The Problem With Self Control - Rick Lambert

 "Self is a fleshly weapon. It's useless in spiritual battles." I really liked this study that Rick Lambert (author of Polycarp: A Destroyer of Our gods) is doing on 'self control', that the term is actually translated incorrectly in our Bibles and that there is a better term that captures the meaning of the original greek word better.  He is working on a book that will deal with this concept (among other things). In this talk, he is doing a test run to try to get his explanation of the concept perfected.

Your Old Testament Sermon Needs to Get Saved - By David King

 

I've known something about the "Christocentric" hermeneutic for many years now.  I need to admit up front that I've always disagreed with it in theory, but have never really fully formulated why I disagree with it.  I saw 'Your Old Testament Sermon Needs to Get Saved' by David King and figured that it would be good chance to read the whole argument for Christocentrism in preaching and think it through more thoroughly.  

One of the main arguments that King makes for a Christocentric interpretation of everything is the Lordship of Jesus.  "We start with the simple but sweeping confession: Jesus is Lord. Take a second to ponder the weight of that three word sentence.  Could there be a more persuasive argument for preaching Christ from the Old Testament? If Jesus is Lord, then He is Lord over the Old Testament - and Lord over our Old Testament sermons, too." At first, it was hard to figure out how to reply to such an argument. A lot of the arguments in the book are similar to the one above in that they seem to be made up of 'gotcha' questions and statements, such that you feel wrong disagreeing with them.  Here are some other snippets:  

"do you believe that there are portions of the Old Testament that have nothing to do with Jesus?" 

"If Christ is the final word from God, then all previous words lead to Him"

"Everything about the Old Testament flows to and through Jesus."

 These arguments are too vague. Take for instance the first one, that Jesus is Lord.  Of course Jesus is Lord! But what does that entail? One could use a similar argument to say that since He is Lord over everything then He is Lord of any secular book too, such as Moby Dick. Should we preach Christ from Moby Dick?  Should we preach him from Star Wars?

And then of course you have the "Emmaus road" argument, "And beginning from Moses and from all the prophets, he interpreted to them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself."(Luk 24:27 ASV) I've always read that to mean that Jesus pointed out that the Scriptures had clearly prophesied about Him, and that He went through the Scriptures and showed them the particular places that prophesied of Himself, not that He showed them that He was in (or the point of) EVERY SINGLE THING written in them. King also uses what Christ said later that night to try to further his point: "These are my words that I spoke to you while I was still with you, that everything written about Me in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms must be fulfilled."(24:44-47). I have always read "everything written about me" as a clarification, that all of the prophecies of Christ in those books must be fulfilled, not that those books were prophesying about Him in everything they said. I've never read those passages as if they said, "Everything in the Law of Moses, the prophets and Psalms was speaking of Me." Or "He showed them that everything that the prophets wrote, and everything written in the Scriptures concerned Himself."  I see "the things concerning Himself" and "everything written about me" as narrowing the focus to particular passages, not encompassing everything in the law, prophets and Psalms. 

Next, the author says that "the apostles adopted a broad prophetic understanding of the Old Testament". The illustrative verse used for this section is Matthew's pointing out the fulfillment of a prophecy in Hosea, "Out of Egypt have I called my Son", in Mary and Joseph taking Jesus and coming back to Israel after having gone to Egypt in obedience to God's command to Joseph to flee there. Many commentators have thought that Matthew was viewing "Israel" as a type of Christ because the statement before "out of Egypt I called My Son" says,"When Israel was a child, then I loved him" (Hosea 11:1).  I don't see that Matthew absolutely has to be viewed as interpreting a passage about Israel by applying it to Christ - one could make the case that the juvenile Israel who was loved is not the same as the Son who was called from out of Egypt.  Especially since Matthew only specifically states that the return of Mary, Joseph and Jesus from Egypt was fulfilled by the particular statement "out of Egypt I called My Son" and he doesn't mention that it fulfills the statement about God loving Israel when Israel was a child. 

