The “Life-Fire” of God’s Word—Charles H. Spurgeon (1834-1892)

In 1854, at the age of twenty and just four years after his conversion, Charles H. Spurgeon became pastor of London’s New Park Street Church. His ministry so grew that the 6,000-seat Metropolitan Tabernacle was built to accommodate the congregation. In “The Mustard Seed: A Sermon for the Sabbath-School Teacher,” he spoke of the power of the gospel, and his words extended to the whole of Scripture.

The human can never rival the divine, for it lacks the life-fire. It is better to preach five words of God’s Word than five million words of man’s wisdom. Men’s words may seem to be the wiser and more attractive, but there is no heavenly life in them. Within God’s Word, however simple it may be, there dwells an omnipotence like that of God, from whose lips it came.1

———————————————-
1 C. H. Spurgeon, “The Mustard Seed: A Sermon for the Sabbath-School Teacher,” The Parables of Our Lord (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 2003), 707.


No “Spiritual Gains without Pains”—J. C. Ryle (1816-1900)

J. C. Ryle was a prominent evangelical leader in the Church of England during the second half of the 19th century. A champion of orthodox doctrine in an age of theological decline, he never divorced dogma from holy living. In fact, his book Holiness, from which this excerpt is taken, argued that no true Christian lacks practical godliness. And developing godliness requires practicing the spiritual disciplines.

Sanctification, again, is a thing which depends greatly on a diligent use of scriptural means. When I speak of “means,” I have in view Bible-reading, private prayer, regular attendance on public worship, regular hearing of God’s Word, and regular reception of the Lord’s Supper. I lay it down as a simple matter of fact, that no one who is careless about such things must ever expect to make much progress in sanctification. I can find no record of any eminent saint who ever neglected them. They are appointed channels through which the Holy Spirit conveys fresh supplies of grace to the soul, and strengthens the work which He has begun in the inward man. Let men call this legal doctrine if they please, but I will never shrink from declaring my belief that there are no “spiritual gains without pains.” I should as soon expect a farmer to prosper in business who contented himself with sowing his fields and never looking at them till harvest, as expect a believer to attain much holiness who was not diligent about his Bible-reading, his prayers, and the use of his Sundays. Our God is a God who works by means, and He will never bless the soul of that man who pretends to be so high and spiritual that he can get on without them.1

—————————————————–
1 J. C. Ryle, Holiness: It’s Nature, Hindrances, Difficulties, and Roots, rev. ed. (Moscow, ID: Charles Nolan, 2001), 25.

Idolatry: Not Thinking Rightly about God—A. W. Tozer (1897-1963)

A. W. Tozer served thirty-one years as the pastor of Chicago’s Southside Gospel Tabernacle (1928-1959), edited a Christian magazine, and was a prolific writer. Discerning the lack of true spiritual vitality within the Church of his day, Tozer dedicated his life’s work to calling the Church back to a radical obedience to Christ. Termed by many a “twentieth-century prophet,” his epitaph simply reads, “A Man of God.”

In his book, The Knowledge of the Holy, Tozer describes the divine attributes. Subtitled, “Why We Must Think Rightly about God,” the first chapter sets the tone for the entire work by declaring that idolatry begins in the mind and is the very place where it should be rooted out.

Let us beware lest we in our pride accept the erroneous notion that idolatry consists only in kneeling before visible objects of adoration, and that civilized peoples are therefore free from it. The essence of idolatry is the entertainment of thoughts about God that are unworthy of Him. It begins in the mind and may be present where no overt act of worship has taken place. “When they knew God,” wrote Paul, “they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.”1

Then followed the worship of idols fashioned after the likeness of men and birds and beasts and creeping things. But this series of degrading acts began in the mind. Wrong ideas about God are not only the fountain from which the polluted waters of idolatry flow; they are themselves idolatrous. The idolater simply imagines things about God and acts as if they were true.

