Commentary
Warning: Psychiatry and Psychology May be Dangerous to Your Soul
By Brother Jed
The word psychology literally means the study of the soul. The soul is made up essentially of the mind and the heart. The heart in the Bible usually represents the will or the faculty with which we choose between right and wrong and good and evil.
What is the difference between psychiatry and psychology? The suffix "-iatry" means healing or medical treatment and "-logy" means study of." So psychiatry is the medical treatment of the psyche (soul-mind), and psychology is the study of the psyche (soul-mind). Psychiatrists have a M.D. and give out drugs. Psychologists usually have a PhD. and they talk to their patients.
Psychology is a legitimate study. What better book to go to in order to study the mind or soul than the Bible, which has so much to say about the mind.
Paul wrote in 2 Tim: 1:7: “For God hath not given us the spirit of fear; but of power, and of love, and of a sound mind.” ... <Read More>
Was the Haiti earthquake God's judgement?
THE WONDERFUL, MIGHTY AND TERRIBLE GOD
“The mountains quake at him, and the hills melt, and the earth is burned at his presence, yea, the world, and all that dwell therein. Who can stand before his indignation? and who can abide in the fierceness of his anger (Nahum 1:5-6)?”
The terrible judgment of God has befallen Haiti. Moments before the quake hit people were going about their business, taking life for granted; and then, suddenly, scores of thousands met their Maker. Sadly, relatively few were probably prepared for eternity. Countless numbers were buried alive under the rubble, which must have been a taste of Hell. Swiftly utter darkness, and screeches, screams, weeping and wailing were heard all over the city. Some singing hymns were heard from under the wreckage. Survivors clawed through the concrete vainly trying to save their loved ones or even strangers. Within a few days the terrible stench of death permeated the city as hope faded. Even for those left alive, many more may be lost through disease. Those without God are in utter despair. Multitudes are homeless. Many reportedly were tormented by looters and many others fought each other for food and drink.
Pat Robertson’s comments after the Haiti earthquake caused both secularists and theists to quake. He claimed Haiti was under a curse since a leader of the Haitian slave rebellion of 1791 made a pact with the devil in a voodoo ceremony sacrificing a pig; and the participates drank its blood mixed with human blood. The voodoo priest promised the slaves would serve the devil if they won their freedom from their French masters. In 1803 the first black “republic” was established in the Western Hemisphere. Robertson did not claim that Haiti experience God’s wrath; yet he was still vilified by Christian leaders for being insensitive and unrepresentative of Christian thought.
Spiritual explanations for cataclysmic events are not tolerated in our secularist society. Even within the Church spiritual interpretations of earth shattering events have become unaccepted.
In 1906, a holiness minister and author, Frank Bartleman, shook the West Coast by declaring that the great San Francisco earthquake was the judgment of God.
Three thousand died in the quake and the fires which it ignited. It is considered the worst “natural disaster” in US history.
Bartleman wrote, “Nearly every pulpit in the land was working overtime to prove that God had nothing to do with earthquakes and thus allay the fears of the people. The Spirit was striving to knock at hearts with conviction, through this judgment. I felt indignation that the preachers should be used of Satan to drown out His voice.”
To counteract this influence a few days after the earthquake, Bartleman wrote the tract, ‘The Last Call,’ which called the earthquake God’s judgment. Within three weeks 75,000 tracts were distributed in Southern California and 50,000 more in the Bay Area.
Bartleman became the chronicler of the Azusa Street revival which started in Los Angeles on April 14, 1906. The San Francisco Earthquake hit on April 18, 1906. The fear of God sparked by the earthquake helped fuel the Azusa Street revival which in turn was the catalyst to spread Pentecostalism throughout the world in the 20th Century.
Bartleman concluded, “The San Francisco earthquake was surely the voice of God to the people on the Pacific Coast. It was used mightily in conviction, for the gracious after revival. In the early ‘Azusa’ days both heaven and hell seemed to have come to town.”
Robertson is one of the few national voices that suggested a supernatural explanation for the earthquake in Haiti. Most Christian authorities accept and teach natural explanations for the earthquake and assure people that God had nothing to do with the quake. Likewise except for Robertson virtually all Christian spokesmen refused to declare hurricane Katrina a manifestation of God’s wrath. It is interesting to note that New Orleans has a significant connection with voodooism.
Modern man has been conditioned by naturalism, which teaches that nature is all there is or at least first looks to a natural explanation of events. Secularists do not want to even consider supernatural explanations for events. Preachers and theologians are intimidated by the naturalists (scientists). Ministers fear being considered uneducated bumpkins, more than they fear the one who is Sovereign over the natural world. To be more charitable, some teachers in their zeal to defend God’s love and longsuffering are concerned that if they declare that a calamity is God’s judgment or even suggest such a thing, they know that the world will find fault with God instead of putting the blame on man for provoking God’s wrath.
Jeremiah challenged, “Run ye to and fro through the streets of Jerusalem, and see now, and know, and seek in the broad places thereof, if ye can find a man, if there be any that executeth judgment, that seeketh the truth; and I will pardon it (5:1).”
In early America such men could be found. The Puritan, Cotton Mather, said of the earthquake that shook Boston in 1727: “Let the Natural Causes of Earthquakes be what the Wise Men of Enquiry please: They and their Causes are still under the Government of HIM that is the GOD of Nature. Shall we say, All this is but a Chance that happens to us or the mere unguided Motion of Matter? Ah, profane Philistine! — ’Tis a Language for none but a Philistine. A Christian cannot speak so. No, He is one that will be sensible of GOD in these things. Verily, In them, Lo, GOD sends forth His Voice, and that a mighty Voice unto us. . .”
In 750 B.C., Amos, the herdsman and fruit gatherer turned prophet, dated his prophesy by an earthquake which he predicted two years before it happened; he warned that God would shake down their houses (3:15). Though he first prophesied that the LORD would “send fire” against the nations bordering Israel, the Syrians, the Philistines the Tyrians, the Edomites and the Ammonites.
Amos asked, “Shall a trumpet be blown in the city, and the people not be afraid? Shall there be evil in a city, and the LORD hath not done it (3:6)?”
Like Robertson and Bartleman, Amos was opposed by the religious establishment. Amaziah the priest of Bethel accused Amos of sedition for prophesying the death of King Jeroboam by the sword and Israel captivity by the Assyrians. Amaziah demanded that Amos return to Judah and prophesy there. But Amos refused to listen to him and prophesied that Amaziah himself would die in exile.
In exile on the isle of Patmos, John the Revelator taught that when God opens the sixth seal in the last days he will judge with a earthquake (Rev 6:14). And John further warned, “When the seventh angel pours out his vial into the air there will be “a great earthquake, such as was not since men were upon the earth, so mighty an earthquake and so great . . . (Rev 16:18)”
The venerable John Wesley in his sermon “The Cause and Cure of Earthquakes,” written in response to Lisbon earthquake of 1755 said, “Of all the judgments which the righteous God inflicts on sinners here, the most dreadful and destructive is an earthquake. This he has lately brought on our part of the earth, and thereby alarmed our fears, and bid us ‘prepare to meet our God!’”
Furthermore Wesley preached, “Now, that God is himself the Author, and sin the moral cause, of earthquakes, (whatever the natural cause may be,) cannot be denied by any who believe the Scriptures; for these are they which testify of Him, that he is God, ‘which removeth the mountains, and overturneth them in his anger; which shaketh the earth out of her place, and the pillars thereof tremble.’ (Job 9:5, 6.) ‘He looketh on the earth, and it trembleth he toucheth the hills, and they smoke.’ (Ps. 104:32.) ‘The hills melted like wax at the presence of the Lord, at the presence of the Lord of the whole earth.’ (Ps. 97:5.) Earthquakes are set forth by the inspired writers as God’s proper judicial act, or the punishment of sin: Sin is the cause, earthquakes the effect, of his anger.”
Sometimes God himself judges a nation through earthquakes other times he uses other means. Jeremiah in the Book of Lamentations mourns over the desolation of Jerusalem by the armies of Babylon. However, Babylon or its armies are not even mentioned in the book. Jeremiah sees the destruction as a result of the judgment of God for the sins of God’s people, “For the LORD hath afflicted her for the multitude of her transgressions (1:5).”
Jerusalem “came down wonderfully (1:9). The LORD hath done that which he had devised…he hath thrown down, and hath not pitied (2:17). The young and the old lie on the ground in the streets: my virgins and my young men are fallen by the sword: thou hast slain them in the day of thine anger; thou hast killed, and not pitied (2:21).”
Jeremiah laments that those who were slain by the sword are better off than those dying of hunger. Conditions are so horrible that mothers are cannibalizing their own children.
