Mutilating the Old Testament

A bible burning event by an Anglican vicar in Wales reveals the logical conclusion of the Enlightenment biblical historical criticism. It also reveals the persistent anti-semitical streak of the higher criticism. The vicar justifies his action with a reference to a certain German philosopher. “Nietzsche said we should philosophise with a hammer, whereas I prefer to theologise with a scissors. I have not burnt a Bible, I have merely cut bits out and burned the little parts that were left over leaving most of the book intact.” The idea is to get rid of the parts of the Bible  that represent a "cruel and vile God" and that supposedly contradict the teachings of Jesus. It's all a rehash of a very old heresy, Marcionism. Coming closer to home, we heard someone at the 2011 General Assembly asserting that certain parts of Leviticus had "never been part of the Word of God". The "moral" repugnance is thrown off onto the Jews.

How is historical criticism anti-Semitic? Try William Robertson Smith and his Lectures on the Religion of the Semites, whose major theme is in showing how different Christianity has always been from the lower ‘primitive’ 'ritualistic' Semitic religion out of which it emerged. Historical criticism is the application of an evolutionary 'scientific' method. Robertson Smith's mentor was Julius Wellhausen (inventor of the documentary hypothesis), whose anti-semitism has been discussed frequently. Johann David Michaelis defined the field of historical criticism and was virulently anti-semitic.

Solomon Schechter gave an address, “Higher Criticism—Higher Anti-Semitism” in 1903. Some warning signs  had been raised. Clearly, however the intellectual climate was prepared for the rise of Hitler when Adolf von Harnack was ready to rehabilitate Marcion.

Volcanic Ash and the Balancings of the Clouds

The ash cloud from the Icelandic volcano Eyjafjallajökull in 2010 challenged scientific knowledge. While further understanding has been gathered, the recent eruption of Grimsvotn has revealed much of the lack of knowledge on the part of many about these things in spite of their claims. Now the Government has appointed an Ash Cloud Tsar, a scientist who is to give them the exact knowledge they need. There has been much debate about the computer forecasts of the ash cloud made by the Met Office’s Volcanic Advisory Centre. The computer model – called NAME – takes into account wind and rain patterns to predict the movement and concentration of the ash cloud up to altitudes of 55,000 feet. It also estimates the type of ash spewing out of the volcano in terms of the size, shape and hardness of volcanic ash particles.

In spring 2010 scientists conducted three flights into the Eyjafjallajökull volcanic ash cloud to collect air samples. They made new discoveries. 'Each volcano has its own character', they concluded. 'We found that hydrocarbon concentrations were up to 70% lower inside the Eyjafjallajökull ash cloud than outside.' They found that the ash plume contained not only the common volcanic gas sulfur dioxide, but also free chlorine radicals. Chlorine radicals are extremely reactive and even tiny amounts that can have a profound impact on local atmospheric chemistry. They are able to confirm that it was dangerous to attempt to fly through the cloud whereas at the time noone really knew for sure.

The media have referred foolishly to the forces of "mother nature" or being in "the lap of the gods" rather than acknowledge our helplessness, despite this knowledge, in response to divine providence. Those, such as ourselves, who found their travel plans affected by these work of providence should come to see our times are in his hands.

In the book of Job, Elihu asks, "Can any understand the spreadings of the clouds?" (Job 36:29). Elihu well knew something of their formation and composition. "He bindeth up the waters in his thick clouds, and the cloud is not rent under them" (Job 26:8). Yet he acknowledged the real limits of his knowledge. He asks does anyone fully know the "balancings of the clouds" (Job 37:16), how millions of tons of water are suspended and sustained in the thinnest parts of the atmosphere even though water is heavier than air. Air currents may keep them aloft for a while, but who controls and directs the wind? There may be various theories based on ever closer analysis but if we are wise we must come to acknowledge and bow to the providence of God.

“Hearken unto this, O Job: stand still and consider the wondrous works of God. Dost thou know when God disposed them [i.e., the winds and clouds, the thunder and lightning, the frost and rain], and caused the light of His cloud to shine? Dost thou know the balancing of the clouds, the wondrous works of Him who is perfect in knowledge” (Job 37:14-16).

"Touching the Almighty, we cannot find him out: he is excellent in power, and in judgment, and in plenty of justice: he will not afflict. Men do therefore fear him: he respecteth not any that are wise of heart" (Job 37:23-24). This is the lesson to be drawn from considering the mighty, wise and holy works of providence.

"Men should therefore stand in awe of him, and beware of quarrelling with his conduct, for he regards none who are wise in their own conceit, or who dare contend with their Maker, or presume to censure his proceedings." (John Brown of Haddington)

Declaratory Acts

Another blog draws attention to the similarity between the praise controversy that has been ongoing within the Free Church lately and the Declaratory Act situation of 1892-3.

One of the points made is that in the Free Church lately there has been "surprising agreement that with Barrier Act legitimacy (however construed) the decision would be a binding law in the Free Church. This has always been the contention of the Free Presbyterian Church in connection with the Declaratory Act adopted in 1891 and made law under the Barrier Act in 1892".

The permission granted to consciences in 2011 to make known their convictions on purity of worship underlines many things. It underlines a situation where "every man does that which is right in his own eyes" and the Church is happy for vows and the definition of true and pure worship to be interpreted according to individual preference. It also acknowledges that the Church's position on worship has changed and in particular the vows of the individual and their meaning. Otherwise why would men need to seek to safeguard their consciences?

Merely to state one's convictions is on the face of it meaningless when this has no integral connection with the vows and it does not matter to the Church whether or not the statement is made. It does not absolve the individual from keeping the vows as the Church has altered them.

Men are now being required to assert, maintain and defend worship that previously their vows required them to oppose. It is no longer possible to assert, maintain and defend purity of worship in congregations that will reject purity of worship. While liberty will be granted to use purity of worship when conducting worship there, is there liberty to preach against the defection from purity of worship? Will this not be seen as schismatic and proceeded against? Will elders be able to protest against defections within their congregation?

When a man changes his views on worship this is entirely irrelevant to his presbytery now and even if the presbytery wished to take action, they cannot. A presbytery cannot require someone being licensed, ordained, inducted to make such a statement and even if they could they cannot act upon it. Thus their vows are now entirely changed.

A man may indicate that his views are conservative and receive a call but what if he omits to make a statement during the process of being inducted, has he changed his views? Could the congregation compel him to make such a statement? But what is the value of the statement? A man may make a statement and change his views not long after. No congregation can be guaranteed otherwise. After all, did not many make such statements and solemn vows but have then changed? A man may decide that he needs to stay in the current Free Church in order to preserve the truth in his own congregation. But what will happen after he is gone?

This brings us back to the point of agreement, that binding rules and constitutions may even if ultra vires, effectually change in practice and reality the meaning and force of one's vows. This is what happened in 1892-3, yet men sought to argue otherwise. One argument was that they were not required to preach heresy. The point was, however, that they had the keys of discipline taken away from them in relation to heresy and their ordination vows were meaningless on this point. Noone is now required to administer worship other than purity of worship but that does not mean that the vows have been altered.

James S. Sinclair commented in relation to the 1892 Act in words that are now very relevant:

"It is very apparent, however, to all observers that the present age is distinguished for great laxity of opinion on religious subjects in general, and that men, from lack of reverence to any authority in heaven or earth, but their own narrow reason, are ready to kick against all fixed doctrinal standards even though these should be clearly supported by the unerring Word of God".

One of Heaven's Jewels: Rev Archibald Cook #2

The second edition of this unique book has now been produced following the success of the first edition. The second edition is largely the same as the first with minor differences. This site posted a review of the first edition which does not need to be repeated. The second edition can be purchased here.

It is certainly worth drawing attention to Cook and his ministry afresh, however. The question was put to Archibald Cook on one occasion, ‘Which do you fear most, that which has gone past in your life, or that which is to come?’ He replied that it was what was past in his life. He was asked, ‘Why is that so?’ ‘Well, I mean this,’ he said, ‘if what took place in the past was right, I fear not what will come after.’

The preface to the book makes reference to one minister who reads a portion of Cook's sermons every day. The author also makes the following summary of Cook's influence. "Perhaps his major long-term legacy to Highland Christianity is that he reinforced the evangelical idea that people claiming to have been born again in Christian religious conversion should give up some parts of their previous life-style, including secular entertainments". In the following extract from a sermon, Cook speaks of coming up out of the wilderness of this world and away from its attractions.

The world is a wilderness literally, because it lost the beauty in which it was created. "Cursed is the ground for thy sake." God's curse wasted the original beauty of the earth. Again, the earth is a wilderness, because it is unable to satisfy the soul. The soul was created to be a dwelling place for God; and when God left the soul of man at the Fall nothing else could ever fill it. Because the Creator is robbed of the affection of the soul by the world, He is provoked to place a worm at the root of everything that is drawing the soul away from Himself. The Lord desires the soul's affection for Himself. When it is given to any creature and not to the Creator, He sees the extent to which He Himself is being despised in favour of that other object of affection. Even if it were to an angel that you would give your soul's affection you would thus be guilty of robbing God. When, for example, a man's worldly affairs prosper and take away his soul's affection from God, he is guilty of robbing God. Throughout eternity many will be cursing the day in which their worldly affairs began to prosper. You take care that the world does not draw your heart away from God.

...The world is a wilderness because it is under sentence of death. The day of judgement will usher in the end of the world. The sentence of death has been pronounced against it as a murderer. They are few in number whose souls are not being destroyed by the world. In the day that you come to a saving knowledge of God you will come to know that the world is a murderer, and in that day you will lose your love for it.

...In the day when the Lord comes into the soul, the world becomes an empty place it becomes a wilderness to that soul. Blessed is the man in whom this view of the world is maintained until the day of his death. In the day in which the Lord will come into your soul you will see no beauty in the creature but what is of God in it. This is what no hypocrite ever saw; but those who are the objects of God's love must see it, and do see it. Until they come to see this, any godliness they may have will be a half-grown godliness; and it is no wonder that they do not bear fruit. But when their eyes are opened they do not see any excellency in the world but what is of God in it. You who have not this view of the world, still have the world, and not God, as your portion.

only a few days left...

