that we have made so many “contacts”. (They used to be called converts.)
The modern gospel is found in School visits, Bible exhibitions, Creation lectures, OAP tea meetings, Mum’s and Toddlers sessions, Hall coffee mornings, YP’s Barbeques, Old Folks Home visits (must be a Sunday night of course).
It is possible that at any of these things a soul may be saved. One may be saved down a sewer. Jonah was saved while in the depths of the ocean. But what a lot of carnal energy is expended on these efforts.
But we can reach the children by visiting the school, so we are told. Yes, you can get in with the approval of ungodly headteachers (very very few are believers). You dare not preach the truth when you do get in, or you will never get back again. (NB. 1 Thess. 2: 6, John
My great-nephew was for a time a paid school visitor, paid by his local Baptist Union church. He has not the slightest comprehension of what it is to be saved. But he could give a nice little Bible story with one or two points made.
How can we reach the children then? They live all around the hall. Go and knock on their doors. Speak to the parents.
Many years ago an assembly wanted to start a Sunday School. Two or three young sisters decided to go door knocking. It was not long before the assembly was running three Sunday Schools, each with 100 children attending regularly.□
ARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURY REJECTS THE "FUNDAMENTALIST" APPROACH TO SCRIPTURE (Friday Church News Notes, April 27, 2007, www.wayoflife.org fbns@wayoflife.org, 866-295-4143) - In a lecture in Toronto, Ontario, on April 16, Rowan Williams, Archbishop of Canterbury, rejected the "fundamentalist" approach to Scripture, calling it "rootless" and "limited" in what "it can contribute to the church." The lecture, "The Bible Today:
This lecture can be read at www.trinity.utoronto.ca/News_Events/News/archbishop.htm
John 14 begins with the words Let not your heart be troubled: ye believe in God, believe also in me. Whatever these faithful believing godly disciples believed concerning the revealed nature of God, revealed to them by the power of the Holy Spirit through the Scriptures, Jesus Christ said, believe the same in Me. What a trump card!! The words of Christ show up the lies and deceit of all world religions. Here is a Man in whom dwells the fullness of the Godhead. Williams is exposed as a leader among the sons of hell.
My Bible and I
We have travelled together, my Bible and I.
Through tempest and sunshine I still kept thee nigh.
Though dark were the days, thy comforts were strong,
"Fear not, I am with thee" I still made my song.
My solace and comfort when trouble was nigh.
We were still close together, my Bible and I .
My stay and my comfort, by day and by night,
My treasure, my succour, my comfort, delight;
My solid foundation from earth's rudest shock,
I am safe in the shadow of thee, blessed rock.
With thee for my guide, I can Satan defy;
We will hold to each other, my Bible and I .
Thou sword of the Spirit, revealer and guide,
My doubts are dispelled when I've thee by my side.
The Master, Himself, soon put Satan to flight
When appearing to him as an angel of light.
With thee I can conquer, and Satan defy,
We'll keep closer together, my Bible and I.
So now who shall part us, my Bible and I ?
Shall Satan's temptations when age dims the eye?
Come storm or come sunshine, come sleet or come rain,
My stay in the past, I will trust thee again.
Be my song in the night, if preparing to die,
We will still be companions, my Bible and I.
SELECTED.
This poem is found on the last page of The Bible at the Bar.