Yet, through it all, the prophet concludes that “it is of the LORD’S mercies that we are not consumed, because his compassions fail not. They are new every morning: great is thy faithfulness (3:22-23). The Lord is good (3:25). He will not cast off for ever: But though he cause grief, yet will he have compassion according to the multitude of his mercies (3:31-32). For he doth not afflict willingly (with delight) nor grieve the children of men. Who is he that saith, and it cometh to pass, when the LORD commandeth it not? Out the mouth of the most High proceedeth not evil and good? Wherefore doth a living man complain, a man for the punishment of his sins (3:37-39).”
Should we think that America or that the Church shall escape the judgment of God that we have seen in Haiti; or should we believe that we are better than this accursed island?
A fundamentalist street preacher named Jesus helps us to answer this question when he commented upon “the Galilaeans, whose blood Pilate had mingled with their sacrifices, Suppose ye that these Galilaeans were sinners above all the Galilaeans, because they suffered such things? I tell you, Nay: except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish (Luke 13:1-3).”
Paul said, “Despisest thou the riches of his goodness and forbearance and longsuffering; not know that the goodness of God leadeth thee to repentance (Rom 2:4)?”
Jeremiah was able to see God’s goodness and mercy in the destruction of Jerusalem in that the city was not utterly consumed. Survivors still had the opportunity to repent and be forgiven in the midst of their solitary, restless and desolate condition. They had the opportunity to hear of a new day of restoration.
We should recognize God’s goodness in bringing destruction upon Haiti as evidence that he cares enough about such an exceptionally poor country that blind men believe to be completely forsaken of God. Whereas Jerusalem, “had none to comfort her: all her friends have dealt treacherously with her, they are become her enemies (1:3).” Haiti has many nations, especially the United States, and charitable organizations from all over the world coming to her aid. This also is the mercy of God.
Jeremiah saw Jerusalem’s destruction as a call for her people “to search and examine our ways, and turn again to the LORD. Let us lift up our heart with our hands unto God in the heavens (3:40-41).”
Thus we see that God’s judgments are good for they demonstrate that God still cares enough to make a desperate attempt to get men’s attention before it is too late. He chastens us “for our profit, that we might be partakers of his holiness (Hebrews 12:10). But if ye be without chastisement, whereof all are partakers, then are ye bastards, and not sons (Heb 12:8).” Haitian Christians should be thankful that God does not consider them as illegitimate children despite the power of voodooists in the country. There is an often repeated hyperbolic saying, “Haiti is 70% Catholic, 30 % Protestant and 100% voodoo.” Voodoo is officially recognized in Haiti.
David sang, “Let the righteous smite me; it shall be a kindness: and let him reprove me; it shall be excellent oil, which shall not break my head (Ps 141:5).” He also wrote, “Come, behold the works of the LORD, what desolations he hath made in the earth (Ps 46:8)”
Four times in Psalm 107, David cries, “Oh that men would praise the LORD for his goodness, and for his wonderful works to the children of men!”
David understood that God’s judgments were part of his wonderful works, “He turneth rivers into a wildernesss, and the watersprings into dry ground; A fruitful land into barrenness, for the wickedness of them that dwell therein (33-34).”
Moses also saw God’s wrath against Pharaoh and Egypt as God’s wonderful work. “Who is like unto thee, LORD, among the gods? Who is like thee, glorious in holiness, fearful in praises, doing wonders (Ex 15:11)?”
God is the author of natural evil, but not moral evil. God’s will is always done in the physical world. Isaiah affirmed God’s sovereignty over nature, “I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things (Is 45:7)” God governs the physical world by cause and effect. God is the ultimate cause of all natural events. Alas, God’s will is not often done in man’s realm for he is governed by moral law; which he has the power to resist.
Isaiah shouted, “O LORD, thou art my God; I will exalt thee, I will praise thy name; for thou hast done wonderful things; the counsels of old are faithfulness and truth. For thou hast made of a city a ruin . . . Therefore shall the strong people glorify thee (25:1-3).”
Let the strong glorify God for this wonderful earthquake that has devastated Haiti. Let the foolish give glory to Mother Nature. Let the strong call men to repentance and faith in our terrible God. Let the foolish assure men that our God would not bring calamity.
Jeremiah asked, “O LORD, are not thine eyes upon the truth? thou hast stricken them, but they have not grieved; thou hast consumed them, but they have refused to receive correction: they have made their faces harder than a rock; they have refused to return. Therefore I said, Surely these are poor; they are foolish: for they know not the way of the LORD, nor the judgment of their God. I will get me unto the great men, and will speak unto them; for they have known the way of the LORD, and the judgment of their God: but these have altogether broken the yoke, and burst the bonds (5:3-5).”
Where are the Bartlemans, the Mathers, the Wesleys, the Amos, Isaiahs, and Jeremiahs today? The heads of the great denominations and the learned theologians of the seminaries refuse to declare the judgment of God; and the ministers of renown if they declare the judgment God, they are soon shamed into silence if not an apology.
Let the strong “Say unto God, How terrible art thou in thy works! through the greatness of thy power shall thine enemies submit themselves unto thee. All the earth shall worship thee, and shall sing unto thee; they shall sing to thy name. Selah. Come and see the works of God: he is terrible in his doing toward the children of men (Ps 66:3-5)”
Blame men for these judgments on account of their sins; but do not fail to give God the glory for his astonishing works of judgment. Away with the euphemism that “God allowed it.” No, God did it, praise his holy and wonderful name!
In his tract, “The Last Call,” which helped to bring a world-wide revival, Bartleman asked, “But what had God to do with earthquakes? He answered by quoting Isaiah, “When Thy judgments are in the earth, the inhabitants of the world learn righteousness (26:9).”
If we are going to learn righteousness from the recent destruction of Haiti preachers must once again warn the world that the same righteous God who judged Israel and the nations in the Bible will judge America and the nations of the world today. Jesus warned that in the last days “nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom: and there shall be famines, and pestilences, and earthquakes, in divers places. And all these are only the beginning of sorrows (Matt 24:7-8)” As prophet of old said, “Prepare to meet God (Amos 4:12)”
Jeremiah sums it up, “Fear ye not me? saith the LORD: will ye not tremble at my presence? But this people hath a revolting and a rebellious heart; they are revolted and gone. Neither say they in their heart, Let us now fear the LORD our God, that giveth rain, both the former and the latter, in his season: he reserveth unto us the appointed weeks of the harvest. Your iniquities have turned away these things, and your sins have withholden good things from you. . . Shall I not visit for these things? saith the LORD: shall not my soul be avenged on such a nation as this? A wonderful and horrible thing is committed in the land; The prophets prophesy falsely, and the priests bear rule by their means; and my people love to have it so: and what will ye do in the end thereof (5:22-25; 29-31)?”
Back to top
The Sword of Mohammed vs. The Sword of the Spirit
American Christians' failure to take the Bible as earnestly and thoughtfully as the Muslim terrorist take the Koran made the United States vulnerable to a devastating attack on 9-11. Our ignorance of the religion of Islam and its prophet Mohammed, which since the seventh century has been the greatest worldwide competitor of Christianity, blinded Americans to the threat of the fastest growing religion of the world and a powerful enemy that is within our walls.
The first reference to taking up the sword in the Koran is found in chapter 2:190-194: "And fight in the way of Allah with those who fight with you, and do not exceed the limits, surely Allah does not love those who exceed the limits. And kill them wherever you find them, and drive them out from whence they drove you out, and persecution is severer than slaughter, and do not fight with them at the Sacred Mosque until they fight with you in it, but if they do fight you, then slay them; such is the recompense of the unbelievers. But if they desist, then surely Allah is Forgiving, Merciful. And fight with them until there is no persecution, and religion should be only for Allah, but if they desist, then there should be no hostility except against the oppressors. The Sacred month for the sacred month and all sacred things are (under the law of) retaliation; whoever then acts aggressively against you, inflict injury on him according to the injury he has inflicted on you and be careful (of your duty) to Allah and know that Allah is with those who guard (against evil)."
In the West most Muslims promote that the Koran merely justifies defensive wars, but the Koran's words go beyond what most would understand as mere defense. Holy war must rage until there is no more persecution and Islam is established throughout the world. Objectives are not limited, but complete submission to Allah is required for all unbelievers. American professors of Islam want to emphasize that Islam means peace, but the true Muslim understands that peace is when all men are in submission to Allah and there is no more opposition to the message of Islam. Islam means submission.
Muslims in America like to stress that Jihad does not mean holy war, but an inner struggle. However, Dr. Mohammed Taqu-ud-Din Al-Hilali, formerly professor of Islamic Faith and teachings at Islamic University, and Dr. Mohammed Muhsin Khan, formerly director of the University Hospital Islamic University, at Al-Madinah Al-Munawwarah, in their translation of the Koran footnote verse 2:190 with the following revealing comment: "Al-Jihad (holy fighting) in Allah's Cause (with full force of numbers and weaponry) is given the utmost importance in Islam and is one of its pillars (on which it stands). By Jihad Islam is established, Allah's Word is made superior, and His Religion (Islam) is propagated. By abandoning Jihad (may Allah protect us from that) Islam is destroyed and the Muslims fall into an inferior position; their honor is lost, their lands are stolen, their rule and authority vanish. Jihad is an obligatory duty in Islam on every Muslim, and he who tries to escape from this duty, or does not in his innermost heart wish to fulfill this duty, dies with one of the qualities of a hypocrite".