King states that,"Christ can be proclaimed from old Testament texts in a manner that pushes the boundaries of our own prophetic understanding. Matthew wasn't mistaken." I agree, Matthew wasn't mistaken but I don't see that he was necessarily pushing the boundaries, and I would probably argue the same about any other prophecy. I think that more, perhaps all, of the "Messianic prophecies" are more explicitly speaking of Christ than many people assume. Many seem to think that some of the Old Testament texts quoted in the New are not explicitly speaking of Christ but had a 'secondary fulfillment' in Christ, that they had 'double' fulfillments. I think that a case can be made for assuming that any Old Testament texts that are said, in the New Testament, to be speaking of Christ are direct prophecies of Christ and  that we need to align our understanding and study of those texts around that assumption. Even Christ called his Jewish disciples fools and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets had spoken(Luke 24:25), I rather think that heavily implies that the prophecies that spoke of Him were very plain, very obvious. 

King thinks that if Christ is not preached in every sermon, then you are preaching a "synagogue sermon", not a Christian sermon.  "…. you must consider whether the Father means for His Son to be preached as an appendix to the sermon rather than as the heart. Until the conclusion, such sermons are suitable for the synagogue." He seems to think that 2 Timothy 3:15-17 (Are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. All Scripture is breathe out by God and is profitable for teaching…") supports his point.  "To be just a tad provocative, Paul isn't saying that all Scripture is profitable for making us competent Jews. He's saying that all Scripture is profitable for making us competent Christians. And we don't have to infer that this is what Paul means - he states it plainly. The sacred writings, he says, are able to make us wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus."  Why would we assume that the Scriptures are only profitable (and wise for salvation) for Christians if you preach Christ from every text, rather than preach what the text says?

 What if a pastor is preaching through the book of Ezra, and on this particular Sunday he is in Ezra chapter one and he doesn't preach Christ as THE POINT of these texts. Rather, after exegeting the text, he applies it by talking about how God's promises and prophecies always come to pass, and he goes on to emphasize the greatness of God, and how every single detail of His prophecies come to pass; he reminds the people that later down the line every detail about the Messiah and His salvation would happen exactly as foretold but he doesn't focus on this, he just mentions it, and moves back to talking about how God does exactly what He says, how God is sovereign even over our salvation, reminding this Christian congregation that they ought never to doubt God, they should always trust Him.  Was that not training in righteousness? Or was it not because the pastor applied the text by focusing upon God's sovereignty rather than on Jesus Christ and His redemptive work? 

 Even if one does believe that one should preach Christ from every text, King warns that one can preach too much of Christ or too little of Him, you can also do it in a "kooky" way (finding Christ in the wood of Noah's ark, that the wood symbolizes the cross).   "The path between the text and Christ is not found in a twister hermeneutic. Our goal instead is to understand how the text is fulfilled in Jesus." I don't understand. Why would finding Christ in the wood of Noah's ark be wrong? The more you see of Christ the better, right? Here's another excerpt from the book which might help you understand my confusion: "Jesus drives an interpretive stake in the ground by in asserting that all the Old testament is fulfilled in Him. In other words, Jesus changes how we read the Old Testament. Not just parts of the Old Testament, but all of it is fulfilled in Him! Every dot and iota of every passage - every jot and tittle…..Jesus' fulfillment language here clearly goes beyond obvious messianic promises and prophecies and patterns. It includes everything!……Jesus is the goal of every detail in the Bible."  I don't understand, based on arguments like this, how you could go wrong with connecting Christ to every single thing in the Old Testament. 