...to download

The Next Story by Time Challies as an audio book for free. It is very insightful reading for anyone that uses a mobile phone, the internet and related technologies. He reveals the dangers of the digital revolution in terms of virtualism and how our engagement with this type of media is changing us. It has an engaging style especially in the use of various metaphors but has a crucial theological perspective upon its subject. The aim of the author is to provide the reader with a framework they can apply to any technology. Here is a sample to read.

sin: the enemy of usefulness#2

Mortification prunes all the graces of God, and makes room for them in our hearts to grow. The life and vigour of our spiritual lives consists in the vigour and flourishing of the plants of grace in our hearts. Now, as you may see in a garden, let there be a precious herb planted, and let the ground be untilled, and weeds grow about it, perhaps it will live still, but be a poor, withering, unuseful thing. You must look and search for it, and sometimes can scarce find it; and when you do, you can scarce know it, whether it be the plant you look for or no; and suppose it be, you can make no use of it at all. When, let another of the same kind be set in the ground, naturally as barren and bad as the other, but let it be well weeded, and every thing that is noxious and hurtful removed from it, -- it flourishes and thrives; you may see it at first look into the garden, and have it for your use when you please. So it is with the graces of the Spirit that are planted in our hearts.

That is true; they are still, they abide in a heart where there is some neglect of mortification; but they are ready to die, Rev. 3:2, they are withering and decaying. The heart is like the sluggard's field, -- so overgrown with weeds that you can scarce see the good corn. Such a man may search for faith, love, and zeal, and scarce be able to find any; and if he do discover that these graces are there yet alive and sincere, yet they are so weak, so clogged with lusts, that they are of very little use; they remain, indeed, but are ready to die. But now let the heart be cleansed by mortification, the weeds of lust constantly and daily rooted up (as they spring daily, nature being their proper soil), let room be made for grace to thrive and flourish, -- how will every grace act its part, and be ready for every use and purpose!

John Owen - Chapter 4 Mortification of Sin

sin: the enemy of usefulness

Sin "will take away a man’s usefulness in his generation. His works, his endeavours, his labours, seldom receive blessing from God. If he be a preacher, God commonly blows upon his ministry, that he shall labour in the fire, and not be honoured with any success or doing any work for God; and the like may be spoken of other conditions. The world is at this day full of poor withering professors. How few are there that walk in any beauty or glory! how barren, how useless are they, for the most part! Amongst the many reasons that may be assigned of this sad estate, it may justly be feared that this is none of the least effectual, — many men harbour spirit-devouring lusts in their bosoms, that lie as worms at the root of their obedience, and corrode and weaken it day by day. All graces, all the ways and means whereby any graces may be exercised and improved, are prejudiced by this means; and as to any success, God blasts such men’s undertakings...Keep alive upon thy heart these or the like considerations of its guilt, danger, and evil; be much in the meditation of these things; cause thy heart to dwell and abide upon them; engage thy thoughts into these considerations; let them not go off nor wander from them until they begin to have a powerful influence upon thy soul, — until they make it to tremble."
John Owen, Chapter 10, Mortification of Sin

US Bible readers prefer the Authorised Version

Of the 89% of U.S. adults who own at least one Bible, 67% own a King James. 82% of those who read the Bible at least once a month rely on the AV. More information here

The King in His Beauty #2

The King in his Beauty now has the release date of 13 April 2011. This is a "wordle" of the total content of the book. Wordles are “word clouds” generated from blocks of text. The clouds give greater prominence to words that appear more frequently in the source text. What it shows is something that would have been very important to Rutherford, that Christ is most frequently mentioned in the book much more than Rutherford himself.

"I wish it were in my power...to cry down all love but the love of Christ, and to cry down all gods but Christ, all saviours but Christ, all well-beloveds but Christ, and all soul-suitors and love-beggars but Christ."

"Oh, but Christ is heaven's wonder, and earth's wonder. What marvel that His bride saith, "He is altogether lovely," Oh, pity for evermore, that there should be such a one as Christ Jesus, so boundless, so bottomless, and so incomparable."

the dawn of heaven breaks

As well remembered here, today marks the 350th anniversary of Samuel Rutherford's death 29 March 1661.

Rutherford wrote in his book Christ Dying:

When the sun riseth first, the beams over-gild the tops of green mountains that look toward the east, and the world cannot hinder the sun to rise: some are so near heaven, that the everlasting Sun hath begun to make an everlasting day of glory on them; the rays that come from his face that sits on the throne, so over-goldeth the soul, that there is no possibility of clouding peace, or of hindering daylight in the souls of such.

We believe that he had such himself upon the date mentioned above. Howie gives an account of it as follows.

Mr Blair, whose praise is in the Churches, being present, when he took a little wine in a spoon to refresh himself, being then very weak, said to him, "Ye feed on dainties in heaven, and think nothing of our cordials on earth." He answered, "They are all but dung; but they are Christ's creatures, and, out of obedience to His command, I take them. Mine eyes shall see my Redeemer; I know He shall stand the last day upon the earth, and I shall be caught up in the clouds to meet Him in the air, and I shall ever be with Him; and what would you have more? there is an end." And stretching out his hands, he said again, "there is an end." And a little after, he said, "I have been a single man, but I stand at the best pass that ever a man did; Christ is mine, and I am His;" and spoke much of the white stone and new name. Mr Blair, who loved with all his heart to hear Christ commended, said to him again—" What think ye now of Christ?" To which he answered, "I shall live and adore Him. Glory! glory to my Creator and my Redeemer for ever! Glory shines in Immanuel's land." In the afternoon of that day, he said, "Oh! that all my brethren in the land may know what a Master I have served, and what peace I have this day. I shall sleep in Christ, and when I awake I shall be satisfied with His likeness. This night shall close the door, and put my anchor within the vail; and I shall go away in a sleep by five of the clock in the morning;" which exactly fell out. Though he was very weak, he had often this expression, "Oh! for arms to embrace Him! Oh! for a well-tuned harp!"

When some spoke to him of his former painfulness and faithfulness in the ministry, he said, "I disclaim all that; the port that I would be at is redemption and forgiveness through His blood; 'Thou shalt show me the path of life, in Thy sight is fulness of joy:' there is nothing now betwixt me and the resurrection, but "to-day thou shalt be with Me in paradise."' Mr Blair saying, "Shall I praise the Lord for all the mercies He has done and is to do for you?" He answered, "Oh ! for a well-tuned harp." To his child he said, "I have again left you upon the Lord; it may be you will tell this to others, that 'the lines are fallen to me in pleasant places; I have got a goodly heritage.' I bless the Lord that He gave me counsel."

Thus, by five o'clock in the morning, as he himself foretold, it was said unto him, "Come up hither;" and he gave up the ghost, and the renowned eagle took its flight unto the mountains of spices.

Thus died the famous Samuel Rutherford, who may justly be accounted among the sufferers of that time; for surely he was a martyr, both in his own design and resolution, and by the design and determination of men. Few men ever ran so long a race without cessation; so constantly, so unweariedly, and so unblameably. Two things rarely to be found in one man, were eminent in him, viz., a quick invention and sound judgment; and these accompanied with a homely but clear expression, and graceful elocution; so that such as knew him best, were in a strait whether to admire him most for his penetrating wit, and sublime genius in the schools, and peculiar exactness in disputes and matters of controversy, or for his familiar condescension in the pulpit, where he was one of the most moving and affectionate preachers in his time, or perhaps in any age of the Church. To sum up all in a word, he seems to have been one of the most resplendent lights that ever arose in this horizon.


Rutherford's epitaph, composed by William Wilson, (see Thomson, Martyr Graves p.208) may not be the highest poetry but expresses things very well.

Most constantly he did contend,
Until his time was at an end.
At last he won to full fruition
Of that which he had seen in vision.

What must be the subject matter of the Church's praise?

Of course "glory to God in the highest" must ever form its all-pervading and most distinguishing element. Praise is the celebration of God's majesty and supremacy—of the glory of his works, and the sublimity of his purposes—the absolute perfection of his dominion over the universe, and the concentrated splendour of his moral attributes, softened into grace, as it shines upon our sinful world in the Person and work of his eternal son. Any serious error or defect here must be fatal to the Psalmody of the Church.

The grace and truth which emanate from God, and are wrought up into the subjective and devotional life of the Church, form an essential part of the matter of her praise. In all their original parity and completeness, these should be reflected in our songs of worship. Besides, the matter of the Church's praise must include and duly celebrate the great deliverances, spiritual and providential, which are all summarily represented in those wonders of old which God wrought for his chosen people, as recorded in his Word, but which he is perpetually renewing to the end of time. The answer of every believing prayer, the issue of every spiritual conflict, the agonising consciousness of impending danger, the piercing cry for immediate help, the joyous confidence of approaching victory, and the irrepressible shout of a realised deliverance—all must find full, poetic expression in the songs of the Church.

These songs, moreover by their prophetic expansiveness, must embrace the gradual enlargement and final triumphs of God's cause on earth—until "men shall be blessed in him, and all nations shall call him blessed." Praise exults in anticipation of the future, as well as in remembrance of the past. Thus exuberant gratitude and rejoicing hope mingle together their joyous strains as the Church advances in her career of conquest, or as individuals gradually advance towards, and are at length permitted to take part in, the ecstatic praises of eternity.