Mohammed said: "I have been ordered (by Allah) to fight against the people till they testify that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and that Mohammed is the Messenger of Allah, and perform As-Salat and give Zakat, so if they perform all that, then they save their lives, and properties from me except for Islamic laws, and their reckoning (accounts) will be with (done by) Allah." (Sahih Al-Bukhari, Vol.1, Hadith No.24)
The chapter of the Koran which is entitled Mohammed or (The Fighting) affirms that Jihad is a perpetual commandment until all of Allah's enemies (unbelievers) are subdued: "So when you meet (in fight--Jihad in Allah's Cause) those who disbelieve, smite (their) necks till when you have killed and wounded many of them, then bind a bond firmly (on them, i.e. take them as captives). Thereafter either for generosity (i.e. free them without ransom), or ransom (according to what benefits Islam), until the war lays down its burden. Thus [you are ordered by Allah to continue in carrying out Jihad against the disbelievers till they embrace Islam and are saved from the punishment in the Hellfire or at least come under your protection]." (Koran 47:4)
The Muslim is directed to be a brutal and ruthless fighter: "The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His messenger and strive to make mischief in the land is only this, that they should be murdered or crucified or their hands and their feet should be cut off on opposite sides or they should be imprisoned; this shall be as a disgrace for them in this world, and in the hereafter they shall have a grievous chastisement." (Koran 5:33).
It is not expedient for Muslims to present Jihad as a pillar of Islam to Western nations, where they are a minority and lack political power; but Mohammed was quoted by the historian, Edward Gibbon, as declaring, "The sword is the key to Heaven and of Hell: a drop of blood shed in the cause of God, a night spent in arms, is of more avail than two months of fasting or prayer" (from Gibbon's, The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire).
No prominent religious leader in history has been more direct and aggressive in promoting his faith with the sword than Mohammed, who declared, "Different prophets have been sent by God to illustrate his different attributes: Moses his clemency and providence; Solomon his wisdom, majesty, and glory; Jesus Christ his righteousness, omniscience, and power - his righteousness by purity of conduct; his omniscience by the knowledge he displayed of the secrets of all hearts; his power by the miracles he wrought. None of these attributes, however, have been sufficient to enforce conviction, and even the miracles of Moses and Jesus have been treated with unbelief. I therefore, the last of the prophets, am sent with the sword! Let those who promulgate my faith enter into no argument nor discussion, but slay all who refuse obedience to the law. Whoever fights for the true faith, whether he fall or conquer, will assuredly receive a glorious reward." (Washington Irving, Mahomet and His Successors).
Jesus is described in the Bible as "the Prince of Peace". He taught, "Blessed are the peacemakers: for they shall be called the children of God" (Mat 5:9). Allah's blessing is on the war-makers, especially those martyred in jihad. The Koran states in chapter 4:74-77: "Therefore let those fight in the way of Allah, who sell this world's life for the hereafter; and whoever fights in the way of Allah, then be he slain or be he victorious, We shall grant him a mighty reward. And what reason have you that you should not fight in the way of Allah and of the weak among the men and the women and the children, (of) those who say: Our Lord! cause us to go forth from this town, whose people are oppressors, and give us from Thee a guardian and give us from Thee a helper. Those who believe fight in the cause of Allah, and those who reject Faith, Fight in the cause of Evil: So fight ye against the friends of Satan: feeble indeed is the cunning of Satan. Hast thou not turned Thy vision to those who were told to hold back their hands (from fight) but establish regular prayers and spend in regular charity? When (at length) the order for fighting was issued to them, behold! a section of them feared men as - or even more than - they should have feared Allah: They said: "Our Lord! Why hast Thou ordered us to fight? Wouldst Thou not Grant us respite to our (natural) term, near (enough)." Say: "Short is the enjoyment of this world: the Hereafter is the best for those who do right: Never will ye be dealt with unjustly in the very least!"
Mohammed from 622 to 632 AD fought 81 campaigns. He started with raids on camel caravan traders moving through routes in the neighborhood of Medina. With the booty he was able to accumulate from these raids, and his attacks on other towns, he was able to raise an army which grew larger and larger with his successes, until he finally marched on Mecca in 630 with an army of 10,000. Mecca surrendered to this overwhelming show of force. By his death in 632 AD, all of Arabia had fallen under his power and was in subjection to Islam.
Christianity is not pacifist in the sense that it forbids the use of force in personal or national defense. Jesus allowed his disciples to be armed for self-defense, but not for the purpose of establishing or propagating the Gospel. In Romans 13, Paul teaches that God has put the sword in the hands of civil authority for the purpose of upholding the law by punishing evildoers. But Paul made clear that the disciple's warfare is spiritual not carnal. "For the weapons of our warfare are not carnal, but mighty through God to the pulling down of strong holds" (2 Cor 10:4)
Jesus' admonition to turn the other cheek does not mean that one cannot defend himself, but that he should not seek vengeance nor respond violently to personal insults. President Bush has been careful not to use the language of vengeance, but of justice in regard to America's war on terrorism. He said, "We will bring the evildoers to justice or else we will take justice to them." It would be vengeance to target innocent family members of the terrorists, as they targeted civilians in their attack of the World Trade Center.
If America is going to be successful in its War on Terrorism, more than military victories on the battlefield are necessary. The real war is in the realm of ideas. Who has the truth? Islam or Christianity? Mohammad or Jesus? Christians must be jealous in taking up the sword of truth and engage in the war for men's minds.
Muslims in American are more aware of the Bible and the state of Christianity than Christians are aware of the Koran and the state of Islam. One must know his enemy. Christians in their zeal to live at peace with all men, must understand that this is not always possible (Rom 12:18). Although Muslims are clearly enemies of Christians, since they deny the death of Christ and that Jesus is the Son of God, we must show our love to them by exposing their error and declaring to them the true God.
We must also demonstrate love to non-Muslims by warning them of the false doctrines and dangers of Islam and pointing them to the claims of the Gospel. Who best represents the spirit of Islam? Do Muslim moderates who claim that extremists have "distorted and hijacked" Islam, or do the Muslim hordes in the streets rejoicing over the fall of the Twin Towers and shouting hate slogans against America?
Who best represents the example of Mohammed? Does Osama bin Laden, al Qaeda and the Taliban, or does the President of Pakistan and the Prime Minister of Turkey (who has committed ground troops against the terrorists in Afghanistan)? Unless one is going to claim that the call to jihad in the Koran was only relevant to Allah's enemies of Mohammed's time, one need not read far into the Koran, or consider the life and teachings of Mohammad, to see that Mr. bin Laden is very much a Mohammed like figure. Muslim moderates are either hypocrites who refuse to apply the Koran to current times, naively ignorant of the true nature of Islam, or clever deceivers who will, at an opportune moment, turn against America.
The Koran recites, "O you who believe! do not take the Jews and the Christians for friends; they are friends of each other; and whoever amongst you takes them for a friend, then surely he is one of them; surely Allah does not guide the unjust people" (5:51).
It would seem that this verse would apply to those who are joining with America in the coalition against terrorism. Are these Muslims to be trusted? Do they not take the Koran seriously, or when it is convenient, will they turn on us? What will happen when America goes after other Muslim governments who are harboring terrorists? Will our present allies still be on our side?
Osama bin Laden, in a handwritten letter reported in USA today on November 11, 2001, wrote, "Muslims in Afghanistan are being subjected to killing, and the Pakistani government is standing beneath the Christian banner. The world is split in two. Part of it is under the head of infidels, (President) Bush, and the other half under the banner of Islam".
The Koran teaches that Islam will ultimately prevail, and Mr. bin Laden believes in the Koran. Was the terrorists' attack merely an attack on America? Or was it more than that, an attack on Christianity, because America, despite all of her sins is still the bastion of Christianity in the world?
The Bush administration has gone out of its way to explain that we are not engaged in a religious war. The war according to American officials is not against Islam, but against terrorists and those who harbor terrorists. President Bush is understandably concerned about stirring up an uprising in the whole Muslim world.
But this is precisely what Mr. bin Laden and his fellow terrorists want. Christians prefer peace over war, because we understand that the gospel is most effectively published in the world when there is peace among the nations. However, we should not promote peace at the expense of Truth and Freedom.
Thankfully, America has apparently achieved an early victory over the Taliban in the War on Terrorism, but military successes alone will ultimately be in vain. Christians must put on the whole armor of God and raise the sword of the Spirit and slay the lie of Islam, which is the motivating force behind the terrorists actions. As much as Americans do not want to admit it, this is a religious war.