King says that, "Failing to preach Christ from the Old Testament is a serious problem. It's exegetically and theologically wrong. It dishonors Jesus as the fulfillment of Scripture and the centerpiece of salvation history.  It leads people astray by perpetuating a Christless notion of Old Testament and, worse, by inadvertently directing them to rely on God, or even themselves apart from Christ."  I don't understand these statements. I don't think I know of any pastor  who promotes the idea that Christ was never spoken of or referred to in the Old Testament. Nor do I understand how they would rely on God or themselves apart from Christ. I have actually noticed that "seeing Christ" and focusing on Him has become THE MOST important thing in some Christians' goals over and above God's plain revelation in any given text (even over and above revelation coming directly from Christ Himself). What a text truly says becomes irrelevant as long as someone's view of Christ is built up, as long as Christ is magnified, it doesn't really seem to matter what the any given text actually says. 

Let me critique one more thing in particular. The author uses Jeremiah 29:11 as an example of how to preach Christ from any given text. "…God's plans for the welfare of exiled Israel is a prophetic promise. Since all the promises of God find their Yes in Christ (2 Cor 1:20), you must locate the fulfillment of this verse not in modern-day Israel, or America, or in any other nation-state but in Jesus and, by extension, those who are united to Jesus through faith. Whether Israeli, or Palestinian, American…..a person receives the benefits of Jeremiah 29:11 only in Christ."  I agree that one mustn't locate the fulfillment in modern day Israel (as if it were already fulfilled) or America, or any other nation-state. But I do believe that the fulfillment, whether past or future, will have happened to Jews, the ethnic descendants of Jacob, and not to Gentiles.  A few verses later on seem to explain what the fulfillment of this verse would look like (after Israel has called upon the Lord with all their heart): "And I will be found of you, saith Jehovah, and I will turn again your captivity, and I will gather you from all the nations, and from all the places whither I have driven you, saith Jehovah; and I will bring you again unto the place whence I caused you to be carried away captive."(Jer 29:14 ASV)     

The people of Israel were promised that they would be gathered from all the lands and brought back to Israel when they seek the Lord wholeheartedly.  The promise to return them to the land is repeated many times in the Old Testament (Deut. 30,Ezek 37,36,39, 39,  Jeremiah 23: 1-8, Amos 9…etc.).  But of course, the Israelites cannot seek God with their whole heart on their own, apart from His grace. Because of their innate inability to make themselves seek Him, will what God repeatedly told Israel through the prophets about their being brought back to the land permanently never come true? That's absurd! The days are coming when those prophecies will be fulfilled. Though many individual people of all ethnicities are the beneficiaries of the New Covenant at present, one day God is going to establish the New Covenant with Israel as a nation (Jeremiah32:36-44, 31:31-37)). God clarifies in His prophecies through the prophet Ezekiel that He is not going to act favorably toward them because they have all of a sudden changed and are now seeking Him, Oh no! there is no indication that they have changed themselves for the better. Rather, God says that He will act Himself, not doing it for their sake but for His holy name, He will create in them the required conditions of the fulfillment of the promise to bring them back to the land of Israel: "A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you; and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you a heart of flesh. And I will put my Spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes, and ye shall keep mine ordinances, and do them. And ye shall dwell in the land that I gave to your fathers; and ye shall be my people, and I will be your God."(Eze 36:26-28 ASV)  He also said this through the prophet Jeremiah: "Behold, I will gather them from all the countries to which I drove them in my anger and my wrath and in great indignation. I will bring them back to this place, and I will make them dwell in safety. And they shall be my people, and I will be their God. I will give them one heart and one way, that they may fear me forever, for their own good and the good of their children after them. I will make with them an everlasting covenant, that I will not turn away from doing good to them. And I will put the fear of me in their hearts, that they may not turn from me. I will rejoice in doing them good, and I will plant them in this land in faithfulness, with all my heart and all my soul. 'For thus says the LORD: Just as I have brought all this great disaster upon this people, so I will bring upon them all the good that I promise them.'"(Jer 32:37-42 ESV) Even in the more famous New Covenant prophecy in Jeremiah 31, after having promised to make a New Covenant with Israel, God emphasizes that ethnic Israel will always be a nation before Him, that He will not fully cast them off despite all that they had done.

