Polemic Theology: How To Deal With Those Who Differ From Us - Part 1 (Roger Nicole)

We all have had occasions when we sharply differ and disagree with others. This could be in a Bible study group, in a Church. This could even be in a Christian home - between you and your spouse or your children!And experience tells us that such disagreement can occur over wide-ranging issues.

I found this article by Roger Nicole very informative and instructive, not to mention, humbling, because I am, unfortunately, prone to sharp disagreement with others. My prayer is that, by the help of the Holy Spirit, I might be able to put to good use the exhortation of our dear brother on this very important subject.

The name, Roger Nicole, may not be familiar to most Christians. He is, however, no stranger to evangelical scholars. Many would testify to his excellent scholarship and his judicious approach to any subject he might happen to deal with. This article by him is an example of the spirit with which he has conducted much of his scholarly endeavours and I commend it to you. Unfortunately, I cannot recall where I first located this article and, as such, I am unable to provide a proper acknowledgement for it. This is the first part of the article.

____________________

Introduction

It seems strange that one should desire to speak at all about Polemic Theology since we are now in an age when folks are more interested in ecumenism and irenics than in polemics. Furthermore, Polemic Theology appears to have been often rather ineffective. Christians have not managed in many cases to win over their opponents. They have shown themselves to be ornery; they have bypassed some fairly important prescriptions of Scripture; and in the end, they have not convinced very many people--sometimes not even themselves! Under these circumstances one perhaps might desire to bypass a subject like this altogether.

We are called upon by the Lord to contend earnestly for the faith (Jude 3). That does not necessarily involve being contentious; but it involves avoiding compromise, standing forth for what we believe, standing forth for the truth of God--without welching at any particular moment. Thus we are bound to meet, at various points and on various levels, people with whom we disagree. We disagree in some areas of Christian doctrine. We disagree as to some details of church administration. We disagree as to the way in which certain tasks of the church should be pursued.

If we are careful to observe the principles that I would like to expound in this article, we may find that they are valuable not only in the religious field but also in the realms of politics, business and family. Who does not encounter from time to time people who are not in complete agreement? Whether it is between husbands and wives, parents and children, co-workers on the job or fellow members in the church, it is impossible to live without disagreement. Therefore it is good to seek to discover certain basic principles whereby we may relate to those who differ from us.

There are three major questions that we must ask; and I would like to emphasize very strongly that, in my judgment, we need to ask them precisely in the right order: (1) What do I owe the person who differs from me? (2) What can I learn from the person who differs from me? (3) How can I cope with the person who differs from me?

What Do I Owe to the Person Who Differs From Me?

Many people overlook the first two questions and jump right away to: "How can I cope with this? How can I bash this person right down into the ground in order to annihilate objections and differences?" Obviously, if we jump to the third question from the start, it is not likely that we will be successful in winning over dissenters. So I suggest, first of all, that we need to face squarely the matter of our duties. We have obligations to people who differ from us. This does not involve agreeing with them. We have an obligation to the truth, and that has priority over agreement with any particular person. If someone is not in the truth, we have no right to agree. We have no right even to minimize the importance of the difference. Consequently, we owe them neither consent nor indifference. But what we owe that person who differs from us, whoever that may be, is what we owe every human being--we owe them love. And we owe it to them to deal with them as we ourselves would like to be dealt with or treated. (Matthew 7:12)

How then do we desire to be treated? First, we want people to know what we are saying or meaning. If we are going to voice differences, therefore, we have an obligation to make a serious effort to understand the person with whom we differ. That person may have published books or articles. Then we should be acquainted with those writings. It is not appropriate for us to voice sharp differences if we have neglected to read what is available. The person with whom we differ should have evidence that we have read carefully what has been written and that we have attempted to understand its meaning. In the case of an oral exchange where we don't have any written words, we owe the person who differs from us the courtesy to listen carefully to what he or she says. Rather than preparing to pounce on that person the moment he or she stops talking, we should concentrate on apprehending precisely what his or her position is.

In this respect, Dr. Cornelius Van Til has given us a splendid example. As you may know, he expressed very strong objections to the theology of Karl Barth. This was so strong that Barth claimed that Van Til simply did not understand him. It has been my privilege to be at Dr. Van Til's office and to see with my own eyes the bulky tomes of Barth's, Kirchliche Dogmatik (incidentally, these volumes were the original German text, not an English translation). As I leafed through them I did not see one page that was not constellated with underlining, double-underlining, marginal annotations, exclamation points, and question marks galore. So here is someone who certainly did not say, "I know Karl Barth well; I understand his stance; I don't need to read any more of this; I can move on with what I have." Each of the volumes, including the most recent, gave evidence of very, very careful scrutiny. So when we take issue with somebody, we need to do the job that is necessary to know that person so that we are not voicing our criticism in the absence of knowledge but that we are proceeding from the vantage point of real acquaintance.

Even that is not enough, however. Beyond what a person says or writes, we must attempt to understand what a person means. Now it is true that there are what are called "Freudian slips." That is, there are people who do not express themselves exactly in the way it should be done and in the process somehow they give an insight into a tendency that is in them all along and which leads them to express themselves in an infelicitous but revealing manner. So it is appropriate, I suppose, to note this as a personal footnote, so to speak, in order possibly to make use of it at some time in the discussion. But if somebody fails to express himself or herself accurately, there is no great point in pressing the very language that is used. We ought to try to understand what is the meaning that this language is intended to convey. In some cases, we may provide an opportunity for an opponent to speak more accurately.

I have experienced this in my own home. I have noticed that my wife sometimes says things like, "You never empty the wastebasket." Now as a matter of fact, on January 12, 1994, I did empty the wastebasket. Therefore, the word never is inappropriate! This tends to weaken the force of my wife's reproach. Well, I've learned that I don't get anywhere by pressing this point. This kind of response does not provide dividends of joy and peace in my home. I've learned, therefore, to interpret that when my wife says "never" she often means "rarely" or "not as often as should be." When she says "always," she means "frequently" or "more often than should be."

Instead of quibbling as to the words never and always, I would do well to pay attention to what she finds objectionable. And indeed, I should be emptying the wastebasket. Feminist or not feminist, a husband and father should empty the wastebasket; and therefore, if I fail to do this, even only once, there is a good reason to complain. Nothing is gained by quibbling about how often this happens. I ought to recognize this and be more diligent with it rather than to quote the dictionary.

Similarly, in dealing with those who differ, we ought not to split hairs about language just in order to pounce on our opponent because he or she has not used accurate wording. It is more effective to seek to apprehend what is meant and then to relate ourselves to the person's meaning. If we don't do that, of course, there is no encounter because this person speaks at one level and we are taking the language at another level. The two do not meet and the result is bound to be frustrating. If we really want to meet, we might as well try to figure out the meaning rather than to quibble on wording.

Moreover, I would suggest that we owe to people who differ from us to seek to understand their aims. What is it that they are looking for? What is it that makes them tick? What is it that they are recoiling against? What are the experiences, perhaps tragic experiences, that have steeled them into a particular stance? What are the things that they fear and the things that they yearn for? Is there not something that I fear as well or yearn for in the same way? Is there not a possibility here to find a point of contact at the very start rather than to move on with an entirely defensive or hostile mood?

As an example it may be observed that in the fourth century the heretic Arius, and undoubtedly many of his supporters, were especially leery of modalism, a serious error in the conception of the Trinity which claims that the Godhead manifested Himself in three successive forms or modes as Father, Son and the Holy Spirit rather than to exist eternally as Three Who have interpersonal relations with each other. From Arius' vantage point, the orthodox doctrine of the full deity of the Son and the Holy Spirit did of necessity imply a modalistic view. It did not help that one of his very vocal opponents, Marcellus of Ancyra, did, in fact, border dangerously on modalism. Arguments designed to show the biblical and logical strengths of the doctrine of the Son's full deity or vice versa the weakness of Arius's subordinationism would not be likely to be effective unless the instinctive fear of an implied modalism were addressed and shown to be without solid foundation. With all due respect to the soundness, courage, and perseverance of those like Athanasius and Hilary who consistently resisted Arianism, one may yet wonder if a more effective method of dealing with this error might not have been to allay the fear that orthodoxy inevitably would lead to modalism.

In the controversy between Calvinism and Arminianism, it must be understood that many Arminians (possibly almost all of them) believed that to affirm the complete sovereignty of God inevitably implies a rejection of any free will, power of decision, and even responsibility on the part of created rational beings, angelic or human. Their attachment to those features naturally leads them to oppose Calvinism as they understand it. It is imperative for the Calvinist controversialist to affirm and to prove that he does not, in fact, deny or reject these modalities of the actions and decisions of moral agents but that he or she undertakes to retain these--even though their logical relation to divine sovereignty remains shrouded in a mystery that transcends finite, human logic.

Similarly, the Calvinist should not glibly conclude that evangelical Arminians are abandoning the notion of divine sovereignty because they assert the freedom of the human will. It is plainly obvious that Arminians pray for the conversion of those yet unconverted and that they desire to recognize the Lordship of God. The Arminian will do well to emphasize this in discussion with Calvinists so as to provide a clearer perception of the actual stance of both parties. It is remarkable that committed Calvinists can sing without reservation many of the hymns of Charles and John Wesley, and vice versa that most Arminians do not feel they need to object to those of Isaac Watts, Augustus Toplady, or John Newton.

In summary, I would say we owe it to our opponents to deal with them in such a way that they may sense that we have a real interest in them as persons, that we are not simply trying to win an argument or show how smart we are, but that we are deeply interested in them--and are eager to learn from them as well as to help them.

One method that I have found helpful in making sure that I have dealt fairly with a position that I could not espouse was to assume that a person endorsing that view was present in my audience (or was reading what I had written). Then my aim is to represent the view faithfully and fully without mingling the criticism with factual statements. In fact, I try to represent them so faithfully and fully that an adherent to that position might comment, "This man certainly does understand our view!" It would be a special boon if one could say, "I never heard it stated better!" Thus I have earned the right to criticize. But before I proceed to do this, it is only proper that I should have demonstrated that I have a correct understanding of the position I desire to contest.