Jed Smock
Back to top
--o0o--
Evangeline's Judge Not Tract
From a young age, I have ministered open-air on America's college campuses with my parents. I preach the gospel of Jesus Christ to unbelieving students, convicting them of sin, righteousness and judgment. The collegians immediately take offense when told that God has condemned them for their sin. Soon, a few students will huddle together and search frantically for Bible verses to prove me wrong.
They rush back with, "Judge not, lest ye be judged." (Matthew 7:1) This common occurrence has provoked me to Biblical study and research on the subject of judging. My intention is to prove that Christians not only may, but must judge. First, I will demonstrate that it is impossible not to judge, and second, that the Bible commands believers to judge.
The fact that it is impossible not to judge must be seen by examining everyday activities. All people judge and could no more avoid it than they could avoid breathing. Judging as defined in the American Heritage Dictionary is: "To form an opinion or estimation of after careful consideration: judge heights; judging character." Some examples of judging are: telling someone he is a great person, choosing friends, deciding what church to attend, saying Hitler was a bad man, choosing to walk or to run, or picking what to have for dinner.
All people must make choices, and every choice is a judgment. Even by choosing not to judge, one is making a judgment; one is simply judging that it is wrong to judge. Therefore, if you do not judge, you judge, and if you do judge, you judge. Judging is an inevitable part of human life. For instance, one must judge whom to marry or whether to marry. Judging is a necessity! I challenge anyone to try to go one day without judging. It is impossible; the very attempt is in itself a judgment.
After hearing the above argument, some will respond, "That is just logic; show me Bible verses to prove this." It is easy to find Scriptures that command Christians to pass judgment. Six times, in his first letter to the Corinthians, the Apostle Paul instructs believers to judge, and twice he rebukes them for not judging. "But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man." (1 Corinthians 2:15)
So, if someone is truly saved he has the responsibility to judge good and evil. Later, in chapter 6 verse 3, Paul questions the Corinthians, "Know ye not that we shall judge angels? How much more things that pertain to this life?" The apostle reasons that because God considers Christians able to judge angels, the same believers are also qualified to judge people, who are lower than the angels.
Finally, in verse 5, Paul reproves the believers for their lack of judgment. "I speak to your shame. Is it so, that there is not a wise man among you? No, not one that shall be able to judge between his brethren?" The apostle indicates that a wise man will judge.
Paul is not the only Biblical writer who commands believers to judge. Jesus exhorts in Luke 12:57, "Yea, and why even of yourselves judge ye not what is right?" The Lord expressed frustration that men will not judge right from wrong. In Leviticus 19:15, Moses writes "...But in righteousness shalt thou judge thy neighbor." Here is another one of the numerous verses directing judgment.
Whether in church life or personal life, sound discernment is always a necessity. For example, what if a man asked a woman for a date? Should that woman not judge him, when she has evidence that he is not of a strong moral character? It would not be wise for her to say, "I must not judge, so I will go out with him." In contrast, is it not also true that by deciding not to judge, and going on the date, she would be judging in his favor?
Though many ministers preach from the pulpit, "Thou shall not judge," all mainline denominations have some form of excommunication and church discipline. In Matthew 18, Jesus gives the proper procedures to follow to reprimand those who sin. To allow sin to remain in the camp is historically and Biblically corrupt. However, one should always keep in mind that the purpose of chastisement is so that the wayward member will repent and then be restored to favor.
If the civil authority punishes those who break the law and rightly so, how much more should the church? "The local congregational leadership does well to remember that the Lord requires of their hands an accounting of the blood of each member. What the disciplined member does becomes his responsibility; what the leaders fail to do is ineradicably theirs," L. DeKoster writes in The Evangelical Dictionary of Theology.
Many people believe that though as Christians they may judge other Christians, they should not judge unbelievers. Ezekiel wrote to the contrary. The following verses show that the righteous who fail to judge the wicked will be held accountable to God for their souls:
"When I say unto the wicked, Thou shalt surely die; and thou givest him not warning, nor speakest to warn the wicked from his wicked way, to save his life; the same wicked man shall die in his iniquity; but his blood will I require at thine hand. Yet if thou warn the wicked, and he turn not from his wickedness, nor from his wicked way, he shall die in his iniquity; but thou hast delivered thy soul. (Ezekiel. 3:18-19)
Assuredly, God considers it very important that the righteous should judge the wicked.
To fulfill the Great Commission to preach the Gospel to all the world, Christians must warn the unbelievers that they are condemned. "And he {Jesus} said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned." (Mark 16:15-16)
Does this verse mean that Christians are to preach God's mercy and forgiveness to the lost, without mentioning that if they reject this good news, they will be damned to hell for eternity? I think not. It would not be right nor fair to fail to tell people the whole truth. Jesus' final words in Matthew 28:19-20 are, "Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you." If disciples are to teach a new way of life, they have to warn that the old life is wrong.
Anyone that evangelizes discovers that one of the few verses that every sinner knows is Matthew 7:1, "Judge not, that ye be not judged." It is unfortunate that this verse is often taken out of context by those who care nothing for God or his commandments. Reading the next few verses, one can see that the correct interpretation of this passage is very different:
"For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again. And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye? Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye? Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye." (Matthew 7:2-5)
Jesus is telling the hypocrite not to judge. For instance, the thief should not condemn his neighbor for stealing. But Jesus is by no means forbidding the Christian to judge. In fact, in verse 5 he again says to judge. Jesus directs the hypocrite to first cast the beam (sin) out of his own life; then he may judge justly. When a sinner repents and turns to God, it is then his duty as a good Christian to judge.
"And {Jehoshaphat} said to the judges, Take heed what ye do: for ye judge not for man, but for the LORD, who is with you in the judgment. Wherefore now let the fear of the LORD be upon you; take heed and do it." (2 Chronicles 19:6-7)
This verse tells the faithful that it is their duty to judge rightly because they are God's representatives. They must remember to be careful to remain true to God's Word, for they are not actually judging for themselves, but simply teaching the Bible. Evangelists should judge people according to Scripture rather than by their own personal convictions.
People commonly argue that it is not loving to judge others, but consider Leviticus 19:17: "Do not hate your brother in your heart. Rebuke your neighbor frankly so you will not share in his sin." A reproof might seem un-loving on the surface, but the above verse teaches that one who does not judge actually hates his brother. The Bible teaches that those in sin are condemned to hell. If Christians do not tell their fellow human beings this, they may burn forever in hell. Is it not loving to warn them before it is too late?
In conclusion, not only is it impossible not to judge, but it is by far the most right and loving thing to do. I challenge Christians to do their duty and judge in this present world. It is a Christian's obligation to judge! If believers do not judge, they are partly responsible for the sinner's damnation. For when all else is said, "Open rebuke is better than secret love." (Proverbs 27:5)
Therefore, remember that Christians fulfill their duty more with a loving word of rebuke and judgment when needed than with a cruel word of undue flattery.
Evangeline Smock
Back to top
--o0o--
Doubtful Things
A treatise on Romans 14:22
Romans 14:22: “Hast thou faith? have it to thyself before God. Happy is he that condemneth not himself in that thing which he alloweth. 23 And he that doubteth is damned if he eat, because he eateth not of faith: for whatsoever is not of faith is sin."
Paul is trying to reconcile two factions within the church at Rome: Converted Jews who hold on to the ceremonial aspects of the law of Moses concerning eating and drinking and keeping of days, against the more liberal Gentile converts who believe that they may eat anything and keep everyday alike. The former faction he refers to as "weak in the faith."
The vegetarians are weak in the faith in the sense that they have a weak or scrupulous conscience. According to The Catholic Encyclopedia Dictionary, "To scruple, or to have a scruple, is to doubt about and to hesitate doing something on false grounds, of conscience. Scruples cause a state of anxiety in those afflicted with them. They arise from excessive servile fear in some persons, because they represent God as an exacting tyrant. In others, they are mere temptations of the enemy of human nature, but frequently fortified by stubbornness and obstinacy in the individual. Scruples are enemies to spiritual progress, because they lead to discouragement and despondency in the practice of religion."
Paul makes clear that God has received both factions, and that therefore they should receive one another and that one group should not condemn or judge the other in such external nonessential matters. Both should follow after "the things which make for peace" and edification.
Paul in verse 22 is asking do you have a conviction in relationship to what you eat or drink, or keeping or not of particular Jewish holidays? Then keep the standard to yourself without condemning others who may not have it. The Apostle teaches that the believer with a strong conscience should not flaunt his liberty out of consideration for the peace of mind of his weak brother, nor should the weak brother condemn the strong for his liberty.