Perverted notions about God soon rot the religion in which they appear. The long career of Israel demonstrates this clearly enough, and the history of the Church confirms it. So necessary to the Church is a lofty concept of God that when that concept in any measure declines, the Church with her worship and her moral standards declines along with it. The first step down for any church is taken when it surrenders its high opinion of God.2

————————————–
1 Romans 1:21, KJV.
2 A. W. Tozer, The Knowledge of the Holy (San Francisco: HaperCollins, 1961), 3-4.

A Theology of Work—Archibald Alexander Hodge (1823-1886)

Archibald Alexander Hodge was a leading Presbyterian theologian and denominational statesman in the nineteenth century. The son of Charles Hodge, A. A. Hodge carried forward his father’s legacy in his role as a professor at Princeton Seminary and a trustee at Princeton College.

As the industrial revolution was changing the nature of America’s economy, A. A. Hodge challenged the idea that “ministry” was restricted to clergy and denominational officers. All of a person’s work should be presented as a holy sacrifice to God. Specifically, the Princeton theologian sought to disabuse Christians of the notion that a Christian could separate his life into two spheres: a private life of piety toward God and a public life of secular values and practices. According to Hodge, one either should demonstrate his obedience to the Lord in the marketplace or he should not accept the name Christian.

A Christian is just as much under the obligation to obey God’s will in the most secular of his daily business as he is in his closet or at the communion table. He has no right to separate his life into two realms, and acknowledge different moral codes in each . . . The kingdom of God includes all sides of human life, and it is a kingdom of absolute righteousness. You are either a loyal subject or a traitor. When the King comes, how will he find you doing?1

———————————————–

1 A. A. Hodge, Evangelical Theology (1890; reprint, Carlisle, PA: The Banner of Truth Trust, 1997), 280-281.


Biblical Insight: Does “Intelligent Design” = “Perfect World”?

With war, famine, disease, and death, it would be impossible to make sense of the world around us apart from the Bible. Without revelation, we are left to our own conclusions about the world and the God who made it. And so, when we attempt to discard God’s wisdom about reality, it’s not surprising that we attempt to discard God all together.

From the Kairos Journal vault are some answers to the challenges that Christians face when skeptics argue that an imperfect world disproves a theistic worldview.

——————-

6 And the LORD was sorry that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him to his heart. 7 So the LORD said, “I will blot out man whom I have created from the face of the land, man and animals and creeping things and birds of the heavens, for I am sorry that I have made them.”

Genesis 6:6-7 (ESV)

Harvard psychologist Steven Pinker says he is unconvinced by the theory of intelligent design. He argues, “Our own bodies are riddled with quirks no competent engineer would have planned,” such as “a retina installed backward” and “goose bumps that uselessly try to warm us by fluffing up long-gone fur.” What is more, Pinker adds, “the moral design of nature is as bungled as its engineering design. What twisted sadist would have invented a parasite that blinds millions of people or a gene that covers babies with excruciating blisters?” Consequently, Pinker concludes, there must be no “white-coated technician in the sky.”

What should believers make of Pinker’s assertion that a flawed universe is evidence against intelligent design? The Bible has an answer, but not in the first chapter of Genesis. Genesis 6 depicts the chaos into which human civilization had devolved and describes the Lord’s reaction to the great wickedness that had spread through the human race since the creation of planet earth. Every thought, the reader is told, “was only evil continually” (v. 5). In response, God grieved that He had made man upon the earth and vowed to destroy almost all of them in the Flood (v. 6). The question thus arises: does this passage conflict with the earlier revelation that when the Lord made the world, He created it good? (e.g. Gen. 1:4, 10, 12)

Contrary to Pinker’s accusation, the fault lay not in God’s design. In its original state, the created order functioned precisely as it should have. But then a lie from the Serpent broke the stillness. The result of that lie was original sin. Adam’s transgression unleashed a horrible curse upon the cosmos (see Gen. 3). What God made good, people turned into a horrific mess. The Lord Himself grieved at what had become of His creation. Romans 8 relates that even the creation itself “groans” under the scourge of sin that affected the very fabric of the universe.