What If There Had Never Been A Bible - Part 3 (W Graham Scroggie)

This is the third and final part of the article, What If There Had Never Been a Bible, by W Graham Scroggie.

_______________________

And what can one say about

THE INFLUENCE OF THE BIBLE ON THE MISSIONARY ENTERPRISE

To tell this story would require, not a paragraph, but a library, and many libraries. Yet, for our present purpose, we may get a flash-back which ought to stir our souls.

Speaking only of Protestant Missions, and only of the modern period of missions, at least 400 Missionary Societies could be named which operate in every part of the world.

Up to the beginning of this century over 500 missionaries had made translations or revisions of Holy Scripture; and there were about 90 Protestant Missions to the Jews.

Dr. Dennis, of Princeton University, has written a work of over 1,600 pages on the sociological results of Christian Missions in every part of the world.

Now if there had never been a Bible, nothing of this would ever have existed, and the whole world would still be “sitting in darkness and in the shadow of death.”

But as statistics may leave most people cold, let us for a moment or two be more personal.

Referring still only to the modern period of missions, if there had been no Bible, no work would have been done by Carey, or Marshman, or Ward, or Henry Martyn, or Alexander Duff in India, and there would have been in that vast land no Christian hospitals, educational institutions, or zenana work.

Morrison, and Burns, and Griffith John, Timothy Richards, and Hudson Taylor would never have gone to China. Hepburn, and Verbeck would never have gone to Japan; and we would never have heard of Paul Kanamori, or of Kagawa.

Underwood, and Gale would never have gone to Korea. Keith Falconer, and’ Samuel Zwemer would never have gone to Arabia. Moffat, and Livingstone, and Macbay, and Fred Arnot, and Mary Slessor, and Dan Crawford would never have gone to Africa. Allen Gardiner, and similarly devoted missionaries, would never have gone to South America. Williams, and Paton, and Patteson, and Chalmers would never have gone to the Islands of the Pacific.

And the time would fail me to tell of John Eliot, David Brainerd, Charles Abel, Andrew Murray, Mary Read, Christina Forsyth, James Gilmour, C. T. Studd, Bishop Hannington, Adoniram Judson, Robert Laws, Raymond Lull, Dr. Pennell, Pandita Ramabai, Sadhu Sundar Singh, James Stewart, Spencer Walton; and of Dame Edith Brown, Amy Carmichael, Mildred Cable, Evangeline and Francesca French, who happily are still with us; and a throng of other great souls who counted life lost that was not thrown away for God.

What, suppose you, moved all these to such high and noble enterprise! Only one thing, the revelation of the redeeming God in Christ Jesus, the record of which is given only in the Bible.

But if there had been no Bible there would have been no missionary enterprise or history; and no one would have lived for Christ, and died for those for whom He died.

And a brief word must be said about

THE INFLUENCE OF THE BIBLE ON THE INDIVIDUAL SOUL

The Scriptures have never been the preserve of weak-minded men and sentimental women, nor of the unlettered and the ignorant, for even before they were written, the truth orally proclaimed made converts in the households of Herod and Caesar, and many of the early martyrs were men and women of social distinction and of intellectual eminence.

The difference between mediocrity and genius, when laid hold of by Christianity, is not in the value of souls, for all are alike dear to God, but in what ability can do for the Kingdom of God which inability cannot do.

AUGUSTINE, the intellectual, tells his story in his Confessions, and a sad one it is. He spent his youth in profligacy, while pursuing the study of rhetoric, and he was the heartbreak of his devoted and godly mother, Monica. When twenty-two years of age, while in a garden in Milan, contemplating his misspent life, he tells us that he heard a voice saying: “Take up and read, take up and read,” and, opening a Bible which he had with him, his eyes fell on the words:

“Let us walk honestly as in the day; not in rioting and drunkenness, not in chambering and wantonness, not in strife and envy; but put ye on the Lord Jesus Christ, and make not provision for the flesh, to fulfil the lusts thereof.”

By these words Augustine was led to a saving knowledge of God, and he became one of the greatest of the Church Fathers, of theologians, and of writers, whose influence has been stamped upon the Christian Church for 1600 years.

Had the Bible never been written, he could not have read it and if he had never read it, he would never have been heard of; and we would never have known of the Confessions of that repentant sinner and forgiven saint; nor would we ever have heard of his City of God, and 250 other books.

It was in the library of the University of Erfurt that a student, twenty years of age, whose name was MARTYN LUTHER, had his attention attracted to a volume of the Bible, a book at that time practically unknown. This he read and re-read whenever he could.

Later, in the city of Rome, as he was saying prayers on the Lateran Staircase, the words of Habakkuk kept sounding in his ears, “The just shall live by faith.”

As he climbed the Staircase, imagining that he was earning a year’s indulgence at every step, he was startled again by the same words, as if a voice of thunder had uttered them - “The just shall live by faith.”

“What folly,” he said to himself, “to seek indulgence from the ‘Church when God is willing to acquit me of all my sins, if I believe in His Son.”

That was the Scripture which, through Luther, changed the course of the world. “It was,” says F. W. Boreham, “as though all the windows of Europe had been suddenly thrown open, and the sunshine came streaming in everywhere.”

Out of that truth, of justification by faith in Christ alone, came the mighty Reformation, and revival spread like an epidemic.

In his Grace Abounding JOHN BUNYAN tells us that he never went to school to Plato or Aristotle, but, he says,

“I betook me to my Bible, and began to take great pleasure in reading it, but especially the historical parts thereof.”

And again,

“I began to look into the Bible with new eyes, and read as I never did before; and especially the Epistles of the Apostle Paul were sweet and pleasant to me"; and he adds, “indeed, I was then never out of the Bible.” And so by this means, the drunken tinker of Bedford was so enlivened and enlightened by the Spirit of God as to write the greatest book in the world next to the Bible, The Pilgrim’s Progress.

But learned or ignorant, rich or poor, religious or irreligious, all men and women who have ever received eternal life have done so, and still do so, by the revelation which the Scriptures embody. The Pilgrim’s Progress opens with the words:

“I saw a man clothed with rags standing in a certain place, with his face from his own house, a book in his hand, and a great burden upon his back. I looked and saw him open the book, and read therein; and as he read, he wept and trembled; and not being able longer to contain, he broke out with a lamentable cry, saying, ‘What shall I do?”

Yes, that is the Book which has brought conviction of sin, and. led to conversion through grace, of everyone who has ever become a pilgrim to the Celestial City in the Land of Beulah beyond the River; each one has gone through the Wicket Gate; and if the stories of all who have passed that way were written, “the world itself could not contain the books that should be written.” These stories constitute the miracle of all the ages.

And when in a Methodist Society Meeting in Aldersgate Street in this city, on May 24th, 1738, the devout and seeking JOHN WESLEY heard someone read Luther’s preface to the Epistle to the Romans, his heart, he tells us, was

“strangely warmed. I felt I did trust in Christ, Christ alone, for salvation; and an assurance was given me that He had taken away my sins, even mine, and saved me from the law of sin and death.”

Out of that conversion came the revolutionizing 18th century Revival, and the rise of the great Methodist Movement. That Revival, as J. R. Green has shown, and later, Dr. Bready, changed the religious and social face of Britain, and has had repercussions to the ends of the earth.

And JOHN NEWTON has told us that when he was eleven years of age he went to Africa that he might be free to sin to his heart’s content. There he sank into abject degradation, first becoming a slave, and later, a trafficker in slaves. His mouth was always full of oaths and curses, and he was on the highway to hell.

But in March, 1748, when he was twenty-three years of age, he was caught in a terrific storm at sea, and his ship was foundering. In utter despair he cried to God for mercy, and mercy God showed him.

That deep-dyed sinner became the Rector of St. Mary Woolnoth of this City, the writer of that religious classic, the Cardiphonia, and the joint-author with William Cowper of the Olney Hymns. The hand that had sent so many to an ignominious death, wrote, How sweet the name of Jesus sounds in a believer’s ear, and, One there is’ above all others, well deserves the name of Friend, and Begone unbelief, my Saviour is near, and many another which Christians will sing right up to the Golden Gates.

Take one more instance:

When CHARLES HADDON SPURGEON was fifteen years of age, one snowy day in a Primitive Methodist Church in Colchester, in January, 1850, he heard a preacher say a few simple things on the’ text, “Look unto Me, and be ye saved, all the ends of the earth.”

Then the preacher, catching sight of this youth, addressed him personally. He told him that he would be miserable all his life unless he looked to Jesus for salvation. And Spurgeon tells us that he looked and looked until he almost looked his eyes away, and he saw what he looked for; and that day God laid His hand upon one who was to become the greatest Gospel preacher of the Christian age; who, for over thirty years, preached to 10,000 people every Sunday in the Metropolitan Tabernacle at Newington Butts; who brought hundreds of thousands of people to the Cross of Christ; whose sermons are published in more than 6o volumes; who founded a College for those who would preach the Gospel he so deeply loved an Orphanage, and a Colportage Society; and whose death fell upon London as a calamity.

These men owed everything to the Bible, and had there been no Bible, there would have been no Augustine the theologian, no Luther the reformer, no Bunyan the immortal dreamer, no Wesley the revivalist, no Newton the hymn writer, and no Spurgeon the evangelist; and if these were taken out of history, the rent would be so great as to render the garment of Christendom almost unrecognizable.

And finally, our rapid survey must include a word on

THE INFLUENCE OF THE BIBLE ON HOME LIFE

The homes of a nation must be its greatest blessing, or its greatest curse. No nation has yet survived whose home life was not founded on true religion. Ancient Egypt, Assyria, Greece, and Rome all passed away because they had not the true foundation; but for nearly 2000 years the Christian Church has survived because the Bible struck root in the homes of the people.

