Issue 2, Fall 2003, Volume 21
RESEARCH
on REVIVAL
Mark
Horton
Most of us are not exempt
from having presuppositions about how and when God comes and blesses his people.
We hold mental pictures based on our education and experience that sum up what
we have seen and know about the ways of God. Yet we are aware that God is too
great to be limited to our little realm of experience and droplet of knowledge.
We may live at times with a degree of insecurity knowing that God could come in
ways we least expect. Recently in my own walk with God I have prayed concerning
this issue. I concluded that it really didn't matter how God chose to come. The
current need for him is so desperate, let him come however he chooses. It may
upset our apple carts but many of us are feeling very empty with all our apples
in a row and no major presence of God in our lives and ministry.
In 1985 Thomas R. Albin first
published his research at Cambridge University. Albin did a study of the
Wesleyan Revival and put together an amazing array of statistics on the way God
worked in the lives of those touched by the Wesleys' ministry. More recently Albin was interviewed in the
August 2003 issue of Christianity Today. Using mostly autobiographical accounts from the Arminian Magazine
and other early sources, Albin's study used the testimony of 555 Methodist
converts from the years 1725‑1790. His information follows the early
Methodist tendency to interpret their spiritual journey around three definite
stages: work of prevenient grace leading to awakening and conviction for sin,
the experience of justification and the new birth and the experience of entire
sanctification.
Most of the converts came from some
type of church background with few being saved out "of the rough." Of
those who included information on their childhood home, 6.2% came from
"active irreligious" or "unconcerned or inactive homes."
This seems to indicate that the Wesleyan revival was exactly that - a reviving
of spiritual life and fervor among those who had some degree of religious
training.
The average age of one's awakening
was 21 years of age with a time lapse of more than two years between their
awakening and new birth experience. "This fact suggests that the
evangelical conversion for early Methodism was a slow process involving
significant thought and reflection." One has to wonder if our American
drive to push people on to an experience has not come back to haunt us.
Few of the converts were exposed to
either of the Wesley brothers or Whitefield at the time of their three stages
of experience. It was the laity that was the "human catalyst" at each
of these transitions. Albin observes, "Lay persons are mentioned three
times more frequently than clergy in relation to awakening or conviction, twice
as often in relation to the new birth, and four times more often in relation to
sanctification . . . It appears that the impact of a given clergyperson
decreased as an individual progressed in spiritual life."
Most of the converts were alone when
they experienced the new birth. When those who were in a small group are added
more than two‑thirds are accounted for. Most of those who were alone were
in their own room or home when the blessing came.
The time lapse between the
experience of the new birth and entire sanctification was nearly six years on
average. Of the 131 cases that experienced this, one‑half were alone. The
"single most frequent event," for this blessing was: the deathbed (22.1%),
while different types of prayer make up the largest general category (33.2%).
Sixteen persons received it during preaching, thirteen in spiritual
conversation and eight while going about the routines of life. Perhaps it was
Wesley's emphasis to, "expect it every moment," that contributed to
such diverse settings of the experience.
All this together presents an
intriguing picture. God has blessed in ways and places we often would not look
for today. Our limited outlook of God only coming in church services and altar
calls may have restricted our faith.
Since we have not expected a move of God beyond our church walls, we
have reaped according to our faith. Oh that God would rend the heavens and come
down and reeducate us into a larger realm of faith.
DOES
GOD HAVE AN ERASER?
Vic
Reasoner
Each of the seven letters in
Revelation 2‑3 closes with a promise to the overcomer. A popular teaching defines an overcomer as
anyone who had truly trusted in Christ for salvation. Since all who have truly believed in Christ are overcomers, all
who have truly believed also have been guaranteed eternal life. Those who
do not overcome were never truly saved.
This definition fails to emphasize, however, that this saving faith is a
present tense, ongoing faith, not a one‑time decision. Another
popular view distinguishes between carnal Christians and spiritual Christians.
While both groups are eternally secure, only the spiritual Christian receives
the reward promised to the overcomer.
Yet Howard Marshall observed that the rewards for conquerors in
Revelation 2‑3 are elsewhere assigned to all Christians: 2:7 with 22:2;
2:11 with 20:6, 14; 2:17 with 22:4; 2:26 with 22:5; 3:5 with 22:14; 3:12 with
22:3; 3:21 with 22:5. "In particular, ruling is stated to be the privilege
of all believers (Revelation 1:5, 5:10; 22:5)" [Kept by the Power of
God, p. 253].
The Wesleyan‑Arminian position
is that while true believers are indeed overcomers so long as they maintain an
obedient faith, these believers are not guaranteed to persevere, but rather
every true believer must persevere in order to fully realize the promises made
to the overcomer. Thus, Jesus gives a
conditional promise, that those who do overcome will be rewarded. According to Revelation 2:26 and 12:11 the
overcomer is the one who keeps the works of Christ until the end.
In each of the seven churches there
was something particular to be overcome. The promises were given by Jesus to encourage believers to endure to the
end. In all, twelve promises are
given. Of particular interest is the
promise in Revelation 3:5 that he who overcomes will never have his name erased
from the book of life.
What is the book of life? The phrase serves as a metaphor for God's
memory. The Lord knows those who are
his (2 Tim 2:19). The Old Testament declared that the righteous are written in
God's book. In the New Testament this
expresses the idea of assurance of salvation.
This divine register is first
referenced in Exodus 32:32. Even under
the old covenant, the name of Moses was written in God's book and according to
Malachi 3:16 all who feared the Lord were written in heaven. Yet in Exodus 32:33 God himself warned
against the possibility of being blotted out of his book. David
prayed concerning his persecutors, "Do not let them share in your
salvation. May they be blotted out of
the book of life and not be listed with the righteous" (Psalm 69:27‑28). Notice that when Judas was replaced as an
apostle, Peter quotes from Psalm 69:25. According to Peter, David spoke by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit
(Acts 1:16). And David's prayer was
that apostates be blotted from the book of life. As a result of being blotted out of the book of life, Judas went
to his own place - the place he had chosen (Acts 1:25).
Isaiah 4:3 teaches that those who
are recorded among the living are the holy. According to Daniel 12:1, everyone written in the book escaped the great
tribulation which came upon Jerusalem.
Malachi 3:16‑18 describes those who were written in God's book of
remembrance, which served to distinguish between the righteous and the wicked.
Luke 10:20 indicates that the names
of the seventy evangelists were written in heaven. Philippians 4:3 speaks of those whose names are written in the
book of life. Hebrews 12:23 declares
that the church is enrolled in heaven.