HOW CAN SUCH PRAISE BE PROVIDED?
Assuredly not by the Church. She is incompetent to the task. And even if competent, she is not warranted to undertake it. When did God devolve on any man, or body of men, the right to determine what should be offered to him in praise? We naturally look to One higher than a worshipper for songs of worship. We instinctively ask for One far removed above the level of sinful, erring, wayward humanity, to teach us to praise, and supply us with its matter. Our songs must be known to have come from the very midst of the throne and of the excellent glory, that we may be confident of their acceptance there, when they return glowing with the enkindled emotions, and fragrant with the bursting gratitude, of the church. Divine matter alone can be employed, or accepted, in the exercise of praise. And even were that matter furnished to their
hand, men would prove utterly incompetent to prepare it aright for the ordinance of worship.
The matter of praise must be distributed in brief, poetic, and exulting odes of universal adaptation. The highest and most elevating style of thought and of utterance alone is befitting such a service. Each song must be framed so as to express the emotions, not of one, or of a few, but of all. The completed collection must embrace in its various songs—each differing from the rest in length, or style, or substance—the entire matter of the Church's praise for all time. Yet this collection, as a whole, must be so brief, simple, and easy of entire appropriation, that when associated with suitable music, it may be readily grafted upon the memory of childhood, and so familiarised as to become the living embodiment and efflorescence of the devotion and piety of the people from generation to generation. An immature, ever-changing, multitudinous, uncertain psalmody mocks, but cannot satisfy, the deep and abiding necessities of the Church of God. This is no proper field for the display of conceited gifts, or the trial of empirical effusions. When the rage of hymn-making seizes upon men, countless rhapsodies will be amassed together and offered as suitable vehicles of the Church's praise. Must they all be accepted and sung, that a full tribute of worship may be presented to Jehovah? If not, who is authorised to make the final selection? And when it is made, who can give confidence to the anxious worshipper, that all the matter of praise is embraced in it, clothed in language
fitted to the ear of God, untainted with error, and purged from such spurious and self-pleasing emotions as are so apt to beguile us even in the divine presence? The Church never has undertaken a work so superhuman and responsible as this. Nor has God given the slightest hint that such a work was ever expected at her hands. We are shut up to the conclusion, that God himself must be the author and finisher of the praises of the Church.

In singing the book of Psalms, we may pass at once, and with boldness, into the holiest of all, confident that we are offering praise, that we are giving to the great God the glory due unto his name, that we are stirring up within ourselves and presenting unto him only such emotions as are well-pleasing in his sight, and such as will be beneficial to ourselves and others—in short, that we are doing true homage before the Jealous One, by worshipping him only in the way which he has appointed, and which he has pledged himself to accept at our hands.

On the other hand, if we take up one of the almost countless collections of hymns recently offered to the Church, what a Herculean and superhuman task is required of us before we dare venture to use any part of it in the solemn exercise of worship! Does it contain the true matter of the Church's praise without the fatal admixture of error or defect? Is each separate ode expressive of the sentiments of scriptural worship in language of celestial purity and poetic fire? Does the entire collection contain no misrepresentation of the divine character and purposes—no biased statement of Christian truth or experience—nothing that fosters sinful prejudice, ministers to self-deception, or panders to a domineering sensationalism—thus tending to make self, and not God, the centre and the end of all our worship? These questions require to be settled by each worshipper before he opens his lips in the use of such hymns. He cannot depute the task to another.

Nor is any council or synod competent to decide for him what he should offer in praise to God. He must decide for himself. To his own Master he standeth or falleth. And, when he has done so, may he not still be arrested and silenced by the challenge, "Who hath required this at your hands?" Is it not a daring impertinence, a solemn affront offered in the very exercise of worship, to come before God with the singing of human hymns, when he himself has furnished us with psalms which he has commanded us to sing?

Men must know beforehand what they are to sing, and be well assured that it is in accordance with God's will, before they can praise with the spirit and with the understanding also. How can they know this of hymns that bear no stamp whatever of divine approval? And even if an infallible test could be devised, how is it to be applied to the hundreds of hymns in different collections, that are so hastily adopted, and then so speedily subjected to change, revision, and alteration.

Josias A. Chancellor ("One of the ablest scholars and preachers that the Reformed Presbyterian Church of Ireland has produced")

The King and The English Bible - 1911

the value of the English Bible

Various translations of the Psalms are before the public. Many of them have much merit and preserve much of the heavenly savor of the original. All of them may occasionally afford a good hint. Of those made into English none can compare with the authorized version...no competent scholar would agree that our authorized version has any successful rival.

The author thinks proper here to record his high estimate of the value of the English Bible now in common use. It seems to him that his brethren, who seek to bring it into disrepute, might be much better employed. He gives it as his deliberate judgment that he has never seen even one chapter done into English so well anywhere else. The learning of the men, who made it, was vast, sound, and unquestionable. In this respect their little fingers were thicker than the loins of the men, who decry their labors.

William Swan Plumer, Commentary on the Psalms. (see this related post)

Praise for The English Bible - 2011

It is a year of praise for the only translation of the Bible into English that can justly be referred to as The English Bible. "After four centuries, the symbolic power of the 1611 Bible remains mighty indeed" writes Boyd Tonkin.

"Today it is a commonplace to note that the words and rhythms of the KJB and its source translations shape the speech of countless millions who never open a bible or enter a church. Somehow, the language of the 1611 version never falls from grace (Galatians 5.4) even if its message falls on stony ground (Mark 4.5). In a secular age where ignorance of religion goes from strength to strength (Psalms 84.7) among lovers of filthy lucre (1 Timothy 3.8) who only want to eat, drink and be merry (Luke 12.19), we know for a certainty (Joshua 23.13) that these resonant words endure as a fly in the ointment (Ecclesiastes 10.1) and a thorn in the flesh (2 Corinthians 12.7) of the powers that be (Romans 13.1). They can still set the teeth on edge (Jeremiah 31.29) of those who try to worship God and Mammon (Matthew 6.24). But does this ancient book, proof that there is no new thing under the sun (Ecclesiastes 1.9), now cast its pearls before swine (Matthew 7.6), and act as a voice crying in the wilderness (Luke 3.4) – a drop in a bucket (Isaiah 40.15) of unbelief, no longer a sign of the times (Matthew 16.3) but a verbal stumbling-block (Leviticus 19.14) or else all things to all men (1 Corinthians 9.22) while the blind lead the blind (Matthew 15.14)?"

A useful indication of its continuing influence upon the language (besides Crystal's "Begat" book) is available here.

James Naughtie's radio series was very worthwhile - he writes here. Another insightful article by Charles Moore is worth extensive quotation (Daily Telegraph, Saturday 27th November 2010: ‘Gove’s sense of the nobility of education offers hope to us all’.)

This week marked the 400th anniversary celebrations [of the King James Bible]. It has often been said – by Winston Churchill and T S Eliot among others – that the King James Bible is the greatest work in the English language, and it is true...Time and chance [sic] found a moment when our language was young yet mature, sprightly yet stately, earthy yet sublime.

But what was the purpose of this enterprise? It was not to produce lovely language for its own sake. It was educational. The translators dedicated their work to King James 1, explaining that it was essential that “God’s holy truth . . . be yet more and more known unto the people” (who, until then, had had no one, permitted, English version). They praised James for “cherishing the teachers” of this truth. They saw what they were doing as a work of national salvation, both in a religious and political sense. The fact that the version is known by the name of an earthly King tells you a lot about its aims.

So the point of this Bible was not only that everyone might study it in private, but also that it was “appointed to be read in churches”, often to those who could not read. It was taught in schools, it was the classic text, the words – the Word, indeed – which people needed to know.

This persisted until the 1960s, and, to a remarkable degree, it worked. Contrary to the claims of the modernists, you did not have to be clever to profit from the King James Version . . . In my own village school, where most of the pupils were the children of gypsum miners and labourers, we read and heard always the King James Version (and the collects from the Book of Common Prayer). No doubt we frequently did not understand it, but only a fool would claim to fully understand the Bible in any version. We benefitted from something that was seriously beautiful and beautifully serious.

All this changed, as it was bound to do. The 1960s saw the production of the New English Bible, which was intended to be relevant. Today, nobody reads it at all: it is – to adapt a King James phrase – perished as though it had never been. It failed, but it succeeded in dethroning the King James Version. Now there are many Bibles, but no known one - a Babel of Bibles, in fact."

The King in His Beauty #1

Matthew Vogan, “The King in His Beauty”: The Piety of Samuel Rutherford

“The King in His Beauty” introduces readers to the life and writings of Samuel Rutherford (1600–1661). Matthew Vogan’s biographical introduction traces the significant events of this Scottish theologian’s life and guides readers through his writings, focusing on his distinctive insight into Christian experience. In forty-three excerpts drawn from Rutherford’s letters, major treatises, catechism, and sermons, readers will discover the depth of Rutherford’s compassion, piety, and theological wisdom, all rooted in his unwavering love for Christ.

Description by the publishers. Coming soon (DV) from Reformation Heritage Books

nothing can hinder God from aiding us

Calvin on Psalm 102:12 "But thou, O LORD, shalt endure for ever; and thy remembrance unto all generations".

When the prophet, for his own encouragement, sets before himself the eternity of God, it seems, at first sight, to be a far-fetched consolation; for what benefit will accrue to us from the fact that God sits immutable on his heavenly throne, when, at the same time, our frail and perishing condition does not permit us to continue unmoved for a single moment? ...What advantage would we derive from this eternity and immutability of God's being, unless we had in our hearts the knowledge of him, which, produced by his gracious covenant, begets in us the confidence arising from a mutual relationship between him and us? The meaning then is, "We are like withered grass, we are decaying every moment, we are not far from death, yea rather, we are, as it were, already dwelling in the grave; but since thou, O God! hast made a covenant with us, by which thou hast promised to protect and defend thine own people, and hast brought thyself into a gracious relation to us, giving us the fullest assurance that thou wilt always dwell in the midst of us, instead of desponding, we must be of good courage; and although we may see only ground for despair if we depend upon ourselves, we ought nevertheless to lift up our minds to the heavenly throne, from which thou wilt at length stretch forth thy hand to help us."