And thus Paul(Romans 9-12) explains to the Roman Christians that God is still going to do what He promised to the Jews as a people, and that Christian Gentiles shouldn't become arrogant toward the Jews, emphasizing that God will one day save the whole nation of Israel, through Christ's salvatory work just as He saves us individually through that work (11:26-27): "And in this way all Israel will be saved, as it is written, 'The Deliverer will come from Zion, he will banish ungodliness from Jacob'; 'and this will be my covenant with them when I take away their sins.'" (Rom 11:26-27 ESV) And I say all of that to make the point that I don't believe that one can make a true biblical case that Christian Gentiles are ultimately the ones addressed in that particular promise in Jeremiah 29, and also to note that many Christians seem to have already arrived at what Paul warned against: them becoming arrogant toward the Jews (Rom 11:25-36), as though God is fully done with the ethnic descendants of Jacob as a people and that He has replaced them with the 'true Israel': the church.  

This is quite long so I had better wrap up.  My last argument against a christocentric hermeneutic is that Jesus Himself didn't preach Himself from every Old Testament text. For instance, in Matthew 24:15, Jesus spoke of Daniel's prophecy of the Abomination of Desolation, He didn't preach Himself from that text, He told the people what to do when it came to pass. When you see the abomination, run! He demonstrated that He didn't read it as a symbol of something spiritual, or of Himself in some way, but rather as a particular thing that would happen in the future that they were supposed to be watching out for.  I don't see how anyone is dishonoring God and not respecting Christ's Lordship by preaching what the text says, obeying God's will, submitting to His sovereignty, obeying Jesus' commands, mimicking good examples of faith, believing all of the prophecies (including Christ's Revelation to the churches about things to come) and even just by reading the historical accounts and 'seeing' what God ordained to happen in the past.  What does Jesus command? Do it. Where did Jesus look and point to? The Father. So should we. Jesus honored the Scriptures, preaching them as though they meant what they said, pointing out that people were not understanding their plain meaning, not their hidden meaning. We don't want to be guilty of the same.

Many thanks to the folks at Moody Publishers for sending me a free review copy of this book! (My review did not have to be favorable)

This book may be purchased at Amazon.com

Quote of the Day

 The good news is that demonstration of what God is accomplishing in spite of me.  It makes it the best news possible because it doesn't depend upon my right response. Even after Jesus told Peter he was going to deny Him, if faith then was built on his (Peter's) response, then he failed in faith! But Jesus had already told them, before He admonished them regarding "don't let your hearts be troubled", 'You're going to do this' (to deny Him, to forsake Him), 'this is going to happen, He didn't say "you might", He didn't say "you might".  "You will!" That's the beauty of the Gospel! We're troubled in every way! And yet God is still doing His work! We doubt Him, and God is doing His work, we may even deny Him and yet God is still doing His work , in us, through us, for us - bringing us to that glorious conclusion that "this is what I've (God has) done." And so we go in faith to the Word, and that Word builds that faith. We don't  go with our faith to the Word, we go with the faith given to us by the Spirit of God to the Word and that (faith) is built and developed

- Rick Lambert

(Author of Polycarp: A destroyer of our gods)

From his sermon: Love's Message

Quote of the Day

 Speaking on James 1:14: 

Temptation finds its strength and source from within ourselves. The brutal truth of our sin, personal sinning, is that it is all in and of ourselves - not only can't God be blamed, but no other (person or thing) can be blamed - it is sad to realize how many still trust the validity of their 'blame shifting' and then add an extra 'perimeter fence' of protection by no longer identifying sin as sin - sinners are encouraged by other sinners to find shelter in their being a victim.

The process is ls illustrated by James as being , first, each person being tempted (tested to prove slavery to sin) by their own desire/lust (ἐπιθυμίας - passions, inner cravings and inclinations) - this process of temptation first "lures" (NASB has "carried away") - "lure" is a better descriptive word since it was used of luring a fish with bait and visuals. 