Our citizenship is in heaven and our names are written upon the register
of that city.
Thus, with this biblical background,
John makes reference to the book of life in Revelation 3:5, 13:8, 17:8, 20:12‑15,
21:27, and perhaps in 22:19. Revelation
13:8 and 17:8 indicate that God in his foreknowledge wrote the name of every
saved person in the book of life before the foundation of the world. Does that mean that God predestines those
whom he will save? While God foreknows
who will be saved, he does not
predetermine their salvation.
Four hundred years ago Christopher
Ness stated the Calvinistic position that "the Lamb's book of life
contains a catalog of the elect, determined by the unalterable counsel of God,
which number can neither be increased nor diminished" because the elect
were predestined by God before the foundation of the world and these alone were
redeemed by Christ. If God predestined
those whom he will save, why would he ever erase anyone out of this "register
of the elect?" Presumably, the
Calvinistic answer would be that those blotted out participated in covenant
blessings, but were not elect. Yet this
book is a book of eternal life, not a book of blessing.
The popular evangelical position
today says that God does not predestine who will be saved, but that he has
predestinated those who are saved can never be lost. Those who hold to unconditional security then offer six different
explanations for Revelation 3:5:
. Only the redeemed are recorded in the
book of life and Christ categorically promises never to erase a true
Christian's name. There is not an
explicit statement that God will blot out anyone's name. Revelation 3:5 is a litotes, a
figure of speech that expresses less than what is intended. Since all who are truly saved are
overcomers, this is actually a promise that their name will not be blotted
out. According to Charles Stanley,
"The good news is, God's pencil has no eraser"[Eternal Security:
Can You Be Sure? p. 182].
Yet John Walvoord
said the possibility of having a name blotted out is implied [ Revelation,
p. 82]. In a JETS article J.
William Fuller wrote, "A command that everyone keeps is superfluous and a
reward that everyone receives for a virtue that everyone has is nonsense"
["I Will Not Erase His Name," p. 299]. Robert L. Thomas wrote, "The promise to the overcomer is an
empty one unless the possibility exists that such blotting out could occur. What incentive is furnished by being
promised deliverance from something that could not happen?" [Revelation
1‑7, p. 261].
. Everyone who ever lived is recorded
in the book of life and at the end of their life those who never trusted in
Christ to receive the gift of salvation are blotted out.
While this
position is advocated by John Walvoord, Tim LaHaye, Hal Lindsey, and Robert
Thomas, according to Revelation 17:8 not every name has been written in the
book of life. James Rosscup argued that
only the saved are ever listed in the book of life. "It seems to be eisegesis [reading presuppositions into a
passage] to suggest that they were in it but later removed when
they failed to receive Christ ["The Overcomer of the Apocalypse," p.
286]. Charles R. Smith argued from Luke
10:20 that if the names of all living humans were written in heaven there would
be no point in telling any living person to rejoice because his name was
written in heaven!" ["The Book of Life," p. 225]. Fuller concluded that both interpretations
which have been presented lack exegetical integrity [p. 298].
. Unbelievers' names were written in
the book of life in eternity past and were then blotted out prior to the
creation of the world. Believers' names
remain in the book unconditionally.
Walvoord admitted
Revelation 13:8 "presents a number of problems" and so also adopts
this view [Revelation, pp. 202‑203] as an attempt to circumvent
Revelation 17:8. Thomas also floundered
at 13:8. He admitted that the names of
those who worship the beast might never have been written in the book of life,
but then argues that while they were in the book at one time, they then were
removed, presumably before the time of creation because God foreknew their
disbelief and consequent disobedience.
However, Thomas would not hold that believers' names could ever be
removed because of disbelief and disobedience [Revelation 4‑22,
pp. 164‑165].
. The "book of life" and the
"Lamb's book of life" are two different books. The book of life contains the names of all
mankind. The Lamb's book of life contains
the names of only the redeemed. While
unbelievers can be blotted out of the book of life, the redeemed can never be
blotted out of the Lamb's book of life.
Rosscup concluded
that only in the New Testament do references appear concerning the book of God
that pertain to eternal life. MacArthur
claimed Exodus 32:33 and Psalm 69:28 referred to physical death [Revelation
1‑11, p. 115]. Yet Robert
Thomas, Professor of New Testament at MacArthur's Master's Seminary, disputed
the distinction between the interpretation that these Old Testament passages
refer to the loss of physical life, while the New Testament passages refer to
the loss of spiritual life. "This
distinction is arbitrary, however. Consistency demands that both refer to spiritual
death" [Revelation 1‑7, p. 262].
Charles R. Smith
surveyed sixteen passages in Scripture and concluded that the Old Testament
refers to several divine registers or books. "It is unlikely that any refer to mere physical life alone. Rather, all specify the recipients of
special divine blessings." But
Smith also argued that since the Mosaic Covenant promised blessing, conditioned
on obedience, a person's name could be blotted from a list of covenant
blessings if he failed to fulfill the conditions. Here Smith created a false distinction between the Mosaic
Covenant and other covenants, since all covenants are based upon conditions.
However, Smith
concluded that by the New Testament only one book was under discussion and it
was "the register of the elect."
Smith asserted that names are never removed from it ["The Book of
Life," pp. 219‑230]. But
Revelation 17:8 clearly teaches that everyone is not written in the book of
life. Therefore, those blotted out in
Revelation 3:5 cannot be unbelievers who were never entered into it, but
backsliders who apostatized.
. Walter Scott claimed the "book
of life" in Revelation 3:5 contains the names of professing believers,
while the "book of life" in Revelation 13:8 contains the names of
genuine believers. While the names of
professing believers will be blotted out of the book of life, no genuine
believer will ever be blotted out.
Matthew Henry's Commentary offered a similar explanation.
Yet this is the
book of life, not a church roll. Grant
Osborne wrote, "It is difficult to conceive why those with an empty
profession would be included on such a list in the first place" [Revelation,
p. 183]. Thomas rejected this view
saying, "This explanation fails to indicate why a person with an empty
profession had his or her name written in the book of life in the first
place" [Revelation 1‑7, p. 262]. And why would a name which was never entered in the book of life
need to be erased?
. Fuller explained that in Revelation
3:1 "name" refers to reputation. Those who deny the faith will still enter eternal life, but Christ will
be ashamed of them. They will lose the
privileged reputation of the overcomer because their garments are soiled (v
4).