Bible instruction in the family began centuries before the Incarnation, and Jewish children were taught the story of their nation from the time of Abraham.

Harnack has shown that in the apostolic age the Old Testament had its place in the Christian home. Timothy, we read, was early taught the Scriptures by his mother and grandmother, and this practice continued, with the New Testament Writings added, throughout the early centuries. For a thousand years Romanism tried to prevent it, but with the Reformation it came in again like a flood, and to-day no home need be without a Bible.

The question was put more than once to Bunyan’s pilgrim: “Where are your wife and family?” The Bible, and the Christ of the Bible, are for the home as well as for the individual soul. The Family Bible is a noble idea, until it becomes merely a register of births, marriages, and deaths. The mother is the maker of the home, and the contribution of mothers to the building of the Church of God can never be fully known, but something of its significance may be seen in the offspring of godly mothers.

Think of Monica and Augustine, of Susanna and the Wesley sons, of Mary and George Washington, of the mother of John Newton, of Nancy and Abraham Lincoln, of Margaret Ogilvy and J. M. Barrie, and a host of others, women builders of the City of God.

Surely in all literature there is no more moving picture of a pious home than the one Robert Burns has given us in his Cottar’s Saturday Night:

“The cheerfu’ supper done, wi’ serious face,
They, round the ingle, form a circle wide;
The sire turns o’er, with patriarchal grace,
The big ha’-bible, ance his father’s pride:
His bonnet rev’rently is laid aside,
His lyart haffets wearing thin and bare;
Those strains that once did sweet in Zion glide.
He wales a portion with judicious care;
And ‘Let us worship God!’ he says with solemn air.

Then kneeling down to Heaven’s Eternal King.
The saint, the father, and the husband prays:
Hope springs exulting on triumphant wing,’
That thus they all shall meet in future days,
There, ever bask in uncreated rays.
No more to sigh, or shed the bitter tear,
Together hymning their Creator’s praise,
In such society, yet still more dear;
While circling Time moves round in an eternal sphere,”

But if there had been no Bible, such homes would never have existed.

Perhaps enough has been said to show that the Bible is the most creating, regenerating, civilizing, humanizing, educating, reforming, and inspiring power in all the world, and that the most lurid imagination cannot conceive what would be the state of the world to-day if there had never been a Bible.

But we place this emphasis on the Book, only because it is the one inspired and authoritative record of the redemption which is in Christ Jesus.

It is little wonder that, throughout the ages, the devil has attempted to discredit or destroy the Bible, in spite of Christians, and, alas, sometimes by means of them.

If he had succeeded, what a kingdom he would have had by now But he has not succeeded. We still have Christ, and the Bible, and the Christian, and the Church, and the Gates of Hell shall never prevail against them.

“The Cross it standeth fast, Hallelujah!
Defying every blast, Hallelujah
The winds of hell have blown,
The world its hate hath shown.
Yet it is not overthrown,
Hallelujah, for the Cross!”

What If There Had Never Been A Bible - Part 2 (W Graham Scroggie)

This is the second part of the article, What If There Had Never Been a Bible, by W Graham Scroggie.

_______________________________

But further, there is

THE INFLUENCE OF THE BIBLE ON LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE

Considerable as has been its influence on Art and Music, its influence on Language and Literature has been vastly greater. But for the Bible the English Language, and English Literature, as we know them, would never have been. Prof. Quiller-Couch, lecturing at Cambridge University, said:

“The Scriptures in our Authorized Version are part and parcel of English Literature,” and “the most majestic thing in our Literature,” “a well of English undefiled.”

And again,

“The Authorized Version has set a seal on our natural style, thinking, and speaking”; “it is in everything we see, hear, and feel, because it is in us, in our blood.”

And J. R. Green, in his History of the English People, says:

“As a mere literary monument, the English Version of the Bible remains the noblest example of the English tongue, while its perpetual use made it, from the instant of its appearance, the standard of our language.”

And Macaulay said of the English Bible:

“If everything else in our language should perish, it would alone suffice to show the whole extent of its beauty and power.”

Try to imagine, then, what would happen if the Bible and all its influences were obliterated! It would mean that all copies of Bible manuscripts would disappear, and consequently all Scripture quotations and references in the writings of the Church Fathers; all Versions of the Bible also, the Bishops’, the Authorized, and the Revised; and all translations of the Bible, which are in over 1,000 languages and dialects; and in consequence, of course, so would all agencies for the circulation of the Scriptures, the British and Foreign Bible Society, the National Bible Society of Scotland, the Hibernian Bible Society, and the Trinitarian; all Bible Societies in Europe, and in America, and all similar agencies throughout the world.

All these would go, and with them, all the influences they have exerted on the mind and heart and will of uncounted millions of people, of all nations, and kindreds, and tongues, and all their effects upon social and national life everywhere.

But what if the Bible and all its influences were to be expunged from English Literature, that, for instance, of the Elizabethan and Victorian periods! Could anyone assess the loss?

MILTON’s Paradise Lost, and Paradise Regained would completely disappear, for the one is about the Fall in Eden, and the other is about Christ’s victory over the devil in the wilderness. Could we afford to lose these masterpieces, as literature? And think of SHAKESPEARE’S works. Bishop Wordsworth wrote in 1864:

“Take the entire range of English literature; put together our best authors, who have written upon subjects not professedly religious or theological, and we shall not find, I believe, in them all united, so much evidence of the Bible having been read and used, as we have found in Shakespeare alone.”

And a more recent writer has said that “Shakespeare definitely made identifiable quotations from or allusions to at least forty-two books of the Bible.”

There are many passages in Shakespeare which cannot be understood by anyone who is not acquainted with the Bible. Such references are found in Hamlet, As You Like It, Richard III, King Henry IV, All’s Well, and in numerous shorter works.

And what about BUNYAN? But for the Bible, do you suppose we would ever have heard of the Bedford tinker? Bunyan’s contribution to style and to literature is due entirely to the Authorized Version of our Bible, which he so imbibed, and in which he so soaked, that the only way he could write was Biblically. This unlettered man produced 60 works, longer and shorter, one for each year of his life. The elimination of many of these would not mean serious loss, but the Life and Death of Mr. Badman, Grace Abounding to the Chief of Sinners, the Holy War, and, greatest of them all, the Pilgrim’s Progress, “final flower of Puritan theology and experience,” these are part of the English Language, and of English Literature. This masterpiece, the Pilgrim’s Progress, has been translated into no fewer than 108 languages and dialects, and has become a part of the thought-stock of an uncountable multitude of people.

What a tragic gap would be made in literature by the elimination of Bunyan’s characters; Christian, Evangelist, Obstinate, Pliable, Prudence, Talkative, By-Ends, Hopeful, Great-Heart, Ready-to-Halt, and many others! Of this book Gosse says: “It is the matchless and inimitable crystallization into imaginative art of the whole system of Puritan Protestantism”; and, remember, it is based squarely on the Bible.

But these are not isolated instances of the Bible’s influence in literature. Herbert, Crashaw, Quarles, Spenser, and Addison must be added to those who in the 16th and 17th centuries were indebted to the Bible. Francis Bacon has more than 70 allusions to the Bible in his Essays. And it can be safely claimed that all that is best in the Victorian period gives evidence of this influence, which, were it extracted from the writings of Wordsworth, and Tennyson, and Browning, and Carlyle, and Ruskin, and Cowper, and Coleridge, and Burns, and Scott, and Thackeray, and George Eliot, and Dickens, and Reade, and Stevenson, and the Brontes, and Hawthorne, and Longfellow, and Southey, and many more, would so impair them as, in some instances, to ruin them. An index of Bible references in the writings of Ruskin makes a volume of over 300 pages; and in Van Dyke’s book on Tennyson is a list of the poet’s Bible quotations and allusions which covers 24 pages.

For over 1200 years the Bible has been an active force in English literature, and during the whole period it has been moulding the diction of representative thinkers and literary artists. With the obliteration of the Bible all that would go, with the result that we would not have a literature at all.

And all the religious classics would go also: the Devotions of Lancelot Andrewes; Keble’s Christian Year; the Imitation of Christ, by Thomas à Kempis; the Thoughts of Pascal; the Saint’s Rest, by Richard Baxter; the Confessions of Augustine; Holy Living, and Holy Dying, by Jeremy Taylor; the Serious Call, by William Law; the Cardiphonia, by John Newton; Rutherford’s Letters, and hundreds more; for, but for the Bible, these things could never have been written, or thought.

And, to an extent which is not appreciated, the language of the Bible has entered into our common speech, and all the time terms are being employed by the people, the origin of which, for the most part, they do not know.

Illustration of this is seen in such expressions as, highways and byways; hip and thigh; arise as one man; lick the dust; a broken reed; the root of all evil; weighed and found wanting; the sweat of his brow; a word in season; heap coals of fire; a pearl of great price; the burden and heat of the day; wars and rumours of wars; an eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth; casting pearls before swine; and hundreds more. These are often used in a sense quite false, and entirely opposed to their original meaning; but that only demonstrates the influence of the Bible where it is least intended or expected.

When we sing, God Save the King, we are using Bible language (1 Sam. x. 24). The inscription over the front portico of the Royal Exchange is from Psalm xxiv, “The earth is the LORD’s and the fulness thereof.” The University of Oxford has for its motto, Dominus illuminatio mea, which is from Psalm xxvii. Truly in the very fabric and fibre of our life is this Book of books.

And now, for a moment, let us think of

THE INFLUENCE OF THE BIBLE ON BELIEF

Everybody believes something, if it is only that he believes nothing. It is not humanly possible not to believe. The heretic believes that he is orthodox; and even the lunatic believes that he is sane.

But when we come to Christian belief, we are face to face with monuments of theological thought, representing the progress of the Church’s Faith; a Faith which expresses itself in Creeds, Confessions, and Catechisms, These have been of the substance of Christian thought for 1600 years.