Then they are "enticed" (another hunting/fishing term) and so are trapped and ensnared - there is an attraction, leading to exploration, ending in entrapment (hooked) - these lusts then become the trap itself (prison, unhookable hook).

 

This can be pictured as if there are internal counselors working to achieve an inner desire - the counselor of feelings begins to prod us for attention for some "needed relief" or fulfillment, followed closely by the advisor of reason (not considering that feelings has paid-off/bribed or blackmailed reason by its relentlessness and insistence) - the advisor of reason is then accompanied by the scholar of memory, vividly portraying past yielding, only showing photos of the "good times" - with all such counsel, we play along (disregarding the Holy Spirit) and so the manager of decision, believing all needed research has been dutifully done, signs-off to action (sin). 

So rather than being a victim of the external influences to sin, we discover we are instigators, working with even the enemies from without to conquer any convicting and motivating work of God within us - the "conspiracy" ends up being us.

- Don Lambert

From his sermon series on James

You can find more quotes on my quotes blog: snickerdoodlesquotes.blogspot.com

Getting Over Yourself - By Dean Inserra

It's been a while since I've seen a book I wanted to review.  I was looking at the Moody Publishers Newsroom website and the title of this book caught my eye:  Getting Over Yourself: Trading Believe-In-Yourself Religion for Christ-Centered Christianity.  

If I remember correctly, when I was looking at the preview of the book online the chapter titles were a big part of what convinced me that this would be a good read, Here's a little sample of them:

1.LOSERVILLE : Is Christianity for the Cool, Trendy, and Successful?

4. HASHTAG FILTER: The Promise of a Socially Approved Life

5. THIS IS SO BORING: The New Prosperity Cardinal Sin of Settling For The Mundane

I love the title of Chapter 5, it's so true! The living a mundane life really does seem to be a sin in our age. It really looked like this guy had a lot of the same thoughts my dad (a pastor) has had on the state of modern 'Christianity', so I ordered the book.

Of course, it turned out that the chapter titles weren't the only interesting thing; their content is also interesting. Inserra does a lot of Biblical critiquing of modern popular Christianity.  But the critique often hits close to home, many of his chapters are   quite convicting and yet oddly comforting in that they are reminders that the Christian life is supposed to be hard, and that dying to self really will be painful. Here's an excerpt from one:

"Jesus told His disciples, 'If anyone wants to follow after me, let him deny himself, take up his cross daily, and follow me. For whoever wants to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life because of me will save it' (Luke 9:23-24). Jesus is calling  HIs disciples to attend a daily funeral for their own ambitions and pride. The cross was not a piece of jewelry in New Testament times. It wasn't a living room decoration carved nicely to fit on the mantel. There weren't crosses hanging in any place of worship. A cross meant one thing: death. It was a curse to hang on one, to receive capital punishment in a gruesome manner for crimes committed. It would be the equivalent of being told to pick up your lethal injection or electric chair. For Jesus to tell His followers to carry their crosses (prior to HIs own death, which would probably have shed light on the metaphor) meant a call to die to themselves. This probably sounded insane, but is much better than the alternative given in the next verse: 'For what does it benefit someone if he gains the whole world, and yet loses or forfeits himself?' (Luke 9:25)"

One little statement in the book I found particularly thought provoking: "Our problem is when we're trying to use Christianity to be a better version of ourselves rather than a more accurate reflection of Him…" That truly fits more with our having become a new creature (not just bettered creatures), in Christ, and turns the focus away from having our own talents used by God and level sets our gaze toward whatever work God has for us, whether it utilized our talents or not.  After all, God will probably often put us in positions that we are not naturally talented at/fit for to show His power in us.  