However, 3:1
warns that while they have a good "name," Christ knows their true
condition and they are actually dead. Therefore, the promise in 3:5 is not to
those with a good reputation who are "dead," but to the few who have not soiled their garments. Those who are
dead have been erased from the book of life.
In a desperate
attempt to salvage eternal security, scholars such as Fuller, Rosscup, Thomas,
Smith, and Walvoord have grasped at any attempted solution, sometimes offering
more than one option. Often their
conflicting explanations cancel each other out. While I have studied under a couple of these men and respect
their scholarship, I am disappointed in their lack of objectivity in this
instance. They seem uncertain about
what the verse means, but they are sure about what it does not mean! They appear willing to go to any length to
protect their presupposition. In his
synopsis of "The Overcomer of the Apocalypse," Rosscup stated that
the correct interpretation of the "overcomer" involves a
"defense of the doctrines of eternal security and of the perseverance of
the saints." Thus, eternal
security becomes their foundational doctrine and everything else must be cut to
fit.
Perhaps
Revelation 3:5 could be more easily understood if we did not approach it with
so much extra baggage. Let's consider a
seventh possible interpretation. If God
already knows who will be saved, why does he bother writing down names that he
knows will later be erased? The only
consistent answer is that their names were written down because they were once
saved; their names were erased because they fell away. "The names of the good are often
represented as registered in heaven (Luke 10:20). But this by no means implies a certainty of
salvation, but only that at that time the persons were on the list, from
which (as in Rev 3:5), the names of unworthy members might be erased" [McClintock and Strong, Cyclopedia, 1:852].
Wesley taught that "if any who
are saved make shipwreck of the faith, God will blot them out of his book,
although they were written therein from before the foundation of the
world." Howard Marshall wrote,
The possibility of failure to endure is
mentioned. Christians who fail to
persevere will come under judgment and their names will be blotted out of the
book of life. There is no reason to
suppose that these warnings are purely hypothetical, directed against non‑existent
dangers; the reverse is the case.
Moreover, the reference to the book of life indicates that John is
addressing his warning to believers [Kept by the Power of God, p. 175].
Yet we need not fall away. "This is the victory that has overcome
the world, even our faith" (1 John 5:4). Yet John describes this faith in the next verse as a present tense
faith. The person who keeps on
overcoming is the one who keeps on believing with active, trusting, obedient
faith. Those who do not persevere will have their names blotted out of the Book
of Life. Adam Clarke wrote, "Is it
not evident that a soul could not be blotted out of a book in which it
had never been written? And is
it not farther evident from [Exodus 32:32‑33] that, although a man be
written in God's book, if he sins he may be blotted out?"
In ancient times city registers
contained the names of its citizens. There were two reasons why a name could be erased: committing a capital offense or death. Physical death can never separate us from life
in Christ (Rom 8:38‑39). Yet the
church at Sardis had many who had grown careless and were about to die
spiritually. Their names were about to
be erased. Only a few were
overcomers. Joseph Benson wrote,
"This passage plainly implies, that some names shall be blotted out from
the book of life: this is, some who, in consequence of their adoption and
regeneration, were entitled to and fitted for eternal life, shall, through
falling from grace, lose these blessings, and come again under guilt, condemnation,
and wrath."
If we understand apostasy to be a
"capital offense" which results in spiritual death, then it is
possible to understand how names which were recorded in the heavenly register
could be blotted out. How long has it
been since you received any confirmation from the Holy Spirit that your name
can be found written in the book of life?
Ben Witherington concluded that "one is not eternally secure until
one is securely in eternity."
LOOKING
FOR THE PROMISE OF THE FATHER
Joseph
D. McPherson
In John 7:38‑39 we read
these words of Jesus: "He that believeth on me, as the scripture hath
said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water. (But this spake he of the Spirit, which they
that believe on him should receive: for the Holy Ghost was not yet given;
because that Jesus was not yet glorified.)"
It then becomes a matter of special
interest to us to know just when Christ was glorified, for we see from this
passage that the Holy Ghost was not to be given until He was glorified. There is a sense in which Christ was
glorified when ministering, healing and raising the dead. While on the Mount of Transfiguration three
of the disciples were given something of a preview of Christ's glorification as
He would appear after His ascension. That scene is beautifully described to us in the Gospels. There is a sense in which He was glorified
when crucified and again when He arose from the dead. A most unspeakable description of Christ's glorified state as he
was seen in heaven is shared in chapter one of Revelation. The Apostle John, who had formerly known the
Lord, possibly better than any other man, now fell as one dead when given a
revelation of Christ 's glorified appearance.
We find that the splendor of Christ's glorification as revealed to the
Apostle there on the Isle of Patmos was too much for flesh and blood to behold
without a supernatural touch.
So it is that when the Apostle John
informs us that "the Holy Ghost was not yet given because Jesus was not
yet glorified," he undoubtedly was referring to that glorification which
would take place after His ascension and after His being seated at the Father's
right hand. In his message on the Day
of Pentecost Peter seems to confirm this view when he spoke the following
words: "Therefore being by the right hand of God exalted, and having
received of the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost, he hath shed forth this
which ye now see and hear" (Acts 2:33).
Adam Clarke's comments on John 7:39
are helpful:
Certain measures of the Holy Ghost had been
vouchsafed from the beginning of the world to believers and unbelievers: but
that abundant effusion of his grace spoken of by Joel, chap. ii.28, which
peculiarly characterized the Gospel times, was not granted till after the
ascension of Christ: 1. Because this
Spirit in its plentitude [or in its abundant outpouring] was to come in
consequence of his atonement; and therefore could not come till after his
crucifixion. 2. {This descent of the
Holy Spirit] was to supply the place of Christ to his disciples and to all true
believers; and therefore it was not necessary till after the removal of his
bodily presence from among them.
One other reference directly
identifying Christ's glorification after His ascension is found in John
12:16. "These things understood
not his disciples at the first; but when Jesus was glorified, then remembered
they that these things were written of him, and that they had done these things
unto him."
Adam Clarke, in his comments on this
verse, understands this to mean that "After the ascension of Christ [and
His glorification in heaven], the disciples saw the meaning of many prophecies
which referred to Christ, and applied them to him, which they had not fully
comprehended before." In other
words, after Christ's ascension and the descent of the Holy Spirit on the Day
of Pentecost these disciples were given understanding that they had not had
before concerning many prophecies which referred to Christ.