Whoever is in a moderate degree acquainted with the sacred writings, will readily acknowledge that whenever we are besieged with death, in a variety of forms, we should reason thus: As God continues unchangeably the same—"without variableness or shadow of turning"—nothing can hinder him from aiding us; and this he will do, because we have his word, by which he has laid himself under obligation to us, and because he has deposited with us his own memorial, which contains in it a sacred and indissoluble bond of fellowship.

falling into Christ's lap

O how sweet to be in Christ, and to grow as a tree planted on the banks of the river of life! when such die, they fall in Christ's lap and in his bosom, be the death violent or natural; 'tis all one whether a strong gale and a rough storm shore the child of God on the new Jerusalem's dry
land, or if a small calm blast even with rowing of oars bring the passenger to heaven, if once he be in that goodly land.
from Christ Dying and Drawing Sinners to Himself

See here for related quotations

Open Communion

Sometimes one comes across inferences that the FP Church practices closed (as opposed to restricted) communion. Closed communion means that no one outwith that denomination or congregation can be admitted to the Lord's Supper. The following longstanding Synod resolution gives the accurate statement of the position:

"The Synod would record their strong disapprobation of the conduct of some individuals connected with this Church, who have circulated unfounded charges among our people about the meaning of a resolution passed by the Synod in November last year. The resolution reads follows—"That the Synod approve of the procedure adopted by Mr Macintyre at Winnipeg in the matter or admitting persons to the privilege of the communion, and give it to be understood that, while this Church does not hold close communion, none are to be admitted to the privilege mentioned but such as are known as God-fearing persons by a majority of those who are responsible for admission." The Synod declare that the meaning attached by them to the above resolution is as follows- 1) The office-bearers of the Church in Canada, having sent a request to the Synod to give a deliverance in regard to the position held by this Church about communion, the Synod gave it to be understood that neither the Church of the Reformation, or the Fire Presbyterian Church of Scotland, held or hold close communion; 2) The Synod gave it to be understood that none are to be received to the Lord's table in this Church 'but such as are God-fearing persons'; and that none shall be admitted without the approval of the majority of the Kirk Session. That this has been all along the way of admission to the Lord's Table in the Free Presbyterian Church will be quite manifest to all their people. 3)The Synod would also declare that it flows from ignorance or something more blameworthy on the part of some, to have spread a report to the effect that the Synod, by foresaid resolution, had changed the Constitution of the Church and opened a wide door to receive members wholesale from other Churches to the Lord's table. The people of this Church may rest assured that the Synod did not and does not intend to open the door to communion in the least degree wider than it has been in the Reformed Church of Scotland since the Reformation, and in the Free Presbyterian Church of Scotland hitherto."

the transcendent love of Christ

Christ’s love made Him willing to suffer for us. And for us He has
suffered all miseries that all our sins had deserved and cruelty could
inflict. He who with one word caused the vast fabric of heaven and earth
to start out of nothing, who was King of kings and Lord of lords, who
had heaven for His throne and earth for His footstool, was, out of love
to us, content to take upon Him the form of a servant, and to live in such
a poor condition as He had not a cradle when born, nor a place to lay His
head while He lived, nor a sepulchre to bury Him when He died. He who
was the King of glory, the splendour of whose glory dazzled the eyes of
seraphims, nay, whose glory is above the heavens, was, out of love to us,
willing to be “despised and rejected of men” (Isa. 53. 3); to be accounted
as “a worm, and no man; a reproach of men and despised of the people”
(Psa. 22. 6, 7). He who was adored by the glorious host of heaven, was
the Object of their eternal praises, yea, and “counted it not robbery to be
equal with God,” was, out of love to us, content to be “numbered
amongst transgressors,” to be reviled and slandered as a wine-bibber, a
glutton, a Sabbath-breaker, a blasphemer, a madman, and possessed with
the devil.

He in whose presence was fulness of joy, and from whose smile
spring rivers of pleasures, was, for love of us, willing to become “a Man
of sorrows, acquainted with grief,” yea, and it seems with nothing else;
we never read that He laughed. He whose beauty was the glory of
heaven, the brightness of His Father’s glory, the sight whereof transports
those happy spirits that behold it into an eternal rapture, was, for love to
us, by His suffering so disfigured as He seemed to have no form nor
comeliness in Him, nor beauty that any should desire Him; “He gave His
back to the smiters, and His cheeks to them that plucked off the hair: He
hid not His face from shame and spitting” (Isa. 50. 6).
He in whose sight the heavens are not clean, who was of purer eyes
than to behold iniquity, was, out of love to us, content to “bear our sins
in His body upon the tree,” to be “wounded for our transgressions,” and
to have all our iniquities laid upon Him. This love made God, blessed
for ever, willing to be made a curse, the glorious Redeemer of Israel toTHE LOVE OF CHRIST 107
be sold as a slave, and the Lord of life to die a base, accursed and cruel
death.
And, which is above all, He who was His Father’s love and delight,
who was rejoicing before Him from eternity, and in whom alone His soul
was well pleased, did, out of love to us, bear the unconceivable burden
of His Father’s wrath – that wrath which was the desert of all the sins of
the elect, which would have sunk the whole world into hell, the weight
whereof made His soul heavy unto the death, and was a far greater
torture to Him than ever damned soul felt in hell (if we abstract sin and
eternity from these torments), the burden whereof pressed from Him that
stupendous, bloody sweat and made Him, in the anguish of His
oppressed soul, cry out to heaven, “My God, My God, why hast Thou
forsaken Me?” and cry out to earth, “O! have ye no regard, all ye that
pass by? See if there be any sorrow like My sorrow, wherewith the Lord
has afflicted Me in the day of His fierce wrath.”

No, Lord, there was no sorrow like Thy sorrow, no love like Thy
love. Was it not enough (dearest Saviour) that Thou didst condescend to
pray, and sigh, and weep for us perishing wretches? Wilt Thou also
bleed and die for us? Was it not enough that Thou wast hated, slandered,
blasphemed, buffeted? but Thou wilt also be scourged, nailed, wounded,
crucified. Was it not enough to feel the cruelty of man? Wilt Thou also
undergo the wrath of God? Or if Thy love will count nothing a sufficient
expression of itself, but parting with life, and shedding that precious
blood, yet was it not enough to die once, to suffer one death? Wilt Thou
die twice, and taste both first, and something of the second death, suffer
the pains of death in soul and body?

O the transcendent love of Christ! Heaven and earth are astonished
at it. What tongue can express it? What heart can conceive it? The
tongues, the thoughts of men and angels are far below it. O the height,
and depth, and breadth, and length, of the love of Christ! All the creation
is nonplussed; our thoughts are swallowed up in this depth, and there
must lie till glory elevate them, when we shall have no other employment
but to praise, admire and adore this love of Christ.

David Clarkson

more benefit from the private means than public?

Sometimes people either say or think "I enjoy God more in private, than in the public means of grace. Why should I attend the public means when I can get more benefit in private?"

Is it not an easy thing for a man to think that God is most enjoyed when his heart is most affected? It is possible a man’s heart may be more affected when God is less enjoyed; such is the deceit of our hearts. God is most enjoyed where God is most served. But, now, suppose God were more enjoyed in private than under public ordinances, I do but suppose it, yet were this no reason why a man should lay by the public ordinances: for you are sometimes in your closet at prayer, and there you enjoy God; sometimes you are below at dinner and supper, and you have some enjoyments of God there. But, I pray, tell me, whether do you enjoy God more at your ordinary dinner and supper or in your closet in prayer? Surely I enjoy God more in my closet in prayer. And is this a reason why you should never dine and sup again? Yet, notwithstanding, how do people reason thus: I enjoy God more in private, therefore I must lay by the public.

William Bridge. Vindication of Ordinances (Works, 4:141-42).

In his sermon David Clarkson says that "the presence of God, which, enjoyed in private, is but a stream, in public becomes a river, a river that makes glad the city of God". "David saw as much of God in secret as could then be expected, but he expected more in public, and, therefore, as not satisfied with his private enjoyments, he breathes and longs after the public ordinances, for this reason, that he might have clearer discoveries of the Lord there" (Ps. 27:4; Ps 63:1-2) "Public ordinances are a better security against apostasy than private, and therefore to be preferred: an argument worthy our observation in these backsliding times. He that wants the public ordinances, whatever private means he enjoy, is in danger of apostasy" (see 1 Sam. 16:19).

Clarkson deals at length with objection of more benefit being obtained in private.

Obj. But notwithstanding all the arguments brought to prove public worship is to be preferred, I find something to the contrary in experience; and who can admit arguments against experience? I have sometimes in private more of God's presence, more assistance of his Spirit, more joy, more enlargement, more raised affections; whereas in public I often find much dullness of heart, much straitness and unaffectedness, therefore I cannot so freely yield that public worship is to be preferred.

Ans. I shall endeavour to satisfy this in many severals.

1. Experience is not a rule for your judgment, but the word of God; that is a fallible guide, this only infallible. If you press your judgment always to follow experience, Satan may quickly afford you such experience as will lead you out of the way. Be scrupulous of following experience when it goes alone, when it is not backed by the word, countenanced by Scripture. It has deceived many. Empirics are no more tolerable in divinity than in physic. As there reason and experience, so here Scripture and experience, should go together. Those that live by sense may admit this alone to be their guide, but the event has often proved it a blind one. Those that live by faith must admit no experiments against Scripture. Nay, those that are but true to reason will not admit a few experiments against many arguments. You find this sometimes true in private, but do you find it so ordinarily? If not, here is no ground to pass any judgment against what is delivered. It may be a purge or a vomit does sometimes tend more to your health than your meat and drink; will you therefore prefer physic before your ordinary food? It may be in some extremity of cold you find more refreshment from a fire than from the sun; will you therefore prefer the fire, and judge it more beneficial to the world than the sun? Experience must not rule your judgment here, nor must you be confident of such apprehensions as are only granted upon some few experiments.