As I mentioned, my dad is a pastor, and he has done lots of counseling over the years.  At one point, I found a section of this book particularly startling in its correlation to what I know dad has experienced over the years in counselling wives in troubled marriages.  My mom can attest to it as she accompanies him in these counseling sessions. Inserra's list of what wives will say: "'I feel like I settled' 'What if I married the wrong person?'….. 'I just feel like I need to focus on myself for a while…. And then the famous line: 'I believe that God just wants to be happy.'" fits exactly what mom and dad have heard from unhappy wives. As the author laments: "The life God has given you, and (in the case of marriage and parenthood) has directly called you to, becomes a symbol for all that is keeping you from a 'truly' fulfilling life." This is all in the chapter about the sin of mundaneness. Our idea of the Christian life seems to be that of a life of self service, and self glorification rather than the service of God and others. In the book it's noted that: "Contentment is a borderline curse word in pop-Christianity, because not pursuing or desiring something 'better' is seen as settling for less than God's best……Ironically, the discontented life is one that is actually settling for less than God's best….The yellow brick road to God's best life for us is one of contentment in Christ, obedience to Christ, fulfillment in Christ."

Now, I need to mention that there were a couple of things in the book that I didn't think were particularly Biblical, but the only one that I feel the need to address is where Inserra talks about running into someone who had left the church he's the  pastor of, this woman had left because she had begun a same-sex relationship and knew that the church stood with God's Word against those types of relationship. He seems to indicate to her that she didn't have to leave - apparently she still would have been welcome to attend the worship services and Bible studies.  That concession really surprised me because of Biblical instructions like in the Apostle Paul's first letter to the Corinthians where he tells them not to associate with professing Christians who are living in unrepentant sexual immorality:  "I wrote to you in my letter not to associate with sexually immoral people— not at all meaning the sexually immoral of this world, or the greedy and swindlers, or idolaters, since then you would need to go out of the world. But now I am writing to you not to associate with anyone who bears the name of brother if he is guilty of sexual immorality or greed, or is an idolater, reviler, drunkard, or swindler—not even to eat with such a one. For what have I to do with judging outsiders? Is it not those inside the church whom you are to judge? God judges those outside. 'Purge the evil person from among you.'(1Co 5:9-13 ESV) Of course, if a fellow Christian sins, we don't immediately kick them out of the church, we try to restore them first (Gal 6:1, James 5:19-20, Titus 3:9-11…etc), but if they are persistent and will not repent, we must separate, and perhaps God will use the separation to lead them to repentance (2 Thess 3:14).

But for the most part Inserra seems very Biblically focused. To reiterate what he demonstrates and critiques clearly in the book: modern 'Christianity' is obsessed with self.  I especially see it in memes on Facebook,  like those depicting a girl saying to the Devil, "I am the storm" (how arrogant!).  Others brag about being princesses because we're daughters of the King, but their intent (at least from my perspective) seems to be aimed at making people treat us like Princesses. It has been lamentable to see the focus of Christianity trending toward self, rather than God.  We worship our worship, worship our devotion to God, and worship our own 'potential'. This book is a breath of fresh air.   It was refreshing to read a book written from a Biblical perspective that reiterates the Bible's focus on God, not on ourselves. I'll end with one more quote from the book: "It's clear that God is fully satisfied with Jesus.  Am I?"

Many thanks to the folks at Moody Publishers Newsroom for the free review copy of this book (my review did not have to be favorable).

My Rating: 5 out of 5 stars

*****

This book may be purchased at Christianbook.com and Amazon.com

Quote of the Day

  The progress of Christianity has been confessedly tardy. From the places where first its light shone, the candlestick has been removed; and where now we speak of it as established, we are constrained to make the humiliating acknowledgment that nine-tenths of the profession is false. Our missions proceed also but slowly, indeed more slowly than we will allow ourselves to think; and though we hang upon the lips of the newly arrived missionary, and drink in with avidity the reports of each society, when we come in the moment of cool reflection to ask, what has been done? I say the answer is, but little. Nor is it from want of exertion: for never was there such a host of instrumentality brought to bear on the promotion of Christianity as of late years: and, without making the state of things worse than it really is, I yet say that the mind that would take for its data, on which to expect the speedy establishment of Christ's kingdom, the means now in use, and the success attending them, must be indeed must sanguine. I know how unwelcome are these observations. I know that it will be said they serve no purpose but to check Christian exertion, - to damp Christian energy. But it is not so; they may check the exertion and damp the energy which owe their existence to false stimulus; but the exertion or the energy which has for its motive the glory of God - which appreciates the value of the immortal soul, and carries with it the recollection that 'there is joy in the presence of the angels of God over ONE sinner that repenteth: will not be diverted from its purpose merely by having its expectations corrected. Indeed on the contrary; for, as it is said that "hope deferred maketh the heart sick," I fear there is more danger of the exertion relaxing which is subject to disappointment, than that which has for its measure and guide a more moderate but more certain prospect. 