Near the end of Christ's earthly
ministry He had assured His disciples that "It is expedient for you that I
go away: for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I
depart, I will send him unto you" (John 16:7). We are to understand by this that the communication of the Holy
Ghost was, in the words of David Brown, "dependent upon [Christ's] own
departure to the Father. Now as Christ
was not yet gone, so the Holy Ghost was not yet given." The word "glorified," as used in
John 7:39, is "used advisedly," says Brown, "to teach the reader
. . . that the departure of Christ to the Father was indispensable to the
giving of the Spirit" [Jamieson, Fausset and Brown].
Nowhere in the Gospels are we
informed that the disciples were inwardly possessed of the Holy Spirit while
their Master was yet with them. Rather
we find Jesus assuring them that the Spirit "dwelleth [now] with you, and
shall be in you" (John 14:17).
This is significant because after Pentecost we are assured in various
New Testament epistles that all justified believers, even while not yet
entirely sanctified, were possessed of the indwelling Spirit of God (Rom 8:9; 1
Cor 3:16; 6:19; Gal 3:2‑3; 1 Thess 1:6).
In Matthew 11:11 we read a statement
made by Jesus which is truly astounding.
He says, "Verily I say unto you, Among them that are born of women
there hath not risen a greater prophet than John the Baptist: but he that is
least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he."
Mr. Wesley explains these words of
Jesus by quoting an ancient writer, "John," says he, "was
greater than all who had been then born of women; but he was cut off before the
kingdom of heaven was given." "He seems to mean," added Mr. Wesley, "that
righteousness, peace, and joy which constitutes the present, inward kingdom of
heaven." This ancient writer
continued to describe John the Baptist. "He was blameless as to that righteousness which is by the law; but
he fell short of those who are perfected by the spirit of life which is in
Christ. Whosoever, therefore, is least
in the kingdom of heaven, by Christian regeneration, is greater than any who
has attained only the righteousness of the law, because the law maketh nothing
perfect." Thus, it is clear that
one regenerated in this Holy Ghost dispensation is greater than any who had
attained to righteousness in a former and inferior dispensation.
One passage found in John 20:22 has
been a puzzle to many Bible students. On the evening of the resurrection Jesus unexpectedly appears in the
presence of His disciples in a room whose doors are closed. We are told that during that appearance
Jesus "breathed on them and saith unto them, Receive ye the Holy
Ghost."
David Brown believed that "this
was a symbolic conveyance of the Spirit."
However, he is also convinced that it amounted to more than mere
symbolism, for he goes on to speak of it as "an earnest and first‑fruits
of the more copious Pentecostal effusion." In like manner, Mr. Wesley spoke of Christ's breathing on His
disciples at this time as "an earnest of the Spirit." In a general sense an earnest is a token of
something to come or of that which is promised. Since Christ told the disciples to tarry in Jerusalem until
Pentecost (Luke 24:49; Acts 1:4, 8), the promise was fulfilled on that day. If these disciples did indeed
receive an "earnest of the Spirit" and "first‑fruits of a
more copious Pentecostal effusion," to what purpose and benefit did they
receive it? John Fletcher wrote that
Christ "imparted [a measure of the Holy Ghost] to them as a 'Spirit of
grace and supplication,' to help them to wait in faith and unceasing prayer,
'till they were endued with power from on high'" [Works, 1:590].
Donald Winter has observed that the
occasion in which Christ "breathed" on His disciples and commanded
them to "receive the Holy Ghost" took place on the evening of His
resurrection. The parallel account in
Luke 24 gives additional details of that Easter evening. After suddenly appearing in the presence of
His terrified followers He reminded them of the words He had formerly spoken to
them concerning all that "must be fulfilled, which were written in the law
of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the Psalms concerning [Himself]."
Verse 45 follows with these amazing
words: "Then opened he their understanding, that they might understand the
scriptures." By weaving together
the recorded accounts of that evening, Winter concluded that a token of the
Spirit was imparted to these disciples to the end that their understanding
might be opened. In other words an
unusual enabling of the Spirit was given by Christ whereby His disciples could
now understand as never before those Old Testament Scriptures that spoke of
Him.
Luke also recorded that the
disciples "worshiped Him and returned to Jerusalem with great
joy." Such joy, Winter explained,
was the effect, not only of the reality of their Lord's resurrection and
ascension, but the result of the Spirit's influence received on that Easter
evening. Such influence quickened their
anticipation of that "promise of the Father" pledged to them by their
Lord before He was parted from them.
Often times the expectant seeker also experiences such joy and influence
of the Spirit through prevenient grace.
In contrast to these views, there
are those who believe that on this occasion in John 20:22 the disciples,
without the full 120, received the Holy Ghost in regenerating power. Such a view, however, is not sufficiently
supported by the Scriptures. For
instance, one need only take a close look at the very next chapter, John 21. Here we read that some days after their
Lord's resurrection, Peter, Thomas, Nathaniel, James, and John were found to
have gone back to their fishing. On
this particular occasion they had been fishing all night without success. But by casting the net on the right side of
the ship in obedience to Jesus' instruction, they not only caught a multitude
of fish, but were invited to a breakfast of fish and bread that the Master had
personally prepared for them.
On this occasion Jesus asked Peter
three times, "Lovest thou me?"
Christ was asking Peter whether he loved Him with that supreme quality
of agape love. "Peter, do
you love me ardently, supremely, perfectly?" Peter, by his reply, confessed that his love was inferior to that
which the Master had in mind. His
answer was, "Lord; thou knowest that I love thee," using the Greek
verb phileo.
Though Peter had been one of
those present during the appearance of Jesus on that resurrection evening and
had been a recipient of that which the Master had imparted to them when
breathing upon them and saying, "Receive ye the Holy Ghost," he nevertheless
testifies some days later to an affection and esteem for the Master, but not
the kind of divine love one finds in the hearts of regenerated believers after
Pentecost. Those who are now justified
by faith experience this agape love shed abroad in their hearts by the
Holy Ghost which is given unto them (Rom 5:1‑5). The Thessalonians were not yet entirely
sanctified when Paul wrote his first letter to them, yet they possessed this agape love (1 Thess 1:3; 3:6; 4:9). According
to 1 John 4:7‑8, everyone who possesses this agape love is born of
God and those who do not possess it do not know God.