2. It may be your enjoyments in private were upon some special occasion. Now some special cases make no general rule; nor are they sufficient promises to afford an universal conclusion. For instance, it may be you enjoyed so much of God in private, when you were necessarily and unavoidably hindered from waiting upon the Lord in public ordinances. Now in this case, when the people of God bewail the want of public liberties as an affliction, and seek the Lord in special manner to supply that want in private, he is graciously pleased to make up what they are deprived of in public, by the vouchsafements of his quickening and comforting presence in private. So it was with David in his banishment, yet this did nothing abate his esteem of or desires after the public ordinances; far was he from preferring private duties before public, though he enjoyed exceeding much of God in private. Nor must we from such particular cases draw an universal conclusion; either affirmatively, that private is to be preferred; or negatively, that public is not to be preferred.

3. These enjoyments of God in private may be extraordinary dispensations. These the Lord does sometimes use, though seldom, though rarely. Now, such extraordinary cases are exceptions from the general rule, and such exceptions do limit the rule, but not overthrow it. They take off something from the extent, nothing from the truth of it. It holds good still, more of God is enjoyed in public than private; except in rare extraordinary cases, ordinarily it is so. And this is sufficient, if there were no other argument to establish the observation as a truth, public worship is to be preferred before private.

4. It may be thy enjoyments in private are the fruits of thy attendance upon God in public. It may be the assistance, the enlargement, the affections thou findest in private duties, are the returns of public worship. The benefits of public ordinances are not all, nor always, received while ye are therein employed; the returns of them may be continued many days after. The refreshment the Lord affords his people in public worship is like the provision he made for Elijah in the wilderness, 1 Kings xix. 18, 'He arose and did eat and drink, and went in the strength of that meat forty days.' When the Lord feasts his people in public, they may walk with the Lord in the strength thereof in private duties with more cheerfulness, with more enlargedness, more affection, many days after. Those that know what it is to enjoy communion with God in his ordinances, know this by experience. When the Lord meets you in public, find ye not your hearts far better disposed to, and in, private duties? Now, if the assistance you find in private be the fruits of your waiting upon God in public, this should rather raise your esteem of public worship than abate it. That which is objected tends to confirm this truth, so far should it be from hindering you to subscribe it.

5. There may be a deceit in thy experience. All those joys, affections, enlargements, which men find in duties, are not always from the special presence of God. There may be a great flash of spirit, and much cheerfulness and activeness from false principles; some flashes of fleeting affections, some transient and fading impressions, may fall upon the hearts of men, and yet not fall from above. The gifts of men may be sometimes carried very high, even to the admiration of others, whenas there is little or no spiritual life. Vigour of nature, strength of parts, enforcement of conscience, outward respects, delusive joys, delusive visions, ungrounded fancies, deceiving dreams, yea, superstitious conceits, may work much upon men in duties when there is little or nothing of God. When men seem to be carried out with a full gale of assistance, it is not always the Spirit of God that fills the sails. A man may move with much life, freedom, cheerfulness, in spiritual duties, when his motion is from other weights than those of the Spirit.

Nay, further, not only those potent workings which are ordinary, but extraordinary, such as ecstasies and raptures, wherein the soul is transported, so as to leave the body without its ordinary influence, so as it seems without sense or motion; such inward operations on the soul as work strange effects upon the body, visible in its disordered motions and incomposed gestures. Such workings as these have been in all ages, and may be now, from the spirit of darkness transforming himself into an angel of light; and therefore, if such private experiences be produced to disparage the public worship, the public ministry, or any other public ordinance of God (however they pretend to the Spirit of God), they are to be rejected. The deceits of our own hearts, or the delusions of that envious spirit, who has always shewed his malice against God's public worship, should not be admitted, to render this Scripture truth questionable, that public worship is to be preferred before private. And, indeed, the experiences of ordinary personal assistance in private duties, if it be made use of to this end, is to be looked upon as suspicious; you may suspect it is not as it seems, if this be the issue of it. Those assistances which come from the Spirit of God have a better tendency than to disparage the public worship of God, which himself is so tender of. And this should be the more regarded, because it is apparent Satan has a design against God's public worship, and he drives it on in a subtler way than in darker times. He would thrust out one part of God's worship by another, that so at last he may deprive us of all. Mind it, then, and examine thy experiences, if there be a deceit in them, as many times there is. They are of no force against this truth, public worship is to be preferred before private.

6. It may be the Lord seems to withdraw from thee, and to deny thee, spiritual assistance in public worship for trial; to try thy love to him, and the ways which most honour him; to see whether thou wilt withdraw from him and his worship, when he seems to withhold himself from thee; to try whether thou wilt serve God for nothing, when thou seemest to find nothing answerable to thy attendance and endeavours. This is the hour of England's temptation in other things, and probably it is so in this as well as others. If it be so with thee, thy resolution should be that of the prophet, Isa. viii. 17, 'I will wait upon the Lord, that hideth his face from the house of Jacob.' If this be thy case, thy esteem of his public worship should hereby be rather raised than abated, since this is the way to comply with the Lord's design in this dispensation, the way to procure more comfortable returns, more powerful assistance than ever.

7. You may enjoy more of God in public, and not observe it. As there may be a mistake in thinking you enjoy much of God in private when you do not, so there may be a mistake in thinking you want the presence of God in public when indeed you have it. It is not the improvement of parts, enlargement of heart, flashes of joy, stirrings of affections, that argue most of God's presence; there may be much of these when there is little of God. It is a humble soul, one that is poor in spirit, that trembles at the word, that hungers and thirsts after Christ, that is sensible of spiritual wants and distempers, that is burdened with his corruptions, and laments after the Lord and freer enjoyments of him. He whose heart is soft and pliable, whose conscience is tender, it is he who thrives and prospers in the inward man. And if these be the effects of thy attendance upon God in public worship, thou dost there enjoy much of God's presence, whatever thou apprehend to the contrary. These are far more valuable than those affections and enlargements by which some judge of the Lord's presence in his ordinances; for these are the sound fruits of a tree of righteousness, whereas those are but the leaves or flourishes of it, which you may sometimes find in a barren tree. So far as the Lord upholds in thee a poor and hungering spirit, a humble and thirsting heart, so far he is graciously present with thee; for this is it to which he has promised a gracious presence in his ordinances, Isa. lxvi. 1, 2. The Lord speaks here as though he were not so much taken with the glory of the temple, no, not with the glow of heaven, as with a spirit of this temper. As sure as the Lord's throne is in heaven, this soul shall have his presence. The streams of spiritual refreshments from his presence shall water these valleys, whenas high-flown confidents, that come to the ordinances with high conceits and carnal boldness, shall be as the mountains, left dry and parched. See Mat. v. 8-6. You may enjoy the presence of God in public, and not observe it. Now, if thy experience be a mistake, no reason it should hinder thee from yielding to this truth, that public worship is to be preferred before private.

8. It is to be suspected that what you want of God's presence, in public worship, is through your own default. Not because more of God is not to be enjoyed, more spiritual advantage is not to be gained in public ordinances, but because, through some sinful miscarriage, you make yourselves incapable thereof. Let this be observed, and your ways impartially examined; and you will find cause to accuse yourselves, instead of objecting anything against the pre-eminence of public worship. There is so much self-love in us, as we are apt to charge anything, even the worship of God itself, rather than ourselves; yea, when ourselves ought only to be charged and accused. The Lord's hand is not straitened, &c. The worship of God is the same, the Lord as much to be enjoyed in it; no less comfort and advantage to be found in it than formerly (and formerly more has been enjoyed therein than in private); how comes it, then, that there is any occasion to object against it? Why, our iniquities have separated between us and our God.

the best reading that ever I had

"MY Dear Friend, At present I am busy about my Bible; being suffered to live to read it over once again.. Two things have occurred to me in the present perusal, in both which I am enabled to triumph. The one is a deeper discovery of the horrible state I am in through sin; so that, as a child of Adam, I feel nothing in my self but the working of corruption by and under the law, dead to God; but all are alive to sin every faculty at work to bring it forth-the mind-the heart-the senses, yea, the very imagination, in prayer disturbing, distracting, quite lawless-I can do nothing but cry out, Rom. vii. 24. Reading verse 25, I get my second lesson, and find employment for my Jesus. A body of sin and death like mine wants an almighty Saviour, and I am learning to put more honour upon His 'Word and work daily. I find more need of Him than ever, and it is some true joy that He is most exactly suited to my desperate case; having no hope but in His blood, not one ray but in His righteousness, no strength but in His arm, no happiness but out of His fulness; I am led even to triumph in what He is to me; I would lay myself at His foot, and would bless His dear name that He has become all my salvation, and glory in Him that He is now all my desire. It is the best reading that ever I had: self was never so brought down, and so crucified daily; nor did I ever see so much reason to magnify the person of God-Jesus. In this spiritual crucifixion of self and sin-in this true growing up out of self into Christ-may the Holy Spirit teach you to profit daily.
Pray for yours, in our common Lord.-William Romaine

Reformation Attainments

In 1910 the Synod of the Free Presbyterian Church passed a resolution called "A Declaration anent Reformation Attainments, and the Church’s Relation thereto". It was a means to "humbly record, with gratitude to Almighty God, the great goodness and mercy with which He graciously visited Scotland in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries by the Reformations from Popery and Prelacy, the spirit of wisdom and understanding He bestowed on the men who were instrumentally used in accomplishing His will during those memorable periods, whereby they were led to grasp, with eminent light and ability, the great doctrines and principles of religious, social, and civil liberty contained in the Bible, and the magnanimity, fortitude, and patriotism wherewith He enabled them to uphold and vindicate the same against inveterate enemies".

It uses the language of the Free Church Act of 1851 to recognise that while not absolutely satisfactory in that the Church was hindered from "realising fully the attainments that had been reached during the Second Reformation" and the failure of the civil power "in adequately acknowledging the Lord’s work done formerly in the land", there is much reason to be thankful for the Revolution Settlement of 1690. "For it would be in a high degree ungrateful to overlook the signal and seasonable benefits which the Revolution Settlement really did confer upon the Church, as well as upon the nation".