One needs only to name - the Apostles’ Creed, the Nicene Creed, the Athanasian Creed, the Te Deum Laudamus; the Augsburg Confession, the Westminster Confession; the Catechisms of Geneva, and Heidelberg; the Larger, and the Shorter Westminster Catechisms - to indicate the wealth of theological thought which is the Church’s heritage.

But these Statements of Faith - and there are many more - are based on the Bible, and if it and all its influences were obliterated, all these summaries of the Truth would disappear, and with them the Christian Church, for, but for these Creeds, Confessions, and Catechisms, there would never have been any personal faith, any public testimony, any doctrinal vindication, any authoritative dogma, any test of orthodoxy, or any standard of discipline; everyone would have believed, and said, and done “that which was right in his own eyes”; and where would that have landed us!

Had there been no Bible, would we ever have heard of Irenaeus, and Justin Martyr, and Tertullian; of the two Clements, and Origen, and Athanasius, and Basil, and Augustine, and Jerome; of Aquinas, and Calvin, and Luther, and Zwingli?

And had there been no Bible and no beliefs, the noble army of martyrs would never have existed. Wild beasts would have lost many a meal in Roman arenas; Inquisition racks would never have been stained with the blood of Christian confessors; nor would fire flames in London, Oxford, and Edinburgh ever have licked human flesh.

If the Bible had never been written, women like Perpetua, and Felicitas, and Blandina, and Margaret Lachlan, and Margaret Wilson would never have glorified the history of courage. Nor would we ever have heard of Savonarola, and Huss, and Latimer, and Ridley, and Cranmer, and Tyndale, and thousands of others “of whom the world was not worthy.”

Only for deep convictions would people suffer as the saints have suffered, and those convictions could have grown in no other soil than that of the Bible; but if there had been no such Book, there would have been no such sufferings, because there would have been no such convictions for which to suffer.

And who can estimate

THE INFLUENCE OF THE BIBLE ON SOCIAL REFORM

It has been a charge against evangelicalism that it has no social passion, that its pursuit of the salvation of souls excludes interest in the salvation of society. Nothing could be further from the truth than such a charge, and they who make it only advertise their colossal ignorance. Social reform in our own and other countries owes more to evangelicalism than to any other influence.

It was John Wesley, William Wilberforce, Thomas Clarkson, Granville Sharp, Fowell Buxton, and Abraham Lincoln who fought the slave traffic, and they were all evangelicals. It was John Howard and Elizabeth Fry, both evangelicals, who championed the cause of prison reform. To the memory of that great reformer, Lord Shaftesbury, a pioneer emancipator of industrial England, and also an evangelical, stands the Eros Monument in Piccadilly Circus, purchased with the pennies of the grateful poor.

It was John B. Gough, Frances Willard, and Sir Wilfred Lawson - all evangelicals - who attacked the entrenched interests of the drink traffic, and whose labours resulted in many Temperance Societies for both old and young. It was Robert Raikes, an evangelical, who inaugurated Sunday Schools in this country, which, says J. R. Green, “were the beginnings of popular education.” It was Benjamin Waugh, George Muller, William Quarrier, C. H. Spurgeon, J. W. C. Fegan, and T. J. Barnardo, all pronounced evangelicals, who espoused the cause of the children, and established Orphanages in England and Scotland which are flourishing at the present time.

It was William and Catherine Booth who brought into being the vast and world-wide organization of the Salvation Army. Sir George Williams originated the Young Men’s Christian Association. Arthur Broome founded the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (R.S.P.C.A.); and Florence Nightingale was the great reformer of hospital nursing. All these were outstanding evangelicals, and deeply-rooted believers in the Word of God.

But if there had been no such Word there would have been no such benefactors and benefactions, and this country would at this time be sunken in the most incredible bestialities, as indeed it was, in the earlier half of the eighteenth century, before the Evangelical Revival, as Dr. Bready has shown in his book, England, Before and After Wesley.

And we must not omit to refer to

THE INFLUENCE OF THE BIBLE ON PREACHING AND REVIVALS

Do we realize that if there had been no Bible there would have been no Christian preachers, or teachers, or commentators, or Biblical scholars; for there would have been nothing to preach, nothing to teach, and nothing to investigate! But look at this a little more in detail.

Had there been no Bible there would have been no Preachers, for preaching owes its existence to revealed religion. Had God never spoken to men, they never would have had anything to preach, and so the possibility of any record of preaching would have disappeared, and the necessity for Theological Colleges and Bible Institutes from the time of Samuel to the present day, would never have existed.

As preaching from the time of Christ to the present time has been dependent on His incarnation, life, ministry, death, resurrection, and ascension, and as this supreme revelation has for its background the whole of the Old Testament, it is easy to see that if the Bible had never been written, we would never have had any knowledge of preaching under either the Old Covenant, or in the time of Christ, or in the Apostolic age; and without all this, preaching from the close of the first century A.D. would have had neither foundation norsubstance, and, needless to say, the loss through these nearly nineteen hundred years would have been incalculable and calamitous.

We would never have heard of the warning words of Enoch and Noah, the instructions of Moses, the testimony of Joshua, nor of the challenge of Elijah. The seraphic utterances of Isaiah would never have reached us:

“Seek ye the LORD while He may be found,
Call ye upon Him while He is near;
Let the wicked forsake his way,
And the unrighteous man his thoughts;
And let him return unto the LORD,
And He will have mercy upon him;
And to our God,
For He will abundantly pardon.”

We would never have listened to the tender pathos of Jeremiah and Hosea; to the denunciations of Amos, and Micah, and Malachi; nor to the encouragements of Ezekiel and Zechariah. We would have been entirely ignorant of the preaching of John the Baptist, and Peter, and Stephen, and Paul; and what would be a more grievous loss than all beside, we would never have heard the words of the greatest of all preachers:

“Come unto Me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give yourest.”

“I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life.”

I am the Resurrection and the Life; he that believeth in Me, though he were dead, yet shall he live; and whosoever liveth and believeth in Me, shall never die.”

Scores of suchlike utterances, which are in the warp and woof of Christian thinking and experience, would never have been known, if there had been no Bible.

We would have remained strangers also to the eloquence of Ambrose, and Chrysostom, and Jeremy Taylor, and Chalmers, to the profound thought of Athanasius, and Augustine, and Calvin; to the conscience-smiting pleading of Luther, and Wesley, and Knox; and to the passionate evangelism of Whitefield, and Spurgeon, and Moody. And to these great names we must add those of: Bernard, and Eckhart, and Tauler, and Sibbs, and Baxter; Owen, and Bunyan; Hooker and Donna and Fuller; McCheyne, and Caird, and Matheson; Dale, and Parker, and Morley Punshon, and Maclaren; F. W. Robertson; J. H. Newman, and H. P. Liddon; Christmas Evans, John Evans, and William Williams; Vinet, and Godet, and Monod; and Tholuck; Jonathan Edwards, and Finney, and Phillips Brooks; Beecher, and Bushnell, and a host of others down to this hour. Had there been no Bible there would have been no Campbell Morgan, preacher and teacher, and tens of thousands of people would never have sat in this Church, listening to him expounding the Word of Life. And, of course, if there had been no preachers, and teachers, and spiritual leaders, there would have been no cathedrals, or churches, or chapels, or mission halls; but the land would have been full of gin palaces, casinos, and brothels.

All this ministry owed its existence to the fact and substance of the Bible, and had the Book never been, these men and their messages would never have been.

And what in a passing moment can we say about Revivals? It has been thought that the Christian Church exists, as a motor car is worked, upon a succession of explosions. It is a fact, at any rate, that in the history of the Christian Church a law of periodicity, in this matter of revivals, is discernible. This law is implicit in all progress. There are times of ebb and times of flow in poetry, and art, and literature, and learning, and science, and commerce; and it would be strange indeed if there were no such times in spiritual experience. But the fact is, there have been religious revivals throughout all ages, and these, we may see, have been essential to spiritual progress.

Revival is a re-awakening to something that has been forgotten, a flourishing again of something that appears to be dying, a stimulus of attention and interest in something that has been neglected; and this, I say, has characterized the history of religion for millenniums. We have illustrations of it in the time of Moses, of Samuel, of Hezekiah, of Jonah, and of Ezra and Nehemiah.

In the first century Pentecost was a mighty leap forward in the spiritual experience of men. In the fifth century Chrysostom’s preaching of the cross enraptured multitudes in Constantinople.

In the twelfth century the Waldenses, in the Piedmont valleys of the Alps, were preaching the simplicity, purity, and authority of the Gospel; and notwithstanding persecution, they became the chief evangelists of Italy. In the same century, and also in Italy, Francis of Assisi, by example and proclamation, was succeeding in calling men from the indulgence, deadness, and papal absolutism of the Medieval Church.

In the fourteenth century Wycliffe fought, almost single-handed, for purity of worship, and to make the people of England familiar with the Bible, and in this ministry he anticipated and prepared for the Reformation.

In the fifteenth century Savonarola was proclaiming his message of sin and redemption to great effect in Florence, arousing the people from their moral stagnancy and turpitude.

In the sixteenth century, Luther, in Germany, Calvin in Switzerland, and Knox in Scotland, were, in different ways, making religious history, and the results have been seen and felt ever since. Calvin’s great message centred in the truth of God’s sovereignty, and is embodied in his Institutes; and Luther’s great message centred in the truth of Justification by Faith in Christ alone, and its abiding expression is in Protestantism. John Knox in Scotland, with tremendous power, attacked the ignorance, superstition, and tyranny of his time by proclaiming emancipation in Christ. His uncompromising and fiery ministry gave to Scotland a national life and a national Church, and made religion the dominating factor in the common life of the people.

Then, in the eighteenth century came the great Evangelical Revival under the ministries of the Wesleys and Whitefield, John the theologian, Charles the poet, and George the evangelist. This movement changed the face of England, not only spiritually, but also socially, politically, and educationally, and the effects of it are still with us.