To maintain the joy of the Lord, one must keep a clear conscience. If one eats meat without faith (without a clear conscience), then he is damned by his conscience and consequently will lose the peaceful and joyful mindset promised by the Kingdom of God. But this does not mean that he loses his salvation and actually is on his way to Hell for the Christian is not under the Jewish ceremonial ordinances. He has not actually transgressed the moral law, so that he would not in reality be damned, but only be condemned by his scrupulous conscience.
When Paul says, "Whatsoever is not of faith is sin," he must mean that a scrupulous conscience considers something to be sin when in fact it is not. Would God damn a soul without actually transgressing the law? I think not. So doubtful things which do not in fact break God's law are not damnable to Hell, but damnable to a weak conscience.
Charles G. Finney in his sermon, "Doubtful Actions Are Sinful" applies Paul's teachings on these narrow matters concerning Jewish traditions to all sorts of controversial issues, which may or may not be intrinsically evil. Finney
seems to think that the main point of Paul's sermon was that "If a man eat of meats called unclean, not being clear in his mind that it is right, he offends God." Therefore Finney concludes, "If a man doubts whether it is lawful to do a thing, and while in that state of doubt, he does it, he displeases God, he breaks the law and is condemned whether the thing be in itself right or wrong. Where he doubts the lawfulness of the act, but has no cause to doubt the lawfulness of the omission, and yet does it, he sins and is condemned before God, and must repent or be damned."
Finney illustrates his principle by damning to Hell those who are engaged in employment on the Sabbath or even own stocks in companies that break the Sabbath. Controversial indulgences of appetite such as intoxicating beverages, tobacco, tea and coffee, since they are of "doubtful right," are roundly condemned by Finney. Those who partake of these things sin against God and must repent or be damned. He applies his principle to various amusements such as the theater, parties of pleasure, dances, novel reading, and other "methods of wasting time." Finally, Finney condemned slave owners who must at least doubt the lawfulness of slavery, and therefore are condemned with everyone else who does not conform to Finney’s standards.
Finney teaches that "God has given a sufficient revelation of his will, so that a man might know his duty if he would." Finney also states, "that if God so far enlightens his mind as to make him doubt the lawfulness of an act, he is bound to stop there and examine the question and settle it to his satisfaction."
Sometimes God's will is not as clear as Finney claims. There are many instances where godly men disagree on the legality of actions which are not specifically outlawed in the Bible. Many reasonable men do not even believe
that Christians are obligated to keep the Sabbath under the new covenant, let alone whether or not they may be employed on the Lord's Day. Also a man may doubt the lawfulness of a questionable action when God has not enlightened his mind. He may be confused and weakened in his conscience by the traditions of men or even false accusations from the devil. After thoughtfully considering a matter someone in the light of scripture and reason might act on the behavior in question even though he may have the nagging doubts of a scrupulous conscience, which are rooted in men's traditions or satanic accusations.
Paul's main point was not that doubtful actions are sinful as Finney teaches, but that weaker brothers should receive those who are at liberty to do what others consider doubtful, and that the libertarians should not reject those with the scrupulous conscience, nor should they flaunt their liberty to the possible determent of the weaker brother.
Finney instead of following Paul's principle of letting "every man be fully persuaded in his own mind," is demanding that everyone be fully persuaded to Finney's mind concerning doubtful or controversial behavior or else be damned to Hell. Thus instead of promoting peace and unity within the church Finney's dogmatic standards result in factions and a censorious spirit among Christians. Paul considered the stricter brothers to be the weaker. But Finney turns the weaker brothers with their a list of questionable prohibitions into the stronger.
Back to top
--o0o--
The Study of History, Our Sacred Duty
by George E. (Jed) Smock, B.S., M.S.
History without God is a chaos without design or end or aim. Edward Gibbon, the great historian of the Roman Empire, said, “History is little more than the crimes, follies and misfortunes of mankind.” Gibbon, a skeptic, did not see the the right pattern in history, but the Christian through the Bible perceives a plan and purpose to history. To the Christian, Jesus Christ, as revealed in the Scriptures, is the point of reference for all history. The clue to the perplexing and paradoxical human drama is to be found in His Incarnation, Death and Resurrection, which is God acting in history. Reinhold Niebuhr wrote, “In its profoundest insight the Christian faith sees the whole of human history as involved in guilt, and finds no relief except in the grace of God. The Christian is freed by that grace to act in history.” Indeed, we can act righteously in history, because “the Word became flesh and lived among us.”
The Apostle Paul reminds us that whole world of the created universe groans and travails waiting for the revealing of the sons of God, the sons of whom Christ is the first born, and God’s purpose is to sum up all things in Christ, in heaven and earth, and to put “all things under His feet. "
For good reason historical chronology is divided as B.C.—before Christ—and A.D., Anno Dommini, the year of our Lord, that is the Lord of history. Modern historians with anti-Christian prejudices, or in what they would claim is merely an attempt to be religiously neutral, are replacing these traditional abbreviations with BCE and CE, meaning before and after the "common era.”
But they really cannot get away from Christ, because he is the one who brought into reality the common era. Even with the Bible, we “still look through a glass darkly” as we study the human drama. For we only know in part; without the Bible as a guide the whole of history seems like nothing but sound and fury. What has often been called the philosophy of history is in fact the Theology of history, but disguised and hidden to men without a knowledge of Jesus Christ. History is spiritual drama developing and moving toward the Kingdom of God, which will not be fully realized until the end of history, when good finally triumphs over evil. At the same time, history is a process which has meaning and value as it unfolds. The great conflict of the ages is between faith and unbelief; this conflict is the theme of history, and of greatest concern to the Lord. Jesus asked his disciples, “When the Son of Man comes, shall he find faith on the earth (Luke 18:8)?”
It is often said, that history is not about dates. In fact, history is all about dates, personalities and events. Knowledge of dates is essential to an understanding of history. Alzheimer’s disease gradually destroys the memory, until the man reaches a point that he no longer knows his closest relatives; finally he no longer knows himself. Minutes, hours, days, weeks, months, and years no longer mean a thing, nor do people or events. When Christians have little historical knowledge, the church suffers a debilitating disease and loses her sense and her mission. The Bible is the churches' anchor; and history is the churches compass telling Christians where we have been and where we ought to be headed.
God does not primarily reveal Himself through doctrinal statement and theoretical studies, but events and action, small men and great men. God speaks through war and peace, floods and earthquakes, famines and pestilence, dreams and visions and the natural and the supernatural. He reveals Himself through good men and bad men, both Moses and Pharaoh. The prophet conflicting with the priest or king, the Devil tempting Jesus, Paul rebuking the Jews, the Romans martyring Peter, Arias challenging Athanasius, or Luther standing against the papal legates at the Diet of Worms, God reveals Himself in it all, both through tragedy and triumphant, human failures and human successes.
After the Almighty parted the waters of the Red Sea, then the Jordan for the people of Israel, Joshua instructed the fathers to take twelve stones out of the river bed, representing the twelve tribes. Joshua set up the stones in Gilgal for a memorial. “And he spake unto the children of Israel, saying, When your children shall ask their fathers in time to come, saying, What mean these stones? Then ye shall let your children know, saying, Israel came over this Jordan on dry land. For the LORD your God dried up the waters of Jordan from before you, until ye were passed over, as the LORD your God did to the Red sea, which he dried up from before us, until we were gone over: That all the people of the earth might know the hand of the LORD, that it is mighty: that ye might fear the LORD your God for ever (Josh 4:21-24)."
Stones from Church history are all around us. What do the stones mean? These are memorials of God’s dialoguing with man who is in pilgrimage. They are found everywhere in ancient libraries, museums, monasteries, cathedrals, castles, baptismal records and archeological digs. The stones include the marvelous historical record which fills in the gap from the end of the Bible, to the Age of the Martyred Church, to the Triumphant Church, then the Church in the Conflict during the Reformation and finally right down to what some regard as the Apostate Church of our generation. Through all these periods there has been the Remnant, the Faithful, some staying within the established church of their era or location, and some remaining without, and others being cast out. Through it all men, walking with God, and sometimes wrestling with God, were trying to work things out, and often fight things out. The names and movements are countless, but each, in their own way, hopefully the right way, were striving to establish God’s Kingdom and do His will “on earth as it is in Heaven.”
Who were the Church Fathers, What was the Dontanist Controversy? What did the investiture controversy mean? Who were the Iconoclasts? What was the objective of the Crusades, What was the Great Schism, Who were the Waldensians, What was the problem with Indulgences? Why did Henry VIII have so many wives? Why the Reformation and then the counter-Reformation? Or does it even matter?
Apparently not, for most Christians could not begin to answer these questions and countless others, that have troubled believers down through the Church age. Yet, never in history have we had more resources available to us to answer these question with but the punch of a few letters on one’s computer keyboard.
Christianity is essentially a historical religion, The Bible does not tell legends but historical events. The birth of Christ is a supernatural event, but within a historical reference, “And it came to pass in those days, that there went out a decree from Caesar Augustus…” The Apostles’ Creed reads, that Jesus Christ “suffered under Pontius Pilate,” who is referenced as a check-point for the authenticity of an essential Christian doctrine.