The Synod added their comments "The Synod heartily concur in the above statement of the Church in 1851, and they declare that, in their humble judgment, the fact that the “Rescissory Act” has
been left unrepealed on the Statute Book leaves the Presbyterians of Scotland in a dangerous position, and that effective steps should be taken for its repeal along with all the other pernicious cognate Acts of that period of our history".

In seeking the repeal of this Act and desiring that the covenants would have been acknowledged in the Revolution Settlement, the Synod were acknowledging the perpetual obligation of the Covenants. There is also a reference to renewal of the national covenant before the time of 1638. "Our fathers found the renewing of the National Covenant repeatedly during this period a source of much strength in their opposition to their enemies and of maintaining unity among themselves."

God speaking to us

“Therefore the second practice concerns everyone whose heart is to live for God; so that namely they may love and magnify his unique rule (Ps. 119:127, 2 Thess. 2:10). This consists in love for the divine word (a) in bowing our disposition to Scripture to such a degree that we receive Scripture as God speaking to us, as it were, with His own mouth, with such great submission of course to whatever has been commanded; with such grea0t care and aversion to whatever has been forbidden; with such great delight and desire for whatever has been promised; and finally with such great fear and anxiety of whatever has been threatened; and, as it were, we have God speaking such great things in our presence (1 Thess. 2:13).” Petrus van Mastricht

the pulling down of strongholds

On 5th July 1910 the Synod of the Free Presbyterian Church of Scotland opened in Inverness with a sermon by the Moderator, Rev. Alex Macrae on the text.
“For the weapons of our warfare are not carnal, but mighty through God to the pulling down of strongholds” – 2 Corinthians 10:4. Closing his sermon Macrae said the following which is very relevant to the situation today.

We are in extreme danger. It is, however, with the weapons that the Gospel supplies that Christ will yet, through His mighty power, pull them all down. He shall consume the man of sin “with the spirit of his mouth and shall destroy him with the brightness of his coming.” He shall yet completely demolish the strongholds of error that are spread all over Christendom in the present day...The weapons furnished in the Gospel alone will do it, through the forthputting of the almighty power of God. When His time comes, the light of the Gospel will flash throughout all lands. In spite of all opposition, Christ will have the heathen for His inheritance and the uttermost parts of the earth for His possession.

In conclusion, we have reason to bewail many shortcomings. We see little of the Lord’s work anywhere in our Land. The Holy Spirit is grieved. There is a general falling away from the faith once for all delivered to the saints. There is a process of retrogression persistently going on from purity of doctrine and practice. There is a growing indifference to true religion and undefiled. There is a wide-spread apathy to the inroads of the Papacy that aims at depriving us of our civil and religious liberties. There is a false charity that is more careful of not offending the protagonists of error and falsehood than the God of truth and righteousness. Our duty, however, is clear. Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, and to-day, and for ever. His truth is the same. Let us, therefore, value more and more the weapons that are mighty through God to the pulling down of strongholds, and unflaggingly conduct the warfare to which the Lord has called us, in the strength of His grace, and with a single eye to His glory. “Finally, my brethren, be strong in the Lord, and in the power of his might.” Amen.

For the transgression of a land many are the princes thereof

Is weak government a judgement from God upon our sins?

Prov. 28:2 For the transgression of a land many are the princes thereof: but by a man of understanding and knowledge the state thereof shall be prolonged.

Note, 1. National sins bring national disorders and the disturbance of the public repose: For the transgression of a land, and a general defection from God and religion to idolatry, profaneness, or immorality, many are the princes thereof, many at the same time pretending to the sovereignty and contending for it, by which the people are crumbled into parties and factions, biting and devouring one another, or many successively, in a little time, one cutting off another, as 1 Kings xvi. 8, &c., or soon cut off by the hand of God or of a foreign enemy, as 2 Kings xxiv. 5, &c.

2. Wisdom will prevent or redress these grievances: By a man, that is, by a people, of understanding, that come again to themselves and their right mind, things are kept in a good order, or, if disturbed, brought back to the old channel again. Or, By a prince of understanding and knowledge, a privy-counsellor, or minister of state, that will restrain or suppress the transgression of the land, and take the right methods of healing the state thereof, the good estate of it will be prolonged. We cannot imagine what a great deal of service one wise man may do to a nation in a critical juncture.

- Matthew Henry Commentary

1596

David Calderwood identified 1596 as the year of greatest "perfectioun" and "puritie" in doctrine and discipline for the church in Scotland. 1596 was not only the year in which Andrew Melville called King James VI "God's sillie vassall," a phrase that symbolises the Scottish resistance to Erastianism; it was also the year in which the presbyterian movement showed most strength. A covenant, subscribed in March 1596 was adopted by the general assembly and two synods. The covenant involved a confession of the sins of ministers and a promise to be more zealous. It was a national repentance led by the Church. These were the headings of the covenant:

"Corruptions in the persons and lives of ministers of the gospel."
"Offences in His Majesty's house."
"The common corruptions of all estates."
"And offences in the Courts of Justice."

The initiative in this came from Davidson of Prestonpans. He submitted an overture from the Presbytery of Haddington showing that deep humiliation on account of sin was the first and best preparation against the national disaster of impending invasion. This had followed his visitation to Nithsdale, Annandale, Lauder-dale, Eskdale, and Ewesdale where he witnessed sad corruptions.

On Tuesday, 30th March 1596, the members of Assembly and other brethren having met in the " Little High Church," Mr Davidson discoursed on the evils of an ungodly ministry, and urged his hearers to repentance and self-abasement. For fifteen minutes he sat down and remained silent, the whole place became a Bochim as many of his hearers became deeply moved and sobbed audibly. After another impassioned address, he called on each one to stand up, and with extended hand to pledge himself to a more earnest ministry. "There have," says Calderwood, "been manie dayes of humiliation for present judgement in imminent dangers, but the like for sinne and defectiqun was thus never seen since the Reformation."

the Free Church and the 2nd Commandment

After one post already on this, some might question my right to comment on this. Besides having belonged to the Free Church in the past, currently I belong to a church that inherits from the Free Church of 1843 and retains its constitution. The right to comment, however, is in Leviticus 19:17 "Thou shalt not hate thy brother in thine heart: thou shalt in any wise rebuke thy neighbour, and not suffer sin upon him". I trust that this will be understood in the light of that and neither will it be thought that I am breaching the first part of that verse in order to keep the second.

The Second Commandment "Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image etc." tells us how God is to be worshipped i.e. the means of worship which are to be only according to his appointment and not by our invention. There is emphasis here upon the reflexive "making unto thee" devising and inventing after our own carnal preference and wisdom. Graven images are invented as an aid to worship and so this commandment is linked to the regulative principle of worship which is so abundant in scripture and forbids any aids to worship not appointed by God (Deut. 4:15-20; 12:32; Matt. 4:9-10; 15:8-9; Acts 17:23-25; Exod. 20:4-6, John 4:23-24; Col. 2:18-23; Lev. 10:1-3). A useful article on this is found here, see also here and here.

The Larger Catechism asks: Q. 109. What are the sins forbidden in the second commandment?

A. The sins forbidden in the second commandment are, all devising, counselling, commanding,using, and anywise approving, any religious worship not instituted by God himself...

Only only has to look at the arguments to see that what is now being taught and commanded by the Free Church is merely the doctrines and commandments of men. The crux of the matter is that noone has been able to find that God has instituted in Scripture extra-biblical hymns not immediately inspired by Himself. Neither has anyone been able to find that God has instituted in the New Testament the retention of parts of the ceremonial temple worship which typified Christ's perfect work of redemption and were therefore swept away. Musical instruments are included in this.

We can consider the steps to the position taken by the Free Church in the words of the Larger Catechism.

Using religious worship not instituted by God Himself
The Board in their Report pointed out that inconsistent practice has been maintained in the Free Church for a long time. "The Assembly had the matter drawn to their attention in 1953 when
they were asked to judge an appeal against a decision by the Synod of Ross. The Synod had sought to prohibit Free Church ministers from participating in worship involving hymns and instrumental music in other churches. The Assembly debated the matter, and upheld the right of Free Church ministers to participate in worship of this kind in other churches - thus moving against the spirit of the 1910 Act." This was what Kenneth Macrae protested against in his booklet "Resurgence of Arminianism" in the 1950s. The growing question becomes, "if the vows can be relaxed outwith the Free Church, why not within?" Neil Macmillan put this at the plenary General Assembly: "There are few of us who think that singing hymns and using musical instruments is sinful – hence the repeal of the Act. It if it sinful we should not do it anywhere. How can worship be acceptable to God in another church but not in the Free Church?" Others referred to the inconsistency of allowing church gatherings to use hymns but not allowing them in public worship. The Board tried to maintain this inconsistency but could not in the face of those taking matters to their logical conclusion.

Approving religious worship not instituted by God Himself
The Free Church have now gone the length of approving religious worship not instituted by God Himself. They have done this in a way that is exceedingly difficult to reverse, only an attempt through the barrier Act over several years would change this. Note that the Free Church would have found it a little more difficult and time-consuming to arrive at its current position following this method which was instituted for the prevention of such innovations. The Free Church as a whole with the consent of the majority of the members of her presbyteries approves of religious worship not instituted by God Himself.

Counselling religious worship not instituted by God Himself
The arguments that allow defection from purity of worship that one does not believe in themselves and believe that it will be more attractive to those who would otherwise leave are only counselling that which is sinful that good may come from it.