The truth is, as it appears to me, that we have altogether mistaken the object of this, the Gentile dispensation. That 'the kingdoms of the world shall become the kingdoms of the Lord and his Christ," - that "the Son shall have "the Heathen for his inheritance, and the  ut-"most parts of the earth for his possession,"- that "'the kingdom and dominion UNDER the "whole heaven shall be given to the saints of "the Most High;" - all this is most true: these are the sure promises of God. But that they shall not be fulfilled during this dispensation, is also and equally sure and true. At the sounding of the "seventh trumpet" shall be the first, (Rev. xi.15.) at the destruction of the Antichristian confederacy, is the second, (Ps ii.8,9,) at the falling of the stone on the feet of the image, and the judgment on the little horn of the fourth beast, is the third; in a word all three at the SECOND COMING of Christ. Consider these passages and you will see that so far from this dispensation being appointed to convert the world it actually stands in the way of it - that the apostasy of the Gentiles denoted by "the working of the mystery of iniquity," retards (if I may so speak)  that wished for event; and that not until it is judged, in order to which it must first be consummated, will the kingdom of our God come with power. 

William De Burgh from his book Lectures on the Second Advent [With an introduction on the use of Unfulfilled Prophecy] Published in 1832

See more quotes on my quotes blog: snickerdoodlesquotes.blogspot.com

Quote of the Day

  When we turn from the restless entreaties and exhortations which fill the pages of our modern missionary magazines to the pages of the New Testament, we are astonished at the change in atmosphere. St Paul does not repeatedly exhort his churches to subscribe money for the propagation of the Faith, he is far more concerned to explain to them what the faith is, and how they ought to practice it and keep it.  The same is true of St Peter and St John, and all of the apostolic writers. They do not seem to feel any necessity to repeat the great Commission, and to urge that it is the duty of their converts to make disciples of all the nations. What we read in the New Testament is no anxious appeal to Christians to spread the Gospel, but a note here and there which suggests how the Gospel was being spread abroad: 'the churches were established in the faith and increased in number daily', 'in every place your faith to Godward is spread abroad so that we need not to speak anything', or as a result of a persecution: 'They that were scattered abroad went everywhere preaching the Word'......I know not how it may appear to others, but to me this unexhorted unorganized, spontaneous expansion has a charm far beyond that of our modern highly organized missions. I delight to think that a Christian travelling on his business, or fleeing from persecution, could preach Christ, and a church spring up as the result of his preaching, without his work being advertised through the streets of Antioch or Alexandria as the heading of an appeal to Christian men to subscribe funds to establish a school, or as the text of an exhortation to the church of his native city to send a mission, without which new converts deprived of guidance must inevitably lapse. I suspect, however, that I am not alone in this strange preference, and that many others read their Bibles and find there with relief a welcome escape from our material appeals for funds, and from our methods of moving heaven and earth to make a proselyte......

The Spirit of Christ is a Spirit who longs for, and strives after, the salvation of the souls of men, and that Spirit dwells in them. That Spirit converts the natural instinct into a longing for the conversion of others which is indeed divine in its source and character.

- Roland Allen

From his book: The Spontaneous Expansion of the Church

Find more quotes on my quotes blog:

http://snickerdoodlesquotes.blogspot.com/