God works out his plan of salvation in dramatic confrontations not just between Christian and Pagan, Christian and Jew or Christian and Muslim, but through different personalities and movements, popes and emperors, bishops and laymen, scholars and tinkers, soldiers and pacifists, monks and priests, the orthodox and the heretics, high churchmen and low, the well-known and the obscure, Easterners and Westerners, Romans and Greeks, hermits and knights, rich and poor, inquisitors and martyrs, Catholics and Protestants, and Calvinists and Arminians. The Holy Spirit has made history through them all.
No Christian would deny the importance of Biblical history, but a great eclipse exists in the minds of most believers between the end of the Apostolic era and their own generation. Most Protestants are unfamiliar with the history of what the Apostles’ Creed called, “the holy catholic (meaning not Roman, but universal) church,” but they are also ignorant of the history of their own denomination. Too often especially in respect to the mainline historical denominations their clergy and layman, no longer even hold to the historical confessions of faith, or the particular points of view of Luther, Calvin or John Wesley and others, who founded great movements and promoted revivals of religion in their generation. Whereas Catholics and Orthodox have a greater appreciation for tradition and the history of the church; they usually have less knowledge of Biblical history than the Protestants.
As the patriot considers knowledge of his homeland’s history his civic duty, the Christian should consider knowledge of church history to be his sacred duty. Sacred history is not restricted to the contents of the Bible, sacred history is an on going process and progress. History is made as men respond to the Divine will and purpose, either in unbelief and rebellion or in faithful obedience.
Christians have faith in the Bible as the Word of God and therefore as the true history of the race through Adam, the flood, the patriarchs, the exodus, the kings and prophets, and through the life of Jesus and the Apostles. The problem in studying the history of Christianity beyond the apostolic era is that we have no historian, who is writing with absolute truth and accuracy. Not only is there disagreement over the interpretation of the facts, there is significant disagreement on the what actually happened concerning people and events. Since we cannot study everything, there is the problem of whom and what we should study. Who and what in history do we need to know?
God has graciously given us the Holy Scriptures, not only to learn about Biblical times, but He also sent the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost to witnesses to every generation and give Christians guidance for understanding time and events after the ascension of Jesus and the passing of the apostles. “Back to the Bible” is a popular slogan among fundamentalists. But let us not ignore two millenniums of church history after the closing of the Biblical chronicles. To neglect history is to lose solidarity with Christ’s Church down through the ages, and results in the hardening of sectarianism. The Acts of the Apostles has often times been appropriately called the Acts of the Holy Spirit. There have been countless chapters of Acts added since the passing of the apostolic age; “back to the Bible,” yes, of course, but “onward with the Spirit,” as He has revealed Himself down through the Church Age and as He is revealing Himself to this generation.
Too often, the professional, academic historians in their attempt to be objective, forget that no one is truly objective. We are all influenced by our language, culture, experiences, training, genes, etc., when it comes to recording and interpreting past events. This is not a problem when recognized and acknowledged. The professional historian is pressured by his academic environment to find a natural explanation for what the Bible or the faithful of history have recorded as supernatural. Or they tend to give psychological, sociological or economic explanations for the actions of men and de-emphasize the religious motivation; or if the religious is acknowledged, it is too often the religion of the hypocrite.
Few historians could survive in a state university if they promoted a Theology of History in which God’s providence plays a dominant role as events are unfolding. True history is not merely the direction of history by God; it is the belief that God intervenes in the life of mankind by direct action at certain definite points in time and place. Not merely in Biblical times, but down through the Church Age to the present. Recognizing the hand of God in events and understanding the will and purpose of God is a daunting task, which is best accomplished by a subjective whether than an objective approach to the past. That is by throwing one self into the event, getting under the protagonist’s or antagonist’s skin, walking in his shoes. When we stand back and attempt to be detached or indifferent to the person or event or the outcome, that history can become dry bones. But we can put flesh and blood back on the bones by entering into history, making ourselves as if we are part of the event, that the outcome is as important to us, as it was for the actual participates. We need to put ourselves into the drama, then history lives again.
Arnold J. Toynbee wrote, “The course of human history consists of a series of encounters between individual human beings and God in which each man or woman or child, in turn, is challenged by God to make his free choice between doing God’s will and refusing to do it. When Man refuses, he is free to make his refusal and to take the consequences. When Man accepts, his reward for willing what is the will of God is that he finds himself taken by God into partnership in the doing of God’s creative work.”
Studying and writing history is an art, more than a science. It is recreating the past. God has given us the twin tools of the Bible and the Holy Spirit, now we must recreate the picture, God and man has been in a pilgrimage making the stuff of history, man must work with God as he prayerfully attempts to recreate history by reliving history. I challenge us all to take the journey into the past with me, leave the present behind for the time being, when we return, if you have learned your lessons well, then your faith has increased and you are a more rounded man. Learn the greatest of all the arts, the art of living at once in both time and eternity. In learning church history, find yourself a good history book, and pray over the book. Why not start with Eusebius, "the Father of Church History," after all he was there at the sunset of Ancient History and the dawning of the Middle Ages, which we shall be stepping into.
Back to top
--o0o--
OPEN-AIR PREACHING
A SKETCH OF ITS HISTORY AND REMARKS THEREON
By Charles H. Spurgeon
THERE ARE some customs for which nothing can be pleaded, except that they are very old. In such cases antiquity is of no more value than the rust upon a counterfeit coin. It is, however, a happy circumstance when the usage of ages can be pleaded for a really good and Scriptural practice, for it invests it with a halo of reverence. Now, it can be argued, with small fear of refutation, that openair preaching is as old as preaching itself. We are at full liberty to believe that Enoch, the seventh from Adam, when he prophesied, asked for no better pulpit than the hillside, and that Noah, as a preacher of righteousness, was willing to reason with his contemporaries in the shipyard wherein his marvelous ark was builded.
Certainly, Moses and Joshua found their most convenient place for addressing vast assemblies beneath the unpillared arch of heaven. Samuel closed a sermon in the field of Gilgal amid thunder and rain, by which the Lord rebuked the people and drove them to their knees. Elijah stood on Carmel, and challenged the vacillating nation with "How long halt ye between two opinions?"
Jonah, whose spirit was somewhat similar, lifted up his cry of warning in the streets of Nineveh, and in all her places of concourse gave forth the warning utterance, "Yet forty days, and Nineveh shall be overthrown!" To hear Ezra and Nehemiah "all the people gathered themselves to "ether as one man into the street that was before the water gate." Indeed, we find examples of open-air preaching everywhere around us in the records of the Old Testament.
It may suffice us, however, to go back as far as the origin of our own holy faith, and there we hear the forerunner of the Saviour crying in the wilderness and lifting up his voice from the river's bank. Our Lord Himself, who is yet more our pattern, delivered the larger portion of His sermons on the mountain's side, or by the seashore, or in the streets. Our Lord was to all intents and purposes an openair preacher. He did not remain silent in the synagogue, but He was equally at home in the field. We have no discourse of His on record delivered in the chapel royal, but we have the Sermon on the Mount and the Sermon in the Plain; so that the very earliest and most divine kind of preaching was practiced out-of-doors by Him who spake as never man spake.
There were gatherings of His disciples after His decease, within walls, especially that in the upper room; but the preaching was even then most frequently in the court of the Temple, or in such other open spaces as were available. The notion of holy places and consecrated meetinghouses had not occurred to them as Christians; they preached in the Temple, or in such other open spaces as were available. but with equal earnestness "in every house, they ceased not to teach and preach Jesus Christ."
It would be very easy to prove that revivals of religion have usually been accompanied, if not caused, by a considerable amount of preaching out-of-doors, or in unusual places. The first avowed preaching of Protestant doctrine was almost necessarily in the open air, or in buildings which were not dedicated to worship, for these were in the hands of the papacy. True, Wycliffe for a while preached the Gospel in the church at Lutterworth; Huss and Jerome and Savonarola for a time delivered semi-Gospel addresses in connection with the ecclesiastical arrangements around them; but when they began more fully to know and proclaim the Gospel, they were driven to find other platforms.
The Reformation when yet a babe was like the new-born Christ, and had not where to lay its head, but a company of men comparable to the heavenly host proclaimed it under the open heavens, where shepherds and common people heard them gladly. Throughout England we have several trees remaining called "gospel oaks." There is one spot on the other side of the Thames known by the name of "Gospel Oak," and I have myself preached at Addlestone, in Surrey, under the far-spreading boughs of an ancient oak, beneath which John Knox is said to have proclaimed the Gospel during his sojourn in England. Full many a wild moor and lone hillside and secret spot in the forest have been consecrated in the same fashion, and traditions still linger over caves and dells and hilltops where of old time the bands of the faithful met to hear the Word of the Lord.