Commanding religious worship not instituted by God Himself
The result of this position is that the ordination vows and constitution have been changed. The ordination vows under which men took office cannot be maintained any longer. Despite the false assurances there is an imposition upon consciences made by this legislation. It is no longer possible to assert, maintain and defend purity of worship in congregations that will reject purity of worship. While liberty will be granted to use purity of worship when conducting worship there is there liberty to preach against the defection from purity of worship? Will this not be seen as schismatic and proceeded against? Will elders be able to protest against defections within their congregation? The truth is that men are being commanded to accept this. John Kennedy said that if the legislation permitting hymns had gone under the Barrier Act he would have separated from the Free Church due to the constitutional change. This position enters into the difference of views on duty as to the 1892 Declaratory Act. When I referred to this back in 2009 I commented that "I don't think that there are any of John Kennedy's spirit in the present day Free Church". It appears that I may have been wrong and I am very glad to say so because it seems Kenneth Stewart, Dowanvale has principle in view (his statement is here). There were 30 dissents apparently but protest rather than dissent is what is required in order to keep one's conscience and vows entact.

Devising religious worship not instituted by God Himself
The Free Church are now devising worship for themselves like Jeroboam "devised of his own heart" his worship (1 Kings 12:33). The Assembly approved as follows: "The General Assembly appoint a Special Committee (using consultants as required) to investigate the feasibility and desirability of producing a recommended list of paraphrases of Scripture and hymns and spiritual songs consistent with the Word of God and the whole doctrine of the Confession of Faith [there are none such consistent with WCF 21:1 and 5 - this is a Declaratory Act in relation to confessional subscription], and whether the Free Church ought to produce a praise resource supplementary to the Psalter, and to report to the 2011 General Assembly [with all due haste].” We also note that the anti-verbal inspiration principle of dynamic equivalence has been elevated to constitutional significance in the following instruction to the committee: "to investigate, collect and, if necessary prepare from within the resources of the Church appropriate portions of Scripture, other than the 150 Psalms, in a form which accurately renders the thought of the original [note that] and is suitable for singing in public worship".

This is the seriousness of the step that has been taken: using, approving, commanding, counselling and devising what is sinful in God's eyes. Jeroboam was described as one "who made Israel to sin" by his false aids to the worship of Jehovah not instituted by God Himself. We tremble to say it but this is what must be applied to the Free Church since Friday 19 November 2010.

Free Church votes to allow instruments and man-made hymns

Which makes it an extremely sad day for anyone who prizes the principles of the Scottish Reformation including the sufficiency and authority of Scripture. The vote was carried 98 to 14, defeating a report that proposed a compromise that was unconvincing and clearly not acceptable. As with many of these events in church history it is not the vociferous and determined minority that vote it through but those who do not want the change for themselves but want to keep the minority happy and think that they can and always will be able to harness the forces of change and conservatism. Those who approve of others who express views they personally never could are those who are responsible for the consequences of the change for they have given their support to it.

Take the example of Iain D Campbell who less than 18 months ago was clearly opposed to the change observing at the 2009 General Assembly that the regulative principle was being skewed in the report by a reference to the primacy of Scripture. He pointed out: 'This report affirms the primacy of Scripture. Primacy is something you start from. Scripture is a finality not a primacy'. He then said something important: 'We have taken serious vows regarding a particular position on worship. We’re now being asked to approve a process in this report that begs serious questions. We seem to be asked to reinvent the wheel. It seems to be predetermining the outcome. He did not think he could approve a report that would allow songs of human compositions and instruments.'

His intervention in the debate today was no doubt significant. 'The view I hold is that I want to remain in the same church as the previous two speakers [David Robertson and Kenneth Stewart]. I agree with Mr Stewart’s arguments. I have argued this before - always taken the view that the sufficiency of scripture means the sufficiency of the psalms. Now I need to ask which position safeguuards my position on worship. Alex’s! it safeguards my position insisting on singing psalms. BUT I need to ask what to do with my brethren who have come to another conclusion. What am I going to say to our young people - we’re educating them in the theology of the reformed faith but they drift away to other churches. I want to keep them! Alexs amendment in opening up honestly is a means to that end. We need to fill our pulpits and take more people - but we need to keep our people!' Principled expediency?

The motion carried and the quality of the arguments within the debate (here and here)are most concerning because very little was said of a scriptural character let alone logical consistency. The essence of the motion was that every one had their own 'equally conscientious and Biblically grounded but differing views on the subject' i.e. mere opinion and should be free to do what was right in their own eyes. Scripture wasn't clear on the matter and so it was a matter of conscience and subjective judgement. They had landed themselves in the same morass as John Frame, without a tenth of his rationalising attempts to dilute the regulative principle. Frame says “Unfortunately, it is virtually impossible to prove that anything is divinely required specifically for official services” (Worship in Spirit and Truth, p.44).

The most telling contribution and stinging indictment of the whole debate was from Chris Redmond - Dowanvale.
'There is lack of scripture and confusion. I sing Jesus with my understanding when I sing the psalms Going to support the deliverance as lesser of two evils. We are accommodating two different views of scriptures but God is not divided. Are we Reformed? Not if we are subjective and interpret scripture subjectively. My vows speaks of current worship. The pragmatic arguments? We are too accommodating to people rather than the word'.

Previous posts that have discussed this controversy are here.

Godliness in everything

even in labouring for these other things, ye must do it in a godly manner. In your love to wife, husband, children, and others relations, ye must be godly, not only in your praying, reading, singing, discoursing in the familie, ye must be godly. But also in your lawful callings, whatever they be. If this be not, all the preaching that ye hear, and all the profession of faith, and of godliness that ye have will not profit you, nor avail you anything in the day of God's reckoning with you, because ye gave not him that which he mainly called for, which is godliness.

James Durham

The hyperinflation of Scripture

Yet more Bible versions - the Common English Bible(New) and the NIV 2011(New) take up their position in a crowded market place with aggressive marketing ($3M marketing budgets). This secular newspaper article entitled "How many versions of the Bible do we need?" lifts the lid on the hypocrisy. (I didn't believe that there was a "Holy Bible: Stock Car Racing Edition" until I googled it).

“Bibles are in many ways a cash cow,” said Phyllis Tickle, a former longtime religion editor at Publishers Weekly. “The Bible is the mainstay of many a publishing program.”

“I think we are drifting more and more to a diverse Babel of translations,” said David Lyle Jeffrey, former provost of Baylor University and an expert on biblical translations. Jeffrey thinks Americans need a “common Bible” — a role the King James version played for centuries — to communicate the grandeur of Scripture without reducing it to “shopping-center-level” discourse.

“When we have so much diversity, we lose our common voice,” he said. “It is in effect moving away from a common membership in the body of Christ into disparate, confusing misrepresentations of the rich wisdom of Scripture, which ought to unify us.”

These comments make the implicit claim of the Common English Bible publishers ludicrous.

Leland Ryken, an English professor at Wheaton College, was more blunt.

“When there is wide divergence among Bible translations, readers have no way of knowing what the original text really says,” Ryken said. “It’s like being given four different scores for the same football game or three contradictory directions for getting to a town in the middle of the state.”

In the process “the Bible loses its identity as the authoritative word of God and becomes something trivial, on par with shoes for hikers or luggage for the international set.”

What has happened? Hyperinflation. This vicious circle occurs in an economy when the currency plummets in value while more and more inflation is created with each iteration of the ever increasing money printing cycle. Wikipedia tells us that it "Hyperinflation becomes visible when there is an unchecked increase in the money supply usually accompanied by a widespread unwillingness on the part of the local population to hold the hypebecomes visible when there is an unchecked increase in the money supply usually accompanied by a widespread unwillingness on the part of the local population to hold the hyperinflationary money for more than the time needed to trade it for something non-monetary to avoid further loss of real value". "The main cause of hyperinflation is a massive and rapid increase in the amount of money that is not supported by a corresponding growth in the output of goods and services. This results in an imbalance between the supply and demand for the money (including currency and bank deposits), accompanied by a complete loss of confidence in the money, similar to a bank run".

This is what is happening with the overprinting of versions of the Bible resulting in a loss of confidence in the value of Scripture.

24 hours away from the black hole

University students around the world are taking part in an experiment called "Unplugged" to see how we react to a total media black-out. They have to avoid radio, television, the internet and mobile phones for 24 hours. Some of us do this every week, it's called the Christian Sabbath although self-control shouldn't be limited to that. But apparently for some students it is "akin to torture". "Every single person [so far] has said there was an eerie or deafening silence - that it was scary and isolating. They are just not used to existing without background music." They are disconnected and empty. In fact, all the signs of addicts in withdrawal are there. There's actually an internet addiction test that you can take. It's a bit shocking if not surprising to see how far the media governs and saturates the lives of people in our society. The evidence of infinite distraction is more apparent than the last post on this blog estimated.

Thinking, reading, writing, praying, talking, visiting widows and orphans in their affliction, meditating on the truth...they're all things that the always-connected media world distracts us from. If we're feeling that we don't have the time for these the answer may well lie in disconnecting a lot more.

is the internet amusing us to death?

In his 1985 book 'Amusing Ourselves to Death', Neil Postman wrote of the danger not of an Orwellian 1984 totalitarian world but of a dystopia envisaged by Aldous Huxley characterised by infinite distraction, one where books would not be available - not because they were not banned but because noone wanted to read them. Postman singled out a culture of entertainment with television as its leading media for particular analysis:
"When a population becomes distracted by trivia, when a cultural life is redefined as a perpetual round of entertainment, when serious public conversation becomes a form of baby-talk, when, in short, a people become an audience and their public business a vaudeville act, then a nation finds itself at risk; culture-death is a possibility". (Postman 1985: preface)

Although it began as an educational medium with hopes for educational advancement, television became instead pure entertainment on tap. Postman argued that 'television's principal contribution to educational philosophy is the idea that teaching and entertainment are inseparable' (p150) and that its overall effect was the trivialisation of culture. 25 years later we have a culture that is celebrity-obsessed to the nth degree.

The internet can be lauded similarly as a medium with transformational educational potential. What is the reality? Is the internet just changing things to provide play-on-demand services with an almost infinite variety of choice? Triviality has been trademarked on You Tube and in more sinister entertainment allows happy slapping to be viewed or street fights. Social networking' websites where ego-centrism reigns such as Bebo,
MySpace and FaceBook create a virtual reality where public and private never seem separate and which provides an equally unattractive mirror of the standards of conversation, thinking, spelling besides morality  that obtain in society. Entertainment mimics itself with Facebook now becoming a Holywood movie. Always more than one step ahead of their parents, children are now constant consumers of the internet and have their minds well conformed to this world before they even try to think for themselves.