We find no evidence suggesting that
the rest of the disciples prior to Pentecost had any more love than did
Peter. They had all left Christ in the
hour of trial. Whatever they received
after His resurrection, when He breathed on them, there is no evidence that it
brought a transformation of their hearts such as regeneration brings. It is true that Jesus spoke of the disciples
as being clean. They did indeed belong
to Him. They were not of the
world. However, if Peter's triple
response to Jesus in John 21:15‑17 is any indication of the disciples' spiritual state, they did not yet enjoy that agape love that believers
after Pentecost uniformly received.
Were they saved? Of course they were. We believe they were saved as pious Jews
even before they first met Jesus. They
were saved while following Jesus, while believing and obeying His
teachings. Was their saving experience
such as can be equated with those who were regenerated by the power of the Holy
Spirit after Pentecost? No, it does not
appear so.
After Pentecost, the New Testament
Church lived in the Holy Ghost dispensation, just as we do today. Not only entire sanctification, but
regeneration is the work of a powerful effusion of the Holy Ghost. Bringing a dead soul to life in the new
birth takes the supernatural power of the Holy Spirit. It is then that one is made a new creature
in Christ Jesus. "Old things are
passed away; behold, all things are become new." This is the transformation accomplished in regenerated souls.
The Jews annually celebrated the
giving of the Mosaic law at the feast of Pentecost. God in His sovereignty chose that day when many from various
parts of the ancient world would not only be present, but see and experience
the pouring out of the Holy Spirit. Before that great day was over, three thousand, in addition to the 120,
had received the Spirit by meeting the conditions of repentance and baptism in
the name of the Lord Jesus Christ. God
in his sovereignty chose that day for the grand entrance of this glorious
dispensation of the Holy Ghost. As one
scholar assures us, "Pentecost was a unique and unrepeatable event in
salvation history. It marked the
beginning of a new era of divine grace.
Luke calls it the 'beginning' in Acts 11:15. . . . Pentecost marked the
giving of the Holy Spirit, the beginning of the new covenant, and the coming of
the kingdom of God."
The dispensation of the Father, or
the Jewish dispensation, afforded its blessings. The dispensation of the Son, enjoyed by the disciples while in
the presence of Jesus, provided greater blessings. But the dispensation of the Holy Ghost outshines all former
dispensations, showering even the new believer with blessings and privileges
unavailable to those living in all former dispensations.
In Mark 9:1 we read that Jesus had
previously made a promise to His disciples in the following words: "Verily
I say unto you, That there be some of them that stand here, which shall not
taste death, till they have seen the kingdom of God come with power." "This," wrote Adam Clarke,
"was the glorious Mediatorial kingdom which Jesus Christ was now about to
set up . . . and the diffusion of his Gospel throughout the world . . . the
establishment of the Christian Church."
Some of those who then stood with Jesus when He made this promise did
live to see the inauguration of the Messiah's kingdom on the Day of Pentecost
and even witnessed a mighty extension of that kingdom.
So it was that after His ascension
Jesus was glorified in the ultimate and superlative sense. It was then that He sent the Comforter as He
had promised. The Holy Spirit with
power was poured out on the day of Pentecost and Christ's kingdom was
inaugurated. In fact, on that very day,
His kingdom of righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Ghost began to be
set up in the hearts of men. Since
then, His kingdom is established in the hearts of all true believers.
FOR
YOUR INFORMATION
In 1778 John Wesley introduced
the first issue of a new Wesleyan Methodist publication which he named the Arminian
Magazine. For the last twenty‑four
years we have attempted to publish a magazine by the same name. Our purpose is to articulate and defend the
historic Wesleyan‑Arminian interpretation of Scripture. The Arminian Magazine current is sent
free of charge to 40 states and 12 foreign countries.
We estimate that each annual
subscription costs us $3.50. If you
appreciate this publication, we encourage you to send a contribution not only
to cover the cost of your subscription, but for someone else as well. If you know anyone who would profit from
receiving this publication, please send us their name and mailing address. Pastors we would be glad to send bulk copies
for your congregation. Send all
addresses to <victorpau@aol.com>
If you would like to know more about us, visit our web site at
<fwponline.cc> Send all contributions to: Fundamental Wesleyan
Publishers, 1370 Harrison Ave, Corydon, IN 47712.
THE
BRUSH ARBOR
Marion
Brown
Recent surveys, conducted by
the Barna Research Group, indicate that a doctrinal "rot" has gripped
even the most conservative segments of the Church. Barna concluded, "In many ways, we are living in an age of
theological anarchy." In Boiling
Point Barna also wrote, "The Church is rotting from the inside out,
crippled by abiblical theology."
In an attempt to be relevant, many
pastors simply use the Scripture as a point of departure for "feel
good" discourses on self‑help themes. The result is preaching that conforms to the popular culture,
when God intended the preaching of his Word to transform culture.
In an effort to promote biblically‑based,
doctrinal preaching, I want to reproduce some sermon outlines from the ministry
of Robert L. Brush. My purpose is not
to produce a polished homiletical specimen, but to provide a model from which
pastors and teachers might profit. Here is a message he preached in Brent,
Alabama on November 20, 1977.
THE
COMING JUDGMENT2 Corinthians 5: 9‑10
Introduction:
There is a future time when the dead will be raised and judged. This is a
universal appointment. The scriptures are very clear. Dan. 12:11‑15; Matt
25:31‑33; John 5:28‑29; Acts 24:15,25; Rev. 20:11‑15. I. The
quickness of the transition.A. The departed go immediately and without delay to
heaven or hell to await the resurrection. In reality when life leaves the body,
judgment is upon us.B. In Luke both the rich man and the beggar went to hell
and paradise respectively.C. God gives all men one chance; any second chances
are in His hand.
II
The judgment will be according to the record.A. The deeds of every man are kept
in God''s record books.B. The books will be opened.C. The book of life will be
opened.III The judgment will be QuickA. The scriptural term is ''in the
twinkling of an eye.''B. Another scriptural term ''at the last trumpet.''C. The
sequence ''the dead in Christ shall rise first.''D. ''Afterward they which are
alive and remain shall be caught up.''
IV.
The judgment will be without comparison.A. Those on the earth shall tremble and
men's hearts failing because of fear.B. The Trumpet Angels, Christ appearing,
graves opening, saints shouting, bodies coming out of the graves. Bones coming
out of museums and suddenly coming to life, phenomena that was never thought
possible.C. Wicked men shall cry for the rocks and mountains to fall on them
and hide them from the wrath of God. (2 Peter 3:10‑14)
V.
The Judgment will be complete and exacting.A. The Day of the Lord will come.B.