It would be an interesting task to prepare a volume of notable facts connected with open-air preaching, or, better still, a consecutive history of it. I have no time for even a complete outline, but would simply ask you, where would the Reformation have been if its great preachers had confined themselves to churches and cathedrals ? How would the common people have become indoctrinated with the Gospel had it not been for those far-wandering evangelists, the colporteurs, and those daring innovators who found a pulpit on every heap of stones, and an audience chamber in every open space near the abodes of men?
All through the Puritan times there were gatherings in all sorts of out-of-the-way places, for fear of persecutors. "We took," says Archbishop Laud, in a letter dated Fulham, June, 1632, "another conventicle of separatists in Newington Woods, in the very brake where the king's stag was to be lodged, for his hunting next morning." A hollow or gravelpit on Hounslow Heath sometimes served as a conventicle, and there is a dell near Hitchin where John Bunyan was wont to preach in perilous times. All over Scotland the straths and dells and vales and hillsides are full of covenanting memories to this day. You will not fail to meet with rock pulpits whence the stern fathers of the Presbyterian church thundered forth their denunciations of Erastianism, and pleaded the claims of the King of kings. Cargill and Cameron and their fellows found congenial scenes for their brave ministries amid the mountains' lone rents and ravines.
What the world would have been if there had not been preaching outside of walls, and beneath a more glorious roof than these rafters of fir, I am sure I cannot guess. It was a brave day for England when Whitefield began field-preaching. When Wesley stood and preached a sermon on his father's grave, at Epworth, because the parish priest would not allow him admission within the (so-called) sacred edifice, Mr. Wesley writes: "I am well assured that I did far more good to my Lincolnshire parishioners by preaching three days on my father's tomb than I did by preaching three years in his pulpit."
Wesley writes in his journal, "Saturday, 31 March, 1731. In the evening I reached Bristol, and met Mr. Whitefield there. I could scarce reconcile myself at first to this strange way of preaching in the fields, of which he set me an example on Sunday; having been all my life (till very lately) so tenacious of every point relating to decency and order, that I should have thought the saving of souls almost a sin, if it had not been done in a church." Such were the feelings of a man who in after life became one of the greatest open-air preachers that ever lived!
Once recommenced, the fruitful agency of field-preaching was not allowed to cease. Amid jeering crowds and showers of rotten eggs and filth, the immediate followers of the two great Methodists continued to storm village after village and town after town. Very varied w ere their adventures, but their success was generally great. One smiles often when reading incidents in their labors. A string of pack horses is so driven as to break up a congregation, and a fire engine is brought out and played over the throng to achieve the same purpose. Hand-bells, old kettles, marrowbones and cleavers, trumpets, drums, and entire bands of music were engaged to drown the preachers' voices.
In one case the parish bull was let loose, and in others dogs were set to fight. The preachers needed to have faces set like flints, and so indeed they had. John Furz says: "As soon as I began to preach, a man came straight forward, and presented a gun at my face; swearing that he would blow my brains out, if I spake another word. However, I continued speaking, and he continued swearing, sometimes putting the muzzle of the gun to my mouth, sometimes against my ear. While we were singing the last hymn, he got behind me, fired the gun, and burned off part of my hair.
After this, my brethren, we ought never to speak of petty interruptions or annoyances. The proximity of a blunderbuss in the hands of a son of Belial is not very conducive to collected thought and clear utterance, but the experience of Furz was probably no worse than that of John Nelson, who coolly says, "But when I was in the middle of my discourse, one at the ouside of the congregation threw a stone, which cut me on the head: however that made the people give greater attention, especially when they saw the blood run down my face; so that all was quiet till I had done, and was singing a hymn."
I have no time further to illustrate my subject by descriptions of the work of Christmas Evans and others in Wales, or of the Haldanes in Scotland, or even of Rowland Hill and his brethren in England. If you wish to pursue the subject these names may serve as hints for discovering abundant material; and I may add to the list The Life of Dr. Guthrie, in which he records notable open-air assemblies at the time of the Disruption, when as yet the Free Church had no places of worship built with human hands.
I must linger a moment over Robert Flockhart of Edinburgh, who, though a lesser light, was a constant one, and a fit example to the bulk of Christ's street witnesses. Every evening, in all weathers and amid many persecutions, did this brave man continue to speak in the street for forty-three years. Think of that, and never be discouraged. When he was tottering to the grave the old soldier was still at his post. "Compassion to the souls of men drove me," said he, "to the streets and lanes of my native city, to plead with sinners and persuade them to come to Jesus. The love of Christ constrained me."
Neither the hostility of the police, nor the insults of papists, Unitarians, and the like could move him; he rebuked error in the plainest terms, and preached salvation by grace with all his might. So lately has he passed away that Edinburgh remembers him still. There is room for such in all our cities and towns, and need for hundreds of his noble order in this huge nation of London—can I call it less?
No sort of defense is needed for preaching out-of-doors; but it would need very potent arguments to prove that a man had done his duty who has never preached beyond the walls of his meetinghouse. A defense is required rather for services within buildings than for worship outside of them. Apologies are certainly wanted for architects who pile up brick and stone into the skies when there is so much need for preaching rooms among poor sinners down below. Defense is greatly needed for forests of stone pillars, which prevent the preacher from being seen and his voice from being heard; for high-pitched Gothic roofs in which all sound is lost, and men are killed by being compelled to shout till they burst their blood-vessels; and also for the willful creation of echoes by exposing hard, sound-refracting surfaces to satisfy the demands of art, to the total overlooking of the comfort of both audience and speaker.
Surely also some decent excuse is badly wanted for those childish people who must needs waste money in placing hobgoblins and monsters on the outside of their preaching houses, and must have other ridiculous pieces of popery stuck up both inside and outside, to deface rather than to adorn their churches and chapels: but no defense whatever is wanted for using the Heavenly Father's vast audience chamber, which is in every way so well fitted for the proclamation of a Gospel so free, so full, so expansive, so sublime.
The great benefit of open-air preaching is that we get so many newcomers to hear the Gospel who otherwise would never hear it. The Gospel command is, "Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature," but it is so little obeyed that one would imagine that it ran thus, "Go into your own place of worship and preach the Gospel to the few creatures who will come inside." "Go out into the highways and hedges, and compel them to come in"— albeit it constitutes part of a parable, is worthy to be taken very literally, and in so doing its meaning will be best carried out.
We ought actually to go into the streets and lanes and highways, for there are lurkers in the hedges, tramps on the highways, street-walkers and lane-haunters, whom we shall never reach unless we pursue them into their own domains. Sportsmen must not stop at home and wait for the birds to come and be shot at, neither must fishermen throw their nets inside their boats and hope to take many fish. Traders go to the markets; they follow their customers and go out after business if it will not come to them; and so must we. Some of our brethren are prosing on and on to empty pews and musty hassocks, while they might be conferring lasting benefit upon hundreds by quitting the old walls for a while, and seeking living stones for Jesus.
I am quite sure, too, that if we could persuade our friends in the country to come out a good many times in the year and hold a service in a meadow, or in a shady grove, or on the hillside, or in a garden, or on a common, it would be all the ketter f or the usual hearers. The mere novelty of the place would freshen their interest, and wake them up. The slight change of scene would have a wonderful effect upon the more somnolent. See how mechanically they move into their usual place of worship, and how mechanically they go out again. They fall into their seats as if at last they had found a resting place; they rise to sing with an amazing effort, and they drop down before you have time for the doxology at the close of the hymn because they did not notice it was coming.
What logs some regular hearers are! Many of them are asleep with their eyes open. After sitting a certain number of years in the same old spot, where the pews, pulpit, galleries, and all things else are always the same, except that they get a little dirtier and dingier every week, where everybody occupies the same position forever and forevermore, and the minister's face, voice, tone are much the same from January to December -you get to feel the holy quiet of the scene and listen to what is going on as though it were addressed to "the dull cold ear of Death."
As a miller hears his wheels as though he did not hear them, or a stoker scarcely notices the clatter of his engine after enduring it for a little time, or as a dweller in London never notices the ceaseless grind of the traffic; so do many members of our congregations become insensible to the most earnest addresses, and accept them as a matter of course. The preaching and the rest of it get to be so usual that they might as well not be at all. Hence a change of place might be useful; it might prevent monotony, shake up indifference, suggest thought, and in a thousand ways promote attention and give new hope of doing good. A great fire which should burn some of our chapels to the ground might not be the greatest calamity which has ever occurred, if it only aroused some of those rivals of the seven sleepers of Ephesus who will never be moved so long as the old house and the old pews hold together.