Design does not entail that the universe is currently perfect, only that the Author of the universe is perfect and has left evidence of His handiwork. In fact, God knows far more about the problems with the cosmos than we do—and the picture is worse than Steven Pinker lets on. Not only are there black holes, natural disasters, death and disease, but also adulteries, violence against the innocent, and genocide. But these things are not accidents of random chance or some unfortunate holdover from natural selection, but rather the tragic aftermath of the rebellion of one man and one woman in the Garden against their Maker.

Advocates of intelligent design do not argue that because God made the world, all is right with the world. Explaining what went wrong, however, requires a little theology. Such a theology announces that the divine order and purpose for things has been rejected or forgotten. Only through a return to God, who in the person of Jesus Christ made the world, will the Creation be freed from its “bondage to decay” and restored to its original goodness (Rom. 8:21).

Almost everyone agrees that man lives in a world gone wrong. Almost everyone would like an answer on how to fix it. The choice is between a dismal view of reality where the law of the jungle shows little regard for its inhabitants and a hopeful view in which a loving God has a plan to redeem a world that is in a flight from reality. If people living in a twisted and fallen world came to their senses and took their own suffering—and sin—seriously, they would surely seek help in the only Source of solace and confess at one with the saints, “I believe in God the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth.”

Transgression or Disease?—The DSM and Sin

A timely word from the Kairos Journal vault on bringing a biblical worldview to bear upon our pastoral counseling:

——————

When English Puritan Richard Baxter penned his magnum opus of pastoral counseling, A Christian Directory, he appended a noteworthy subtitle: A Sum of Practical Theology, and Cases of Conscience. Directing Christians How to … Overcome Temptations, and to Escape or Mortify Every Sin. Though lengthy by modern conventions, it reflected his opinion that deviations from God’s standards of behavior are moral transgressions meriting judgment and correction. In contrast, today’s most popular reference work on behavioral deviance operates from a worldview that is decidedly less spiritual. The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th edition, text revision (DSM-IV-TR) never speaks of sin and hardly ever references moral categories of any sort. Instead, it often reclassifies as “disease” what humans have known simply as “immorality” for millennia, ignoring the moral aspect of human behavior.

Consider, for instance, how one could use the DSM-IV-TR to explain some of the traditional seven deadly sins without any reference to ethics.

Wrath could be a Manic Episode, “a distinct period during which there is an abnormally and persistently … irritable mood.” In children, one could classify it as symptomatic of a Major Depressive Episode.

Sloth, or laziness, could be written off as a depression problem rather than an affliction of the soul. One sign of a Major Depressive Episode, says the DSM, is “blaming oneself… for failing to meet occupational or interpersonal responsibilities.” Further, “The efficiency with which tasks are accomplished may be reduced.”

Pride could indicate a Narcissistic Personality Disorder. With that condition, according to the manual, “Individuals … have a grandiose sense of self-importance. They routinely overestimate their abilities and inflate their accomplishments, often appearing boastful and pretentious.”

The DSM’s section on “Sexual and Gender Identity Disorders” provides a plethora of options for explaining lust. Paraphilias, for example, “are characterized by recurrent, intense sexual urges, fantasies, or behaviors that involve unusual objects, activities, or situations.”

Envy might be another sign of Narcissistic Personality Disorder, for, according to the DSM, “[t]hese individuals are often envious of others” and “may begrudge others their successes or possessions.”

Finally, gluttony need not enter the secularist’s vocabulary, for it can be replaced with Binge-Eating Disorder—a condition marked by “recurrent episodes . . . associated with … impaired control.”

Of course, mental disorders are real problems, not mere excuses for sinful behavior. Even so, the DSM leaves a patient’s most fundamental need untreated by isolating his psychological diagnosis from his fallen condition and the spiritual component of his being. Thus, it can lead well-meaning therapists to prescribe only medical care in cases where repentance is needed too. For instance, while children with Conduct Disorder may need clinical diagnosis, they need parental discipline too, a fact the DSM fails to mention. Similarly, Alcohol Intoxication is a moral defect to correct, not merely a mental disorder to diagnose, as the DSM suggests.

In contrast to the DSM’s amoral worldview, the Church must regard biblical instruction as the foundation of counseling. Indeed, the world needs more believers who deal compassionately with mental disorders but never abandon the call to repentance as their central theme.