Part of the problem of the internet is the illusion of aggregation that somehow because enough people hit the "like" button, the preference becomes invested with far more value than it is worth. A cursory review of the trends of searching on Google or Yahoo shows the purpose for which people use the internet as well as the fallacy of building a ranking system for your search engine around these bulk requests. What is the purpose of the internet for many? What Postman describes as "escaping reality and living hollow lives".

The internet is governed by the cult of the instant. The internet makes entertainment instant, information instant - everything instant. This doesn't do much for the virtue of patience; people wait less than 4 seconds for a page to load. No one really reads on the Internet, they skim over words for sound bytes. If you've got beyond the first two paragraphs to this point, you are not in the internet majority. If there are any profound thoughts shared on Twitter, its certain that they cannot be elaborated adequately.

The instant is addictive, if you know that anything is a click away, you keep going and going following an endless trail of information that you cannot absorb but intoxicated by the power of your fingertips. Meanwhile, there's no time for the things that really matter. How much time is redeemed on the internet and how much time is wasted? Our whole view of the world is shaped by this and our lives are changed without us noticing. We focus on what the internet has given us but rarely on what it has taken away. What Postman called the "anxious age of agitated amnesiacs" has become a lot more agitated with the speed of the internet.

Why read Samuel Rutherford?

Rutherford was one of the greatest Scottish theologians, a moving preacher and experimental writer. He is both exuberant and sublime in his commendation of communion with the Lord Jesus Christ but also uniquely homely in the powerful imagery flowing from his pen. Only the Bible exceeds his letters in spirituality.
[This is an opportune time to introduce www.samuelrutherford.org.uk - this site seeks to promote his works and various recent studies of this important figure. The site introduction doesn't quite manage 50 words but is very close.]

Why read the Puritans?

The puritans are mighty in the Scriptures and
promote God's glory to the utmost in honouring above all His will
precisely. They make godliness attractive, doctrine practical and
experience vital to the Christian. They
instruct the Church in entire conformity to the Word of God in
government, worship and practice.

The glory of the millennium

Thomas Ridgely, Body of Divinity

So far as scripture plainly gives countenance to the doctrine in general, that the administration of Christ's government, in this world, shall be attended with great glory, and shall abundantly tend to the advantage of his church, it is a subject of too great importance to be passed over with neglect, as if we had no manner of concern in it, or as if it were a matter of mere speculation; for certainly all scripture is written for our learning, and ought to be studied and improved by us, to the glory of God, and our own edification.

As to those texts which speak of Christ's government as exercised in this world, not only do they contain matters awful and sublime, but our having just ideas of these will be a direction to our faith, when we pray for the farther advancement of Christ's kingdom, as we are bound daily to do. We must take heed, however, that we do not give too great scope to our fancy, by framing imaginary schemes of our own, and then bringing in scripture, not without some violence offered to the sense of it, to give countenance to them. Nor ought we to acquiesce in such a sense of scripture, brought to support this doctrine, as is evidently contrary to other scriptures, or to the nature and spirituality of Christ's government. We must also take it for granted, that some of those scriptures which relate to this matter are hard to be understood, and that, therefore, a humble modesty becomes us in treating it, rather than to censure those who differ from us, as if they had departed from that faith which is founded on the most obvious and plain sense of scripture, especially if they maintain nothing which is derogatory to the glory of Christ. This rule we shall endeavour to observe, in what remains to be considered on this subject.

As most allow that there is a sense in which Christ's kingdom shall be attended with greater circumstances of glory than it is at present, we shall proceed to show how it shall be advanced, in this lower world, beyond what it is at present; and we shall show this in a way which agrees very well with the sense of several scriptures relating to the subject, without going into some extremes which many have run into who plead for Christ's personal reign on earth in a way in which it cannot easily be defended. We freely own, as what we think agreeable to scripture, that as Christ has, in all ages, displayed his glory as King of the church, so we have ground to conclude, from scripture, that the administration of his government in this world, before his coming to judgment, will be attended with greater magnificence, more visible marks of glory, and various occurrences of providence, which shall tend to the welfare and happiness of his church, in a greater degree than has been beheld or experienced by it, since it was planted by the ministry of the apostles after his ascension into heaven. This we think to be the sense, in general, of those scriptures, both in the Old and in the New Testament, which speak of the latter-day glory.

Some of the prophets seem to look farther than the first preaching of the gospel, and the glorious display of Christ's government which attended it. These were, in part, an accomplishment of some of their predictions, but they were not wholly so; for there are some expressions made use of by them which seem as yet not to have had their accomplishment. Of the former kind are the expressions of the prophet Isaiah, when he speaks of 'the glory of the Lord, as arising,' and being 'seen upon' the church, and of the 'Gentiles coming to this light,' and 'kings to the brightness of it;'' and many other things to the same purpose, which denote the glorious privileges that the gospel-church should enjoy. Though these, in a spiritual sense, may, in a great measure, be supposed to be already accomplished ; yet there are other things which he foretells concerning the church which do not yet appear to have had their accomplishment.

He says, for example,' Thy gates shall be open continually; they shall not be shut day nor night,' as denoting the church's being perfectly free from all those afflictive dispensations of providence which should tend to hinder the preaching and success of the gospel. He says, also, ' Violence shall be no more heard in thy land, wasting nor destruction within thy borders; by which he intends the church's perfect freedom from all persecution. He says farther, 'The sun shall be no more thy light by day, neither for brightness shall the moon give light unto thee; but the Lord shall be unto thee an everlasting light, and thy God thy glory.' This is so far from having been yet accomplished, that it seems to refer to the same thing which is mentioned concerning the New Jerusalem, and almost expressed in the same words: which, if it be not a metaphorical description of the heavenly state, has a peculiar reference to the latter-day glory. The prophet again adds, 'Thy people shall be all righteous,' denoting that holiness should almost universally obtain in the world, as much as iniquity has abounded in it,—an event which does not appear to have yet taken place. Again, when the prophet Micah speaks of ' the mountain of the house of the Lord being established in the top of the mountains, and exalted above the hills,' and says, that 'people should flow unto it,' though this, and some other things which he there mentions, may refer to the first preaching of the gospel, and the success of it; yet the words which follow cannot be so understood: ' They shall beat their swords into ploughshares, and their spears into pruning-hooks; and nation shall not lift up a sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more; but they shall sit every man under his vine, and under his fig-tree, and none shall make them afraid.' This prophecy, so far as it may be taken otherwise than in a spiritual sense, seems to imply a greater degree of peace and tranquillity than the gospel-church has hitherto enjoyed. Hence, when he says that this shall be ' in the last days, 'we have reason to conclude that he does not mean merely the last or gospel-dispensation, which commenced on our Saviour's ascension into heaven, but the last period of that dispensation, or the time which we are now considering.

As to the account we have of this period in the New Testament, especially in many places in the Book of Revelation, which speak of' the kingdoms of the world becoming the kingdoms of our Lord, and of his Christ,' and of his ' taking to himself his great power and reigning, and of the thousand years' reign; whatever be the sense of these passages, as to some circumstances of glory which shall attend this administration of the affairs of his kingdom, they certainly have not yet had their accomplishment; and they, therefore, lead us to expect that Christ's kingdom shall be attended with greater degrees of glory redounding to himself, which we call the latter-day glory.

When this period of greater glory shall arrive, many privileges will redound to the church. As Christ is said to reign on earth, so the saints are represented as reigning with him. They say,' Thou hast made us unto our God kings and priests, and we shall reign on the earth; and elsewhere, when the apostle speaks of Christ's reigning ' a thousand years,' he adds, that 'they shall reign with him.' This cannot be understood in any other sense than that of a spiritual reign, agreeably to the nature of Christ's kingdom, which is not of this world. We have, hence, sufficient ground to conclude, that, when these prophecies shall have their accomplishment, the interest of Christ shall be the prevailing interest in the world, which it has never yet been in all respects ; so that godliness shall be as much and as universally valued and esteemed, as it has hitherto been decried, and it shall be reckoned as great an honour to be a Christian, as it has, in the most degenerate age of the church, been matter of reproach. We may add, that the church shall have a perfect freedom from persecution in all parts of the world ; that a greater glory shall be put on the ordinances; and that more success shall attend them thau has hitherto been experienced. In short, there shall be, as it were, an universal spread of religion and holiness to the Lord, throughout the world.

When this glorious dispensation shall commence, we have sufficient ground to conclude, that, the anti-christian powers having been wholly subdued, the Jews shall be converted. This may be inferred from the order in which this event is foretold in the book of Revelation. The fall and utter ruin of Babylon are first predicted. Afterwards we read of 'the marriage of the Lamb being come,'of ' his wife having made herself ready,' and of others, who are styled 'blessed,' being 'called to tho marriage-supper.' This, as an ingenious and learned writer observes, seems to be a prediction of the call of the Jews, and of the saints and faithful, namelv, the gospel-church, who were converted before this time, being, together with the Jews, made partakers of the spiritual privileges of Christ's kingdom, and so invited to the marriage-supper. Accordingly, by 'the Lamb's wife,'is intended the converted Jews, who are considered as espoused to him. As their being ' ignorant of God's righteousness, and going about to establish their own righteousness, and not submitting themselves to the righteousness of God,'m occasioned their being rejected ; so, when they are converted, and their new espousals are celebrated, it is particularly observed that this righteousness shall be their greatest glory, the robe that they shall be adorned with. Hence, when the bride is said to have made herself ready, it is added, ' To her was granted that she should be arrayed in fine linen, clean and white: for the fine linen is the righteousness of saints.'" This prophecy, being placed immediately before the account of the thousand years' reign, gives ground to conclude that the conversion of the Jews shall be before it, or an introduction to it.