Towards the end of the nineteenth century came the movement inspired instrumentally by Moody and Sankey, a movement which stirred the whole of the British Isles; which brought salvation and spiritual renewal to multitudes of people, and a great impetus to missionary work abroad.

And at the beginning of the twentieth century revival again visited Wales, which, among other benefits, resulted in a diminution of drunkenness, an abandonment of feuds, and the restitution of property.

Who can compute the compelling and restraining power for good of all this preaching, and all these revivals! Yet, had there been no Bible there would have been none of it, and instead of spiritual renewal there would have been a deepening and damning degradation. But for the Bible there would have been no revivals of religion, for there would have been no religion to revive. But for the Bible the world would have been, and would still be, a loathsome reeking charnel-house.

What If There Had Never Been A Bible - Part 1 (W Graham Scroggie)

If there is one thing in the life and ministry of Graham Scroggie that has made an indelible impression upon me, it is the fact that in his first two pastorates, he was forced to leave them because he preached the truth. He reminded me of the many faithful prophets of our Lord in the Old Testament, some of whom suffered more than just rejection. And whenever I do encounter people in the Churches where I have preached who seem resistant to God’s Word, I take comfort in the remembrance of Scroggie and that I am not the first (nor the last) to experience such resistance. I have always found Scroggie helpful especially with his ability to provide a broad overview of the whole Scriptures, and portions of the Scriptures. I think here particularly of two of his better known works, The Unfolding Drama of World Redemption and A Guide to the Gospels, both of which I have found very informative and instructive. The wonderful thing about reading Scroggie is that you never know when you might discover a real gem. He has this uncanny ability to point out something in the Scriptures which is so very obvious and yet so very easily missed by us. While there have been some helpful modern attempts at constructing a Biblical theology of the whole Bible, Scroggie remains for me a must when it comes to understanding the history of redemption chronologically. I am given to understand that he has written some other works but I have not had the privilege to reading them. What I can say is that from what I have read of the two books mentioned above, we have much to learn from him today still, dated though he might in the opinion of some.

William Graham Scroggie (1877-1958) was born at Great Malvern, England, of Scottish parents who ministered as evangelists. Being one of nine children in a home without normal educational advantages, he grew up in an ambiance of rich Christian experience. After a few years in business, he entered Spurgeon’s College in London at the age of 19 to train for the Baptist ministry. Turned out of his first two churches in London and Yorkshire because of his opposition to modernism and worldliness, he set himself to the study of the Bible. And, in the next two difficult years, when he had to live with little to support him, he laid the foundation of all his subsequent work. He served a succession of churches, the most fruitful of which was that at Charlotte Chapel, Edinburgh (1916-1933). In his years in Charlotte Chapel, 32 men entered the ministry and 51 missionaries were sent overseas. For many years Scroggie wrote Scripture Union and Sunday school materials for The Sunday School Times. He also led thousands through a Bible correspondence course. Following further pastorates in New Zealand, Australia, Tasmania, the United States, and Canada, he became pastor of Spurgeon’s Metropolitan Tabernacle, London, during World War II. His home was bombed on three occasions, and his historic church building destroyed during an air raid. Increasing ill health forced him to retire in 1944. He devoted his remaining years to completing his literary work, The Unfolding Drama of Redemption. He died on December 28, 1958.

The following quotation by Scroggie probably sums up his one great desire and purpose as a Bible teacher and preacher better than anything I have read:

Preachers will take for texts, phrases which convey a moral or spiritual suggestion, and will develop that thought along one or other of many lines. But one may do that kind of work for half-a-century and yet leave his audience in appalling ignorance of the Bible. Such sentence can be found by the hundred thousand in the world’s literature, and a very instructive course of sermons could be preached from the dicta of Confucius; but that is not the business of the Christian preacher.

The following article is a lecture delivered at Westminster Chapel, London, as part of The Campbell Morgan Memorial Bible Lectureship in 1950. Like his quotation above, the lecture demonstrates the unique and supreme place the Bible has in Scroggie’s life and ministry. I hope you will enjoy reading it as much as I did!

________________________

When the Trustees who have instituted this Lectureship invited me to deliver the second Lecture, I could not and did not hesitate to comply with their wish. I am deeply sensible of the honour they have done me, and grateful for the opportunity to identify myself with their intention, in concrete ways, to perpetuate the memory of one who, on both sides of the Atlantic, exercised a unique ministry, by voice and by pen, in popularizing interest in and knowledge of the Holy Bible.

The Christian public of London was greatly privileged to have the opportunity for so many years of listening to the preaching and teaching of George Campbell Morgan, and I am confident that the time will never come when Westminster Chapel will cease to be a centre of Biblical instruction and inspiration to all who desire these blessings.

The subject I have chosen for your consideration is in some sense novel, but of the utmost importance for a true apprehension and adequate appreciation of the incomparable and inestimable value of those Sacred Scriptures which we call The Bible.

I begin by assuming that but for the Bible Christianity would not have survived. The Bible is the record of a divine revelation, and if there had been no record, no one, after the apostolic age, would have had any means of knowing what that revelation was. Oral tradition would have become more and more corrupt by omissions, additions, and other influences, until, finally, the truth would have been altogether lost.

This observation relates to the recorded New Testament revelation, but it must be evident that except for the Old Testament Writings the entire background of the New Testament revelation would never have been known, for Judaism had misread its own history.

The Biblical record is not the original revelation, but, had there been no record, we would never have known what the revelation had been, or, indeed, that there had been a revelation.

Christians do not worship the Bible, but the God who therein is revealed, but we do realize, or we ought to, that the Bible which makes the redeeming God known to us is, beyond all estimate, our most precious heritage.

Our present task is to try to envisage the obliteration of the Bible, and all traces of it, in our history, literature, art, music, language, social institutions, worship, service, and individual life.

I cannot hope, within the limits imposed by this lectureship, to succeed in so ambitious a task, but perhaps I may start a line of thought which will lead us to renewed thankfulness to God for having given to us such a book as the Bible, and thankfulness also for all who have diligently studied it, and faithfully expounded it.

I do not claim originality for the idea of the obliteration of the Bible, for in a book with the title The Eclipse of Faith, which was published anonymously in the middle of the nineteenth century, but was written by a Henry Rogers, there is a chapter called, The Blank Bible.

It tells of a dream a man had, that, on turning to read his Bible, as was his custom, he found only blank pages. On inquiry, he learned that all the Bibles in his neighbourhood were also blanks, and all copies also in the book shops.

Some people, who never looked at the Bible while they had it, became interested in it now that it was lost.

One man who had never read it, said that it was “confounded hard to be deprived of his religion in his old age.” Another person greatly mourned the loss of her Bible, because in it, for greater safety, she had deposited £100 in notes, and these, too, had become blanks. All the Bibles in the land were blanks, and the volumes were being sold for day-books and ledgers; and instead of Isaiah, and our Lord’s parables, there were orders for silks and satins, cheese and bacon.

Then a movement was set afoot to re-write the Bible from the memories of those who had read and studied it.

A Trinitarian differed from a Unitarian over a critical recension. An Episcopalian did not agree with a Presbyterian that the words bishop and presbyter were interchangeable. A Calvinist had a vivid recollection of Romans ix, and an Arminian had some doubts about some of Paul’s sentiments. Husbands remembered what was due from their wives. Undertakers remembered it had been said that there was “a time to mourn.” A comedian recalled that it was said there was “a time to laugh.” Some young ladies remembered that there was “a time to love,” and everybody knew there was “a time to speak,” except a Quaker who thought that there was “a time to keep silence.”

Protestants and Papists disagreed about many passages, and some infidels thought that the visitation on the Bible was a great mercy, removing a book which promoted idolatry.

This dream begins to show what consternation and confusion would result from the obliteration of the Bible, but the subject can be indefinitely expanded.

Of course, the major disaster would be the loss of the Bible itself, but that would involve so many other losses, the contemplation of which must make the mind to reel, and the heart to faint.

Let us, then, consider some of the influences which this Book has exercised, which would have had no being had there been no Bible.

THE INFLUENCE OF THE BIBLE ON ART

By Art, more is meant than at first may be thought, for it includes architecture, sculpture, symbolism, painting, mosaics, monograms, frescoes, stained glass windows, and decorated manuscripts, and on all these Christianity has left its imprint.

In Architecture, from the basilicas of the time of Constantine to the magnificent cathedrals of our own time and country, the Christian idea and ideal have stood in marked contrast to the pagan temples of the ancient Greeks. Although it has been said that the devil invented Gothic architecture to prevent the people from hearing the Gospel, yet, expressive as it is of sacrifice, aspiration, peace, unity, and beauty, it is the embodiment of Christian ideals, and to multitudes has been an aid to Christian worship. Christian architecture, as Forsyth has said, “is stone made spiritual and musical,” it is “symphony in stone.”

As to Christian Symbolism, it is almost contemporary with the Christian era, appearing before the end of the first century. The favourite symbols have been the Fish, representing the fulness of Christ’s divinity; the Dove, representing peace; the Ship, representing the Church; the Anchor, representing hope; the Good Shepherd, and the Lamb of God. All these, as early as the second century, have been found in the catacombs of Rome.

But later, and down to our time, the influence of the Bible on Painting is seen in a very large number of masterpieces. As examples, one need only mention the Madonnas of Rubens, Raphael, Michelangelo, and of others; Rembrandt’s great works on The Supper at Emmaus, Christ before Pilate, The Descent from the Cross, and many more; Raphael’s Transfiguration; Botticelli’s Adoration of the Magi; Tintoretto’s The Marriage Feast; Leonardo da Vinci’s The Last Supper; Guido’ s Ecce Homo; The Presentation in the Temple, and Mary Magdalene by Titian; Correggio’s Assumption of the Virgin, and The Crucifixion by Van Dyck, Velasquez, and Fra Angelico; and the more modern religious studies by Millais, Hole, Holman Hunt, Millet, G. F. Watts, Burne-Jones, Gabriel Rossetti; and Tissot’s 350 water-colour drawings on New Testament subjects.