Besides, the fresh air and plenty of it is a grand thing for every mortal man, woman and child. I preached in Scotland twice on a Sabbath day at Blairmore, on a little height by the side of the sea, and after discoursing with all my might to large congregations, to be counted by thousands, I did not feel onehalf so much exhausted as I often am when addressing a few hundreds in some horrible black hole of Calcutta, called a chapel. I trace my freshness and freedom from lassitude at Blairmore to the fact that the windows could not be shut down by persons afraid of drafts, and that the roof was as high as the heavens are above the earth. My conviction is that a man could preach three or four times on a Sabbath out-of-doors with less fatigue than would be occasioned by one discourse delivered in an impure atmosphere, heated and poisoned by human breath, and carefully preserved from every refreshing infusion of natural air.
I once preached a sermon in the open air in haying time during a violent storm of rain. The text was, "He shall come down like rain upon the mown grass: as showers that water the earth," and surely we had the blessing as well as the inconvenience. I was sufficiently wet, and my congregation must have been drenched, but they stood it out, and I never heard that anybody was the worse in health, though, I thank God, I have heard of souls brought to Jesus under that discourse. Once in a while, and under strong excitement, such things do no one any harm, but we are not to expect miracles, nor wantonly venture upon a course of procedure which might kill the sickly and lay the foundations of disease in the strong.
Do not try to preach against the wind, for it is an idle attempt. You may hurl your voice a short distance by an amazing effort, but you cannot be well heard even by the few. I do not often advise you to consider which way the wind blows, but on this occasion I urge you to do it, or you will labor in vain. Preach so that the wind carries your voice toward the people, and does not blow it down your throat, or you will have to eat your own words.
There is no telling how far a man may be heard with the wind. In certain atmospheres and climates, as for instance in that of Palestine, persons might be heard for several miles; and single sentences of wellknown speech may in England be recognized a long way off, but I should gravely doubt a man if he asserted that he understood a new sentence beyond the distance of a mile. Whitefield is reported to have been heard a mile, and I have been myself assured that I was heard for that distance, but I am somewhat skeptical. Half a mile is surely enough, even with the wind, but you must make sure of that to be heard at all.
Heroes of the Cross -here is a field for you more glorious than the Cid ever beheld when with his brave right arm he smote the paynim hosts. "Who will bring me into the strong city? who will lead me into Edom?" Who will enable us to win these slums and dens for Jesus ? Who can do it but the Lord? Soldiers of Christ who venture into these regions must expect a revival of the practices of the good old times, so far as brickbats are concerned, and I have known a flowerpot to fall accidentally from an upper window in a remarkably slanting direction. Still, if we are born to be drowned we shall not be killed by flowerpots.
Under such treatment it may be refreshing to read what Christopher Hopper wrote under similar conditions more than a hundred years ago. "I did not much regard a little dirt, a few rotten eggs, the sound of a cow's horn, the noise of bells, or a few snowballs in their season; but sometimes I was saluted with blows, stones, brickbats, and bludgeons. These I did not well like: they were not pleasing to flesh and blood. I sometimes lost a little skin, and once a little blood, which was drawn from my forehead with a sharp stone. I wore a patch for a few days, and was not ashamed; I gloried in the cross. And when my small sufferings abounded for the sake of Christ, my comfort abounded much more. I never was more happy in my own soul, or blessed in my labors."
I am somewhat pleased when I occasionally hear of a brother's being locked up by the police, for it does him good, and it does the people good also. It is a fine sight to see the minister of the Gospel marched off by the servant of the law! It excites sympathy for him, and the next step is sympathy for his message. Many who felt no interest in him before are eager to hear him when he is ordered to 1eave off, and still more so when he is taken to the station. The vilest of mankind respect a man who gets into trouble in order to do them good, and if they see unfair opposition excited they grow quite zealous in the man's defense.
As to style in preaching out-of-doors, it should certainly be very different from much of that which prevails within, and perhaps if a speaker were to acquire a style fully adapted to a street audience, he would be wise to bring it indoors with him. A great deal of sermonizing may be defined as saying nothing at extreme length; but out-of-doors verbosity is not admired; you must say something and have done with it and go on to say something more, or your hearers will let you know.
"Now then," cries a street critic, "let us have it, old fellow." Or else the observation is made, "Now then, pitch it out! You'd better go home and learn your lesson." "Cut It short, old boy," is a very common admonition, and I wish the presenters of this advice gratis could let it be heard inside Ebenezer and Zoar and some other places sacred to long-winded orations. Where these outspoken criticisms are not employed, the hearers rebuke prosiness by quietly walking away. Very unpleasant this, to find your congregation dispersing, but a very plain intimation that your ideas are also much dispersed.
In the street, a man must keep himself alive, and use many illustrations and anecdotes, and sprinkle a quaint remark here and there. To dwell long on a point will never do. Reasoning must be brief, clear, and soon done with. The discourse must not be labored or involved, neither must the second head depend upon the first, for the audience is a changing one, and each point must be complete in itself. The chain of thought must be taken to pieces' and each link melted down and turned into bullets: you will need not so much Saladin's saber to cut through a muslin handkerchief as Coeur de Lion's battle-axe to break a bar of iron. Come to the point at once, and come there with all your might.
Short sentences of words and short passages of thought are needed for out-of-doors. Long paragraphs and long arguments had better be reserved for other occasions. In quiet country crowds there is much force in an eloquent silence, now and then interjected; it gives people time to breathe, and also to reflect. Do not, however, attempt this in a London street; you must go ahead, or someone else may run off with your congregation. In a regular field sermon pauses are very effective, and are useful in several ways, both to speaker and listeners, but to a passing company who are not inclined for anything like worship, quick, short, sharp address is most adapted.
In the streets a man must from beginning to end be intense, and for that very reason he must be condensed and concentrated in his thought and utterance. It would never do to begin by saying, "My text, dear friends, is a passage from the inspired Word, containing doctrines of the utmost importance, and bringing before us in the clearest manner the most valuable practical instruction. I invite your careful attention and the exercise of your most candid judgment while we consider it under various aspects and place it in different lights, in order that we may be able to perceive its position in the analogy of the faith. In its exegesis we shall find an arena for the cultured intellect, and the refined sensibilities. As the purling brook meanders among the meads and fertilizes the pastures, so a stream of sacred truth flows through the remarkable words which now lie before us. It will be well for us to divert the crystal current to the reservoir of our meditation, that we may quaff the cup of wisdom with the lips of satisfaction."
There, gentlemen, is not that rather above the average of word-spinning, and is not the art very generally in vogue in these days? If you go out to the obelisk in Blackfriars Road, and talk in that fashion, you will be saluted with "Go on, old buffer," or "Ain't he fine? My eye!" A very vulgar youth will cry, "What a mouth for a tater!" and another will shout in a tone of mock solemnity, "Amen!" If you give them chaff they will cheerfully return it into your own bosom. Good measure, pressed down and running over will they mete out to you. Shams and shows will have no mercy from a street gathering.
But have something to say, look them in the face, say what you mean, put it plainly, boldly, earnestly, courteously, and they will hear you. Never speak against time or for the sake of hearing your own voice, or you will obtain some information about your personal appearance or manner of oratory which will probably be more true than pleasing. "Crikey," says one, "wouldn't he do for an undertaker! He'd make 'em weep." This was a compliment paid to a melancholy brother whose tone is peculiarly funereal. "There, old fellow," said a critic on another occasion, "you go and wet your whistle. You must feel awfully dry after jawing away at that rate about nothing at all." This also was specially appropriate to a very heavy brother of whom we had aforetime remarked that he would make a good martyr, for there was no doubt of his burning well, he was so dry.
It will be very desirable to speak so as to be heard, but there is no use in incessant bawling. The best street preaching is not that which is done at the top of your voice, for it must be impossible to lay the proper emphasis upon telling passages when all along you are shouting with all your might. When there are no hearers near you, and yet people stand upon the other side of the road and listen, would it not be well to cross over and so save a little of the strength which is now wasted?
A quiet, penetrating, conversational style would seem to be the most telling. Men do not bawl and halloa when they are pleading in deepest earnestness; they have generally at such times less wind and a little more rain: less rant and a few more tears. On, on, on with one monotonous shout and you will weary everybody and wear out yourself. Be wise now, therefore, O ye who would succeed in declaring your Master's message among the multitude, and use your voices as common sense would dictate.
In a tract published by that excellent society "The Open-Air Mission," I notice the following:
QUALIFICATIONS FOR OPEN-AIR PREACHERS
1.A good voice.
2.Naturalness of manner.
3.Self-possession.
4.A good knowledge of Scripture and of common things.
5.Ability to adapt himself to any congregation.
6.Good illustrative powers.
7.Zeal, prudence, and common sense.
8.A large, loving heart.
9.Sincere belief in all he says.
10.Entire dependence on the Holy Spirit for success.
11.A close walk with God by prayer.
12.A consistent walk before men by a holy life.
If any man has all these qualifications, the Queen had better make a bishop of him at once, yet there is no one of these qualities which could well be dispensed with.
Back to top