Every soul will be judged for every deed.C. We will be required to give account
for our deeds, words, thoughts and the intent of our heart.D. God searches the
hearts and motives and they will be made known to all.E. There is nothing
covered that shall not be revealed, nothing hid that shall not be made known.
VI.
The Judgment will be revealing.A. Then God's ways will be made known and the
wise council of His will upheld.B. Sins of the righteous will not be mentioned
to their disadvantage or condemnation.C. Everyone will receive a verdict.
Acquittal (Matt. 25:34) or condemnation (Matt. 25:41); but no one will be
exempted (Matt. 25:46). This judgment
is universal and eternal.
Conclusion
"Seeing then that all these
things shall be dissolved, what manner of persons ought we to be in all holy
conduct and godliness" (2 Peter 3:11).
REVIEWS
Lawrence
W. Wood, The Meaning of Pentecost in Early Methodism. Lanham, MD: Scarecrow Press, 2002. 401 pages.
The author of this study has
attempted to prove that the concept of "pentecostal perfection" had
its roots with the elderly John Wesley, through the influence of John
Fletcher. By the term "pentecostal
perfection," Wood understands "the baptism of the Spirit" as
synonymous with Christian perfection.
It is quite apparent that Wood is intent on proving, if he can, that
John Fletcher always identified the baptism of the Holy Ghost only with entire sanctification. He further
attempts, without full substantiation, to persuade the reader that numerous
early Methodist leaders followed Wesley and Fletcher in the identification of
"the baptism with the Spirit" with entire sanctification.
Although Wood makes the claim that
his book shows "Fletcher's 'reader response' interpretation of Pentecost
uniting it with sanctification was adapted largely from Wesley's Standard
Sermons," such an assertion is again unsubstantiated.
Throughout the entire book Wood
identifies the witness of the Spirit primarily with the experience of Christian
perfection. For instance, he refers to
a letter Fletcher wrote to a Miss Hatton, dated November 1, 1762, in which
Fletcher makes a distinction between justifying faith and believers' receiving
"the seal of their pardon."
This being "assured of that justification," is erroneously
interpreted by Wood as Christian perfection.
It is surprising that Wood should
consistently endeavor to convince his readers that Wesley and other early
Methodists considered a believer to be without the constant and inward dwelling
of the Holy Spirit until attaining Christian perfection. In fact the reader is led to believe that
the constant enjoyment of the Spirit of adoption is found only among those who
have attained Christian perfection.
This is confuted by many of Wesley's writings, both early and late,
including his sermons on the "Witness of the Spirit," wherein he
plainly taught that the Spirit of adoption was to be enjoyed by all justified
believers. To suppose with Wood that
"Wesley repeatedly identified assurance primarily with Christian
perfection" is a mistake.
Wood makes the assertion that
"Wesley eventually came to alter his opinion about justified believers
receiving the witness of the Spirit . . . as shown in his sermon, 'On Faith' (1788)." Any unprejudiced reader,
however, who is familiar with Wesley's writings will be persuaded otherwise
when closely reviewing this sermon.
While it is true that Wesley never links the witness of the Spirit with
the "faith of a servant," we find him unequivocally assuring us here
that the "faith of a son" or justifying faith is accompanied with the
witness of the Spirit. There was never
any alteration in Wesley's views concerning this matter. In his A Plain Account of Christian
Perfection, he taught that there was a witness of the Spirit to a
believer's justification as well as to one' s entire sanctification. Writes Mr. Wesley, "I can know [that I
am entirely sanctified] no otherwise than I know that I am justified. 'Hereby know we that we are of God,' in
either sense [whether justified or entirely sanctified] 'by the Spirit He hath
given us.'" A Plain Account of Christian Perfection was last
revised in 1777 and we are assured that no significant changes in Mr. Wesley's
sentiments concerning its contents were ever evident beyond that date.
Interestingly, this author finds the
conversion of the three thousand on the day of Pentecost to be a problem. To those who had been "pricked in their
hearts" as a result of Peter's sermon, the Apostle clearly promised the
receiving of "the gift of the Holy Ghost" upon their meeting the
conditions of repentance and baptism "for the remission of sins"
(Acts 2:37‑38). "This,"
says Wood, "was an extraordinary occurrence and not the usual pattern
because believers normally are justified believers first and later receive the
baptism with the Holy Spirit." Such
a statement reflects a general denial of that mighty effusion of the Spirit so
necessary to the bringing of a penitent from the state of spiritual death to a
resurrection of spiritual life in the new birth.
Later in his book, Wood refers to
Fletcher's closing passages in his Essay on Truth and confidently
asserts that "Fletcher believes this [conversion of the three thousand on
the day of Pentecost] was an extraordinary event when the Jewish believers
simultaneously received forgiveness of sins through faith in Christ and
received that fullness of sanctification through faith in the
Spirit." Anyone who wishes to
review that part of Fletcher' s writings, however, will not find him making the
claim that the three thousand received fullness of sanctification on the day of
Pentecost. What the Scripture
describes concerning all new converts at and immediately following the day of
Pentecost is the expected norm and standard of all who are regenerated in every
age of this Holy Ghost dispensation.
It cannot be proved that Fletcher or
Wesley "believed that, on the day of Pentecost, all new converts were
simultaneously justified and fully sanctified" as Wood claims. This minimal view of the Spirit's initial work
of sanctification in the heart is repeatedly apparent. Both Wesley and Fletcher consistently
maintained that the work of holiness is begun in regeneration. Wood fails to acknowledge that both
regeneration and entire sanctification are made possible only upon the descent
of the Holy Spirit during and after the day of Pentecost. Initial salvation in the work of
regeneration was sometimes equated by Wesley as a "restoration [if but a
partial restoration] of the image of God in the soul."
Wesley and Fletcher taught the
baptism of the Holy Spirit to be the instrumental means of one's total process
of salvation. Neither man confined the
baptism of the Holy Spirit to the work of entire sanctification nor Christian
perfection. Their holistic view of the
baptism of the Spirit is largely overlooked by Wood. For instance, in response to Jesus' promise to His disciples,
"ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost," Wesley writes: "And
so are all true believers to the end of the world." In response to Romans 8:9, "Now if any
man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his," Wesley comments:
"He is not a member of Christ; not a Christian; not in a state of
salvation" [Explanatory Notes].