But for the Bible these works would never have existed, and Art Galleries in London, and Dresden, and Florence, and Venice, and Paris, and Antwerp, and Milan would never have housed these great creations of Christian Art. It is not too much to say that some of the finest work that has ever been done by pen, and brush, and chisel, and trowel, has been done in the presentation of themes and scenes which only the Bible can supply.

Then there is

THE INFLUENCE OF THE BIBLE ON MUSIC

Christian music, comprehensively understood, is much more popular - that is, ‘of the people’ - than Christian art, for it embraces psalm, hymn, anthem, carol, cantata, chorus, chant, and oratorio, and their instrumental accompaniments as well.

If there had never been a Bible, all these expressions of emotion and aspiration, of adoration and faith, would never have come into being, and the loss would have been incalculable and calamitous.

If there had been no Bible there would have been no Psalms. Never would we have known the thrill of singing Ye gates lift up your heads on high; I to the hills will lift mine eyes; O send Thy light forth, and Thy truth; All people that on earth do dwell; O God, our help in ages past; Let us with a gladsome mind; and, The Lord’s my Shepherd, I’ll not want.

Don’t you begin to feel a chill in your very bones at the bare thought that these inspirations might never have been?

That, however, would have been only the beginning of the loss. But for the Book of Proverbs, we would never have sung, O happy is the man who hears instruction’s warning voice. But for the Epistle to the Hebrews, we would never have heard, Father of peace, and God of love, we own Thy power to save; or, Where high the heavenly temple stands, the house of God not made with hands. But for Luke’s Gospel we would never have heard of the Magnificat, the Benedictus, the Gloria in Excelsis, and the Nunc Dimittis. And but for the final Apocalypse, we would never have known that heaven will be full of song, and that the singers will be Angels, and Living Creatures, and Elders, “and every creature in the heaven, and on the earth, and under the earth, and on the sea, and ten thousand times ten thousand, and thousands of thousands.”

But the Church has always been a singing Church; and the song began in the Upper Room that night when Jesus and His disciples, at the Institution of the Supper, sang a hymn, part of the Hallel of Psalms cxiii-cxviii. The early Christians, we are told, sang, not only with their spirit, but also with their understanding, which their posterity have not always done; and they sang, not Psalms only, as some Scottish folk still do, but also “hymns and spiritual songs; making melody in their heart” (for all cannot do it with their voice) “to the Lord.”

But this early custom would not long have survived if the knowledge on which it was based had been lost. The written Word of God has inspired sacred song in the West in an unbroken line from the time of Ambrose to the present day, and, as we shall see, this has increased in volume and richness in times of evangelical revival; but it has all been rooted in the written Word.

But for the Bible would we ever have heard of John and Charles Wesley, Isaac Watts, Philip Doddridge, William Cowper, Paul Gerhardt, John Newton, Augustus Toplady, Bernard of Clairvaux, Gerhard Tersteegen, Reginald Heber, James Montgomery, John Keble, John M. Neale, and a host of others, men and women, who, drawing inspiration from the Scriptures, have poured it out again in immortal song!

Thousands of Christian hymns are so much a part of the thinking of evangelical Christians, that it has never occurred to us, perhaps, that we might never have had them. Yet, if the Bible had not been written, we would never have sung, or have heard sung, Abide with me, fast falls the eventide; All hail the power of Jesus’ name; Jesus, Lover of my soul; Rock of Ages, cleft for me; How sweet the name of Jesus sounds; Jesus, Thou joy of loving hearts; Nearer my God, to Thee; Jesus shall reign where’er the sun doth his successive journeys run; When I survey the wondrous Cross; O worship the Lord in the beauty of holiness; Jesus, Thy boundless love to me; O happy day that fixed my choice; O Love, that wilt not let me go; Em feste Burg ist unser Gott, A firm defence our God is still; and so on through thousands of hymn books.

Would it mean nothing to you if these were taken out of your life? Then you must still be “in the gall of bitterness, and in the bond of iniquity.” It is true that we have, and sing, many songs of sweet emptiness, which cannot claim to have originated in the Scriptures, and the loss of these would be a distinct gain, but the truly Christian hymns are in the warp and woof of the Church’s life, because the Bible is there.

But in addition to all this, what magnificent contributions to Sacred Music we have on the grand scale; productions which are especially the heritage of the peoples of Western Europe.

One need name only Haydn’s Creation; Handel’s Messiah; Bach’s St. Matthew Passion, and his 190 Church Cantatas; Mendelssohn’s Elijah, with its ‘O rest in the Lord,’ and, ‘He that shall endure to the end’. Spohr’s The Last Judgment; Purcell’s Jubilate; Sullivan’s The Light of the World, and his tune to ‘Onward, Christian Soldiers’; and Stainer’s Crucifixion.

All this, and vastly more, would never have been, if the Bible had never been written!

The Vital Force of Missionary Intercession (Robert Hall Glover)

I felt this piece was worth sharing not only because it is a necessary reminder of the vital importance of prayer to the worldwide mission of Christ's Church today, but also because Glover has pointedly (and rightly) linked mission with revival. While there can be no doubt that the Church today is seriously engaged in global mission as never before, I fear that we have also forgotten how very often the missionary passion or, should I say pathos, has arisen from a genuine revival of Christ's Church by the sovereign work of the Holy Spirit. And while it is certainly right to pray for the worldwide mission of the Church and the ministry of missionaries, we mustn't neglect to pray also that the Lord will be gracious to revive His people so that they may capture a new vision of His glory and a passion for the salvation of souls worldwide. The two go hand-in-hand as Glover would remind us in this piece. My hope is that as you read this you will be challenged to join the fellowship of "intercessors".

Robert Hall Glover was born in Canada, but spent most of his life in China and the United States. He was a graduate of the University of Toronto, New York Missionary Training College, and New York University Medical College (M.D.). He was appointed a medical missionary to China in 1894 by the Christian and Missionary Alliance (C&MA). He survived the Boxer rebellion, when many missionaries were killed and others were forced to flee the country. In direct response to the growing pressure to abandon missionary work in China, Glover wrote a stirring defense of missionary efforts there entitled “Shall Suffering and Danger Halt Our Missionary Work?” His service with the Christian Missionary Alliance in China continued until 1913. During his years in China he was ordained and married Caroline Robbins Prentice, and founded two educational institutions. In 1913 he was appointed C&MA foreign missions secretary. In 1921 Moody Bible Institute recruited him to serve as director of missionary studies. He filled this position until 1926, during which time he wrote the Progress of World-Wide Missions (1924), one of the most widely used mission histories ever written. In 1926 he became a missionary administrator for the China Inland Mission (CIM), serving as assistant home director (1926-1929) and as home director (1930-1943). He retired in Germantown, Pennsylvania, in 1943 and passed on to glory in 1947.

______________________

The most vital consideration in missions is not method, money, or even men, but it is God himself and His working, and it is prayer which brings the revelation of God and calls forth His working. However, praying is never a substitute for going in the case of those who are qualified and able to go. In other words, going, giving, and praying are not three different options which the individual Christian may pick from according to their personal preference. Nor will any amount of giving or praying fulfill the Great Commission to evangelize the world apart from going. The command is "Go, preach"! But those who cannot "Go" in person can still "Go" by prayer.

Yet, as it is true that praying without preaching can never carry out the missionary task, it is equally true that preaching without praying cannot either. God has joined the two together in His Word and they are inseparable. We read in the book of Acts how the early apostles decided on the appointment of deacons to care for the secular affairs of the church, that they themselves might be free for the more direct spiritual ministry, and their words were, "But we will give ourselves continually to prayer, and to the ministry of the word." Here are mentioned the two great lines of Christian ministry, prayer and preaching, and they are presented in such a way as to indicate clearly that they are co-equal. How many there are who regard preaching as being by far the more important ministry, and prayer as simply an added supplement, a kind of "aid to preaching"! However, that is not what the Word of God says. The two, prayer and preaching, are put on the same level and given the same importance; indeed, if any significance is attached to the order of the inspired words, then prayer has the precedence as being mentioned first. The fact is that they are complementary one to the other, not two separate ministries but rather two essential parts of one ministry. Prayer is the priestly function of appearing before God on behalf of men to plead their needs and invoke His help. While preaching is the prophetic function of appearing before men in behalf of God, to proclaim His Word of Life and implore their acceptance of it. Either one is imperfect without the other.

Missionaries are needed to go abroad and preach to the unreached, but their efforts will not reach full fruition without the support of effective intercessors at home. Paul, the prince of missionaries, continually appealed to the churches for prayer. Hear his plea to the Thessalonian Christians, "Finally, brethren, pray for us, that the word of God may have free course, and be glorified." He was faithfully preaching the Word, and in the power of the Spirit, as he repeatedly claimed; yet the fullest effect of that preaching depended upon the believing prayers of others.

Two distinct aspects of prayer are presented in the Bible and find an essential place in the life of all true missionaries, and indeed of all spiritually minded Christians. They are respectively the devotional and the intercessory aspects.

Devotional Prayer

This is communion with God, a holy, intimate and growing fellowship, cultivated by regular seasons of waiting upon Him in adoring worship and quiet meditation on His Word. The book of Psalms abounds in passages illustrating this aspect of prayer, while its supreme example is the Lord Jesus Himself, whose communion with the Father throughout His life on earth was unbroken and intensely real. Jesus was a man of prayer, or more correctly, THE Man of prayer. His life began, continued, and ended in prayer. Limited as is the record given of His earthly career, it includes impressive glimpses into His prayer life. We see Him praying at His baptism, in His wilderness temptation, on the mount of transfiguration, at the grave of Lazarus, in the garden of Gethsemane, on the Cross of Calvary. He prayed in public and in private. He spent whole nights alone in prayer, one of these before choosing the twelve apostles. After a typically strenuous Sabbath day's ministry in Capernaum, the next morning "rising up a great while before day, he went out and departed into a solitary place, and there prayed." Jesus could not live without regular communion with His Father.