There is no doubt that Fletcher, in
his "Last Check to Antinomianism," refers to entire sanctification as
a work of God in a believer's heart by the baptism of the Holy Ghost. However, Wood overlooks the fact that
Fletcher also makes reference to justification and regeneration being wrought
by the baptism of the Holy Ghost. This
can be substantiated by various passages in volumes 3 and 4 of his Works. In his "A Sermon on the New
Birth," he gives encouragement to those seeking justification: "Yes,
you shall be baptized by the Holy Ghost for the remission of sins, and
justified freely by faith" [Works, 4:115]. In his letters on the "Spiritual
Manifestation of the Son of God," he assures his readers that to "be
baptized with the Holy Ghost and spiritual fire, is the common blessing which
can alone make a man a Christian" [Works, 4:287].
Wood highlights what he refers to as
"a rich variety of Pentecostal terms," such as "the love of God
poured out in the heart by the Holy Spirit," "the abiding witness of
the Spirit," "the kingdom within," "the comforts of the
Holy Ghost," "righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy
Ghost." These descriptive terms,
along with others such as, "happy in God," "the Spirit of
adoption," and "the abiding witness," he would identify with the
experience of Christian perfection. However,
it is well known that Wesley and Fletcher both used such scriptural terms to
describe the experience of justified believers, as well as the entirely
sanctified.
On the day of Pentecost the Holy
Ghost was, according to Wesley, given in his sanctifying graces. Only then were those "who 'waited for
the promise of the Father' . . . made more than conquerors over sin." Being made "conquerors over sin," Wood takes to be a common phrase for Christian perfection. This again is a confounding of Wesley's
teachings. It is true that Wesley often
mentions being "saved from sin" (that is, inbred sin) as being
synonymous with Christian perfection, but he also taught that the newly
justified and regenerated soul is initially sanctified and made "so far
perfect as not to commit sin."
Both Wesley and Fletcher embraced
the historic and scriptural view of one baptism, understanding water baptism to
be symbolic of Spirit baptism. Wood
discards this view and speaks rather of two unconnected baptisms. He conceives water baptism to be analogous
to one's "Easter" or point of justification, while baptism of the
Spirit is viewed as a time of one's "Pentecost" and attainment of
Christian perfection. Thus in
accordance with certain ecclesiastical traditions, Wood sees the outward ritual
of water baptism as representing the work of justification, while the laying on
of hands in the ceremony of confirmation to be a marking of the believer's
attainment of Christian perfection in Spirit baptism.
Making "birth of water"
the essence of "justification by faith" in the initial experience of
salvation, while making "birth of the Spirit" represent full
sanctification are favorite suppositions of the author. He endeavors to describe both Wesley and
Fletcher as equating the "being born of God with Christian
perfection." This does not,
however, represent the teachings of Mr. Wesley. To both Wesley and Fletcher, baptism in the Spirit was considered
to be the divine power necessary for bringing about spiritual birth and a
mighty transformation in regeneration. It is then that the soul is resurrected to spiritual life and the love
of God is shed abroad in the heart. By
the aid of the Spirit, the new believer is to go on to perfection. Both Wesley and Fletcher were mindful of Paul's
words to the Corinthian believers who were not yet entirely sanctified, but who
were assured of being inwardly possessed of the Spirit (1 Cor 3:16; 6:19). "For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body" (1 Cor 12:13).
Wood is partially correct when he
says that "Fletcher believed the interior meaning of being baptized with
the Holy Spirit may happen suddenly when one is initially converted, as with
the multitudes on the day of the original Pentecost." Indeed, Fletcher did believe that an initial
baptism of the Holy Spirit was given to one who was truly regenerated and born
of the Spirit. It would be a mistake,
however, to assume that Fletcher looked upon this initial baptism of the Spirit
as synonymous with Christian perfection.
Near the close of the book, the
author makes the following true statement: "Fletcher believed the baptism
with the Spirit was an ongoing dynamic event always being updated in one's
daily life. It was never static,
absolute attainment, representing a final achievement. For Fletcher, today's reception of the
Spirit's fullness became tomorrow's promise of greater infillings of the
Spirit."
In conclusion I find that the
author's claim of a significant change in Wesley's views later in life
concerning Pentecost's relation to New Testament holiness to be greatly
exaggerated. In his Journal,
dated September 1, 1778, the elderly Wesley confessed that he had not made any
essential addition to his knowledge in Divinity. Then with a final statement of strong conviction he assures his
readers that "Forty years ago I knew and preached every Christian doctrine
which I preach now."
Dr. Wood has worked very hard to
force both Wesley and Fletcher to say what he wants them to say. He skews the meaning of their statements so
as to fit his favorite theological preconceptions. The overall effect of this
study by Laurence Wood is that of leaving the reader with a view which
consistently minimizes the new birth and relegates both justification and
entire sanctification to a standard far below that found in the writings of
both Wesley and Fletcher.
‑Joseph
D. McPherson
What
Love is This? Calvinism's Misrepresentation of God.
Sisters, Oregon: Loyal Publishing,
2002.
500
pages.
Dave Hunt is a
nationally known speaker and teacher on biblical issues. He admits that he had
hardly given Calvinism a thought for years prior to publishing this book. It
wasn't until he became repeatedly confronted with the topic in conversations
with other people that he began to look at it more closely. He says this book
was one he did not want to write because of its controversial nature. Nevertheless,
with Calvinism being so widely and aggressively promoted he felt it was time
that its teachings "be faced and dealt with thoroughly" (p. 15).
Hunt is very
thorough in his research on Calvinism. He provides plenty of quotes from John
Calvin and his Institutes, from leading Calvinists of our day-R. C.
Sproul, John Piper, James White, and includes the more classical Calvinist's
such as Arthur Pink, Edwin Palmer, and Loraine Boettner. These quotations
provide the reader with an accurate description of Calvinism's biblical and
philosophical system. This is probably his most valuable contribution.
Remaining true to his
book title and general thesis, Hunt says, "We consider TULIP to be a libel
against our loving and merciful God as He reveals himself both in His Word and
in human conscience" (p. 304). Hunt believes,
the Bible's clear language would
compel any reader to conclude that God loves all, that God is genuinely
striving to convince wicked men to repent and to accept His offer of salvation,
that men have the capability of responding when drawn by the Holy Spirit and
convicted of their guilt and need, and that though all are drawn, some are
convinced and willingly respond while others refuse. (p. 115)
Hunt also
believes that "Calvinism drives us into an irrational dead end" (p.
105), because it asks us to hold to a number of intellectual
"paradoxes" which are nothing but outright contradictions. For
example,
Palmer calls it a paradox that "although man is totally depraved and unable to believe, and that although
faith is a gift of God produced by the irresistible work of the Holy Spirit,
nevertheless, it is up to man to believe. He has the duty to obey God's command
to believe." This is no paradox; it is a contradiction. No one can justly be
held accountable for failing to do what it is impossible for him to do. (p.
131)
Throughout the
book, Hunt raises all the biblical and philosophical problems that have
continually plagued the theology of Calvinism. While this is a strength of the
book, it nevertheless has a number of shortcomings of which I will mention just
a few.
Hunt is an inconsistent Calvinist in that he holds to the fifth point of Calvinism-perseverance of the
saints (otherwise known as unconditional security or once saved,
always saved), while denying the other four points. He does voice
disagreements with how this point is articulated by Classical Calvinists, but
in the end he adheres to its foundational teaching-it is impossible for genuine
believers to develop a sinful and unbelieving heart that turns away from God
(Heb 3:12).
Hunt
disappointedly makes Jacob Arminius appear to be someone who believed in
unconditional security in writing, "with these words, [Arminius] defended
himself against the false charge that he taught the doctrine of falling away:
"At no period have I asserted 'that believers do finally decline or fall
away from faith or salvation'" (pp. 76‑77).
While this quote
may be located in The Works of James Arminius [1:741], Hunt does not
give the full argument of Arminius. On
the next page Arminius explained that it was impossible for believers, "as
long as they remain believers, to decline [or fall away] from salvation.
. . . On the other hand, if believers
fall away from the faith and become unbelievers, it is impossible for them to
do otherwise than decline from salvation." Thus, Arminius concluded, "It is possible for believers
finally to fall away or decline from the faith." In other words, Arminius never taught that one moment of faith
secures one's eternal destiny, which is so popularly taught today by modified
Calvinists - and apparently by Dave Hunt as well.
Carl Bangs, the
authority on Arminius, wrote in the annotated edition of The Works of James
Arminius, that the section just quoted, as well as another section on the
perseverance of the saints,
reveal the leaning of Arminius against the doctrine of the final
perseverance of all true believers.
The restrictions in these two
passages are perfectly in unison with the rest of our author's system, which
recognizes, as believers, those christian characters alone who continue
to believe and do not fall from their own steadfastness. (2 Pet.
3:17.) But it also accounts it possible
for those very characters to imitate the change in conduct of that faithful
and wise steward, described by our Lord (Luke 12:42) as saying in his
heart, "My Lord delayeth his coming!; and who [in consequence] began
to beat the men‑servants. . . . The Lord of that servant will come in
a day when he looketh not for him, and will cut him in sunder, and will appoint
him his portion with the unbelievers!" [Works, 1:665].
Hunt's book has garnered a lot of
attention by Calvinists and Non‑Calvinists. Go to Amazon.com and see over
80 online reviews of his book. Most of the reviewers either give the book 5
stars or 1 star. It is neither that stellar nor that awful. In my opinion, Hunt
is too emotional, unnecessarily repetitive, and occasionally awkward in his
flow of thought. For the most part his exegesis is adequate, at other times weak
to sometimes poor. A much better book that avoids these weaknesses and defends
the conditional security of the believer has previous been reviewed in the Arminian-Grace,
Faith, Free Will. Contrasting Views of Salvation: Calvinism and Arminianism,
by Robert Picirilli.
Readers should note that Multnomah
will be publishing a book called Debating Calvinism: Five Points, Two Views.
It is to be released in February of 2004, with James White and Dave Hunt
debating the two views.
‑Steve
Witzki
Darius L Salter, America's
Bishop: The Life of Francis Asbury. Nappanee, IN: Francis Asbury
Press of Evangel Publishing House, 2003.
435 pages.
When I first went into the ministry, one of my Christian
heroes was, and still is, Bishop Asbury. For me he is still a knight in shining
armor, the prime mover and shaker of early American Methodism, and most of all,
a man greatly used of God in the establishing of the greatest evangelical
denomination of his time. My feelings toward
Asbury were enhanced when I read his biography by L. C. Rudolph. That biography was outstanding and gave me a
thirst to learn more about "my" bishop. However, Dr. Salter's biography of Asbury, while well researched
and generally good, will receive a more critical review.
Like many writers, Salter starts with Asbury and his
early life in England. Then he follows Asbury as he grows under the leadership
of Wesley to become a missionary to America. Asbury comes to this nation when people were beginning their quest for
freedom from the English government. Over the course of time, Asbury is the
only missionary that remains and continues to minister throughout the war. Finally, the end of the war and the great
Christmas Conference arrives. Asbury is ordained and assumes
the office of bishop. He then took
that task of bishop, as described in the early church, to its highest biblical
level. Serving by example, Asbury
said, "my brethren seem unwilling to leave the cities, but I think I will
show them the way." He took his
ordination as God's ordaining him to a great task. Salter does a thorough job in tracing the Asbury effect in
American Methodism and the early American culture.
However, some of Salter's seeming criticism of Asbury
appeared unnecessary to me. For
example, concerning the James O 'Kelly debate and split, Salter says, "The
tunnel vision with which Asbury operated often made him insensitive to the
desires and feelings of others." Was it tunnel vision or a higher vision concerning the task or call that
God gave to him when he became a bishop? In another instant, Salter says that Asbury "perpetuated the Indian stereotype that was held by most
American pioneers." While it is
true that the Gospel is for all peoples, I don't think that our modern day
criticism of the past is totally fair. Simply put, Asbury did not reach out to the Indians as we feel that he
should have and could have. Salter also
says this concerning the spirit of the camp meeting revivals:
There
was little to provide emotional release for women and men who worked sixteen
hour days and
faced the constant threat of death. The confrontational
preaching of
the Word, which
called for a divine‑human
encounter, released the emotions of guilt,
anxiety, and loneliness. No one did it better than the Methodists.
This is almost word for word
how my secular college history professor explained this time of revival. This
sort of explanation for such a spirit of revival, while making sense humanly
speaking, gives no real credit to the working of God's prevenient grace. Salter's use of these kinds of phrases and
remarks seems to take away from the overall value and greatness of Bishop
Asbury.
Beyond this complaint, the book has
a lot of great information on my hero. There will be others who will write
about America 's Bishop, but before they do, they will need to consult Salter's
present work. Salter's biography of
Asbury would be a good addition to any pastor's library.
‑Dennis
Hartman