Now if the very Son of God felt such a need for daily devotional prayer, what a presumption it is on the part of any human missionary or other Christian worker to neglect it! The men who have accomplished most for God have been men of prayer.

Adoniram Judson, one of the greatest of America's missionary sons, was emphatic in his insistence upon prayer. He wrote: "Be resolute in prayer. Make any sacrifice to maintain it. Consider that time is short and that business and company must not be allowed to rob thee of thy God." That was the man who mightily impressed a great empire for Christ and laid deep and strong the foundations of God's kingdom in Burma. Hudson Taylor was before all else a man of prayer. He lived in the conscious presence of the Lord; constant communion with God had become to him as necessary and natural as breathing. The China Inland Mission, which he founded, was born in prayer, and prayer has ever since been its vital breath.

The maintenance of regular daily seasons of devotional prayer (together with Bible meditation) by the missionary on the field will not come easy. Lack of privacy in makeshift living conditions, incessant interruptions by well-meaning but undiscerning persons, the pressure of multiple duties and the oppressive atmosphere of surrounding spiritual activity-all these distractions must be confronted in order to safeguard devotional prayer.

Intercessory Prayer

This is quite different from devotional prayer. The latter is very real and precious and its vital importance has already been stressed. Yet, it needs to be remembered that prayer is not merely communion with God, it is also cooperation with God, a definite and aggressive ministry, a partnership with God in the carrying out of His divine will and purposes in the world. Prayer is more than simply preparation for service; it is power in service-yes, even more than that, prayer IS service. Among the many Bible passages setting forth this aspect of prayer, one to which we would specifically call attention to is the last part of James 5:16. "The energy put forth by the fervent prayer of a righteous man issues in mighty results," or "brings mighty things to pass.": This rendering has the merit of emphasizing the truth that prayer is a vital force, a great dynamic, that prayer exerts energy, and brings things to pass outside the one who prays. We are aware that some individuals will object to this conception of prayer, their contention being that since the universe is governed by certain fixed and unalterable laws, it is therefore unthinkable that any mere man, by his praying, should be able to interfere with such fixed laws. But these objectors lose sight of the important fact that prayer itself IS one of these fixed laws of God, and that God has designed to bring many things to pass by the means of prayer. When that fact is recognized, it will at once be seen that it is not the man who prays, but rather the man who does not pray, who interferes with God's fixed laws, by failing to cooperate with God in bringing about things which He has meant to be accomplished through His law of prayer.

In no other realm have the priority and the power of prayer been as overwhelmingly demonstrated as in the realm of missions. We speak of Pentecost as being the starting point or inauguration day of Christian missions, but we must not forget about the upper room in Jerusalem where that devoted company of disciples continued for ten days with one accord in prayer and supplication for the coming of Pentecost. Therefore, the beginning of missions can consistently be dated from that prayer gathering. The missionary enterprise was born in prayer, and its entire subsequent history has been a record of answered prayer.

The Pietist and Moravians & Missionary Intercession

From Pentecost and the apostle Paul right down through the centuries to the present day, the story of missions has been the story of answered prayer. Every fresh outbreak of missionary energy has been the result of believing prayer. Organized missionary enterprise began in Germany and Denmark a century earlier than in England. It sprang directly from the revival movement known as Pietism, under the godly leadership of Spencer and Francke and it was deeply rooted in prayer. Out of it came the Danish-Halle Mission to India, and also the better known Moravian movement led by saintly Count Zinzendorf. A settlement was founded at Herrnhut ("The Lord's Watch") where a life of prayer became so effused in missionary zeal that it made that little community, and the long line of devoted missionaries who have gone forth from it to the ends of the earth, one of the wonders of the Church age.

Jonathan Edwards & Missionary Intercession

Herrnhut in turn exerted a distinct influence upon the great leaders of Methodism in England, where early in the eighteenth century a marked revival of prayer for the unreached world broke out, greatly stimulated also by a powerful appeal issued by Robert Miller of Scotland urging prayer as foremost among the measures to be used for the conversion of the unreached. In 1744 a call was widely circulated for a sustained concert of prayer, and in 1746 a memorial was sent to America inviting all Christians there to unite in the same petition. This message moved Jonathan Edwards to preach a sermon which not only awakened many on this side of the Atlantic to more earnest prayer, but which also proved to be one of the influences that stirred the heart of William Carey in England, and thus contributed to initiating the modern period of missions.

William Carey, Samuel J. Mills & Missionary Intercession

The facts pertaining to the beginnings of this new era of missions are too well known to need repeating. It's not our present purpose to dwell upon the record itself, but rather on the vital fact that prayer was instrumental in bringing it about. As related to Great Britain, William Carey is universally recognized as "The Father of Modern Missions," and the same title is justly due Samuel J. Mills as related to North America. One cannot read the story of either one without being profoundly stirred. Kettering in England, where the first Baptist Missionary Society was founded in 1792, and the "Haystack prayer meeting" of 1806 at Williams College in the USA will always be spoken of as the birthplaces of modern missions. But it was in the hearts of Carey and Mills, and through their travail of soul and strong wrestling in prayer, that this great enterprise for Christ and the world was actually born. Just as truly can it be said that the China Inland Mission and the Gossner Mission in India, two notable "Faith Missions," were born in the hearts and through the agonizing prayers of their respective founders, Hudson Taylor of England and Pastor Gossner of Germany. The prayer life of the former of these has already been mentioned. Of Gossner, who single-handedly sent out 144 missionaries, it was said: "He prayed up the walls of a hospital, and the hearts of the nurses; he prayed mission stations into being, and missionaries into faith. Prayer was his atmosphere: he could not live without it."

Revival, Missions & Intercessory Prayer

All the mighty spiritual revivals which constitute the mountain peaks of missionary annals had their roots in prayer. The one in Hawaii which continued from 1837 to 1843 began in the hearts of the missionaries themselves. As they assembled for their annual meetings in 1835 and 1836, "they were powerfully moved to pray, and were so deeply impressed with the need of an outpouring of the Spirit that they prepared a strong appeal to the home churches urging Christians everywhere to unite with them in prayer for a baptism from on high." Soon they saw unmistakable signs of deepening interest in spiritual things. Then in 1837, a revival swept the island so that missionaries labored day and night with throngs of anxious souls. On one memorable day at Hilo, 1,705 were baptized by Titus Coan, and within six years 27,000 converts were received into the church.

The story of the great revival among the Telugu outcastes of India is vitally linked with "Prayer-Meeting Hill," a high hill overlooking the town of Ongole. A missionary couple and three like-minded Hindu helpers on a preaching tour were constrained to spend the last night of 1853 on that hilltop in prayer for the Telugu field, which after many years of faithful toil had yielded almost no fruit. More than once the Board at home had been on the point of abandoning it, and only upon the earnest plea of the missionaries had this action been postponed. Just as the first day of the New Year began to dawn, a sweet sense of assurance that their prayers had prevailed stole into their hearts. A further long period of testing had still to be faced, but gradually the opposition broke, the tide began to turn, and finally a mighty outpouring of the Spirit brought a multitude of souls into the kingdom. In a single day at Ongole, in 1878, 22,222 were baptized and 8,000 within six weeks, and the church there became the largest in the world. An added note of interest is that "the Government of India has acknowledged the power emanating from Prayer-Meeting Hill by donating the hilltop to the Mission to be used as a memorial and gathering place."

Perhaps the greatest of all revivals on the mission field was that in Korea during 1905-1907, when one of the most remarkable manifestations of God's power in the entire history of the Christian Church took place. It swept over the whole land and across its borders into Manchuria and China. It cleansed and purified the church, bringing an overwhelming realization of the awfulness of sin. It fired the Christians with a new passion to seek the lost, great numbers were struck with deep conviction and led to accept Christ. It prepared the way for the "Million souls Movement" which was vigorously carried on for years. Like all other revivals this one began with prayer, first by a group of workers in eastern Korea, where the earlier stirring was felt, and latter in Pyeng Yang in the west, which became the center of "The Great Revival." For months previous to this awakening the missionaries of that station had held daily prayer meetings pleading for a mighty outpouring of God's Spirit. Finally the flood of blessing broke upon a large assembly of Korean workers and believers gathered for prayer in the great Central Church of the city, led by a humble but godly Korean evangelist.

A sequel to the Korean Revival was an extended series of much blessed revival services in China conducted by Dr Jonathan Goforth, who had visited Korea and seen the mighty working of the Lord there. As touching the prayer factor in this revival movement, the following impressive testimony was later given by Dr. Goforth: "When I came to England I met a certain saint of God. We talked about the revival in China, and she gave me certain dates when God specially pressed her to pray. I was almost startled on looking up these dates to find that they were the very dates when God was doing His mightiest work in Manchuria and China...I believe the day will come when the whole inward history of that revival will be unveiled, and will show that it was not the one who speaks to you now, but some of God's saints hidden away with Him in prayer who did most to bring it about."

Equally noteworthy are the wonderful answers to prayer and manifestations of divine power and blessing in the lives and ministries of native workers such as Pandita Ramabai and Sadhu Sundar Sungh of India, Pastor Hsi and Ting Li Mei of China, Neesima of Japan, and a host of others who although less well known in the West have similarly learned the secret of prevailing prayer. "One of the greatest miracles and pieces of evidence of Christianity is the prayer life of Oriental Christians, newly won to Christ. In all these multitudes of India, China, Japan, Africa, and the Islands of the sea, we find the same phenomenon - they pray."

Prayer Is Something Everyone Can Do!

If all that has been said about the power and the achievements of prayer is true, then shouldn't we be challenged afresh to embrace this great privilege of cooperating with God through prayer? Missionary praying, unlike going, or giving, is something that every child of God can have a part in. All cannot go today, for going requires special qualifications and training and all cannot give, at least in liberal amounts, because of their limited resources, but everyone can pray. The humblest Christian who lacks public gifts or talents, the illiterate, and even the shut-in and the bed-ridden believer can share in this highest and mightiest ministry of intercession. Indeed some of the greatest missionary intercessors have been among these last mentioned, who have turned their bed chambers into audience rooms with the King, and by way of the throne of grace have projected themselves far beyond the range of any preacher, and touched and influenced the very ends of the earth for Christ.

We thank God for all the faithful intercessors and their prayers. They have been God's means of breaking down barriers, turning the hearts of kings and rulers, forcing open closed doors, calling forth workers, releasing money to support them, giving persuasive power to preaching, softening hard hearts and bringing them under conviction, turning defeat into victory in the hour of crisis-all this and much more. Yet, we need even more such intercessors, yes, for the whole Church to be driven to its knees under a burden of deep concern and a renewed sense of responsibility.

The Purpose Of A Seminary (B B Warfield)

At a time when seminaries seem to be at cross-purposes as to what they should be about, I found this article by B B Warfield helpful and incisive. Although he wrote this almost a century ago, his clear vision of the need to define a seminary's purpose according to a biblical understanding of the Church, the Christian ministry and the substance of the gospel is one which we should take to heart in our day. I also appreciate his emphasis on the need for seminaries to produce preachers, first and foremost, but preachers who are "scholar-saints". In an age where popular opinion does not equate scholarship with saintliness and vice versa, and where the seminary is expected to churn out all kinds of "ministers" of which "the preacher" is just one of many, Warfield's article is both timely and necessary.

This article is taken from The Collected Shorter Writings of B.B.Warfield, Volume One, pp 374-378, published by Presbyterian & Reformed (Phillipsburg, NJ). It first appeared as an article in The Presbyterian, Nov. 22, 1917, pp. 8-9.

_________________________

It is customary to say that the theological seminaries are training-schools for the ministry. Properly understood, that is the right thing to say. But it is not very difficult, and it is very common, seriously to exaggerate the function of the seminary under this definition. It is not the function of the seminary to give young men their entire training for the ministry. That is the concern of the presbytery; and no other organization can supersede the presbytery in this business. The seminary is only an instrument which the presbytery uses in training young men for the ministry. An instrument, not the instrument. The presbytery uses other instruments also in this work.

There is the academy, for example; and the university. It being once understood that the ministry is to be an educated ministry, the academy and the university become instruments which the Church uses in training young men for its ministry. And there is the local church. It is to the local church that the presbytery commits its candidates for the ministry, for moral and spiritual oversight and training. The seminary cannot properly undertake the work of these other instrumentalities. It is essential, if the ministry is to be an educated body, that the minister shall know his A B C’s. It does not follow that the seminary ought to teach young men their A B C’s. It is absolutely necessary, if the ministry is to be a religious body, that every minister should be a converted man. It is not therefore the function of the seminary to convert its students.

No one will suspect me of suggesting that the seminary need not be a “nursery of piety” – any more than that it need not be a “nursery of learning.” But no one ought to contend that the seminary ought to be either expected or permitted to begin with either piety or learning at the beginning. The illiterate and the ungodly have simply no place in the seminary. And if they actually are found there, the remedy is not that the seminary should enlarge its borders and take on the functions either of a primary school or of a confirmation class. The seminary has its own specific work to do, and that work presupposes in its pupils attainments both in literature and in piety. Young men go to it only after they have acquired the education which is common to all educated men, and have made such progress in piety as ranks them with the especially pious men of the community. Basing on this foundation, the seminary undertakes to give to candidates for the ministry the specific training which is peculiar to them as ministers; which fits them, in a word, for the worthy prosecution of the particular work of a minister. It is, in this sense, the finishing-school of the ministry; and it must give itself strictly to those things which the deeply pious man of liberal culture still requires, in order that he may fulfil the office of a minister with credit to himself and to the advantage of the Church.

What precisely must be taught in a theological seminary will be determined by our conception of the ministry for the exercise of the functions of which it offers preparation. And that will be determined ultimately by our conception of the Church. On the sacerdotal theory of the Church, the business of the minister is to perform certain rites, by the correct performance of which the effect sought is obtained. The seminary, in this view, becomes a training-school in the exact sense of that term. It is the place where the prospective minister is trained to perform these rites properly. On the rationalistic theory, the Church is simply a club for intellectual entertainment, or, at the best, a society for ethical culture, or a benevolent organization. The function of the preacher is to be the leader of the group which he serves in such activities; and his training ought to be such as will fit him for this. Great stress will naturally be laid on literary culture, and the masters of thought will take a large place in the theological curriculum. Or, perhaps, the best course in the seminary will be one in sociology - possibly a census of the inhabitants within a given radius of a country church.

None of these things are bad. Even the evangelical minister would do well to know how to conduct the services of the church acceptably. And it will not hurt him a bit to be on speaking terms with Plato and Emerson – and Galsworthy and H. G. Wells and Marie Corelli! Certainly it will be of advantage to him to be at least aware of the social unrest growling around him, and of the terrible distress which it may lie within his power to do something to mitigate or relieve. But all this will not make him a good minister of the gospel of Christ. Do not even the heathen the same? Christ has sent him not to baptize, but to preach the gospel; not to ameliorate the lot of men, but to carry to them salvation. On the evangelical view, the Church is the communion of saints, gathered out of a lost world; and the business of the minister is to apply the saving gospel to lost men for their salvation from sin – from its guilt and from its corruption and power. Palpably, what he needs for this is just the gospel; and if he is to perform his functions at all, he must know this gospel, know it thoroughly, know it in all its details, and in all its power. It is the business of the seminary to give him this knowledge of the gospel. That is the real purpose of the seminary.

It is important that we think worthily of the minister, and understand exactly what the great task which is laid upon him involves. The ministry is not a handicraft, a certain skill in the performance of which may be acquired simply by practice. It is a “learned profession”: one of the three, or at the most four, learned professions which divide between them the expert care of man in his several relations. Man is a composite being, with body and soul, set in a social organism, dependent on a physical environment. He needs expert guidance in every sphere of his existence. Science mediates between him and nature. It is the lawyer who advises him in his social relations. The physician cares for his body. The minister is his guide in spiritual things.

It is possible to argue that we can do very well without any of these guides. It is easier to argue it than to practise it. The Lord has not intended his people to hobble along in their religious living. He has appointed ministers in the churches, and given them the task of shepherding the flock. And no minister is fitted for the position he occupies, unless he is prepared to act as spiritual adviser of the community which he serves. We may talk of “the simple gospel” being enough; and we may thank God that the gospel is simple, and that it is enough. But it is no simple matter rightly to apply this simple gospel in all the varied relations of life, in the multiform emergencies which arise in the tangled business of living. Read but the Epistle to the Romans. Was the right exposition of the gospel in the conditions then obtaining at Rome, given us in the first eleven chapters of this Epistle, so simple a matter that Paul might just as well have left it to the Romans themselves to work it out? Was the application of this gospel to life at Rome in the first Christian century, added in the remaining chapters, so simple a matter that it did not need a Paul to make it rightly? Perhaps we nowhere see the minister more plainly at work than in the First Epistle to the Corinthians. These questions which the Corinthians put to Paul, and he answered with so much care – did they really not need to be asked of him or answered by him? The minister in his place, as Paul in his, is the spiritual guide and adviser of his people.

For this, we say, he needs to know the gospel: to know it at first hand, and to know it through and through. All the work of the seminary must be directed just to this end. For one thing, the minister must learn the code in which the gospel message is written. He must be able to de-code it; to de-code it for himself. No trusting the de-coding to another! This is the message of salvation, and he is the channel by which it is conveyed to men. He cannot take it at second-hand. He must get it for himself, and convey it first-handed to those entrusted to his care. He must, in other words, know the languages in which the gospel is written; and he must be skilled in drawing out from the documents the exact meaning. And, then, he must know the message, thus drawn out, thoroughly, and all its compass, and in all its details, in its right perspective, and in its just proportions. Otherwise he cannot use it aright. Of course, he must also be skilled in winningly presenting this message, thus thoroughly known, and in helpfully applying it, point by point, to emerging needs. These things constitute the core of the seminary’s teaching. There are others that stand very close to them; so close that they cannot be dispensed with as props and stays. The minister must know how to defend the gospel he preaches. And he should know something of the history this gospel has wrought for itself in the world. These things not for themselves, but for the aid they bring him for understanding the gospel better for himself, and for commending it more powerfully to others.

Without this much equipment, the evangelical minister is robbed of his dignity and shorn of his strength. He cannot be the spiritual guide and adviser of the community, as the lawyer is the legal guide and the physician the medical adviser. He sinks into a mere handicraftsman plying a manual trade, learned by rote; or into a mere lecturer to a club or leader in benevolent activities. Of course, “the simple preaching” of the “simple gospel” will not fail of its effect. The loving lisping of the name of Jesus by the lips of a child may carry far. But that is no reason why we should man our pulpits with children lisping the name of Jesus. The foolishness of preaching is one thing: foolish preaching is another. Let us not deceive ourselves: in religion as in everything else knowledge is power. That is a platitude. But platitudes have this to be said for them – they are true. Nothing – not fervor, not devotion, not zeal – can supersede the necessity of knowledge. If knowledge without zeal is useless; zeal without knowledge is worse than useless – it is positively destructive. This is Reformation year: let us ask ourselves why was William Farel, consumed with zeal, burning with evangelical fervor, proclaiming the pure gospel, helpless at Geneva – until “with dreadful imprecations” he brought to his aid John Calvin: John Calvin, scholar become saint, scholar-saint become preacher of God’s grace? What we need in our pulpits is scholar-saints become preachers. And it is the one business of the theological seminaries to make them.