[* “The Future Apostasy” (in ‘Part
One’) is used as a suitable accompaniment to “At The Cutting Edge”. This is because Responsibility Truths shown
throughout the Holy Scriptures – particularly those having to do with the ‘resurrection of the dead’ - are often ‘cutting’ and offensive to those who prefer to
disbelieve and reject them!
Many of Jesus’
teachings (doctrines) could be described as ‘Cutting Edge’; and, because of
this, the
religious teachers at that time were always trying to trap Him in order to find
an occasion to undermine the importance of His teachings! Their question concerning the payment of
tribute money was one of several good examples.
Messiah’s controversial teachings were rejected by the vast
majority of religious people at that time: and they ultimately contributed
toward His death! Most people were
looking for – “A Godlike warrior who would help them
throw off Roman rule.”
Are circumstances
any different throughout Christendom today?
No! A suffering Messiah upon
this earth is accepted; but a ruling Messiah upon
this earth, is now being mainly rejected; and this is mostly due to
the influence of Gnosticism!
All matter is
supposed to be evil, and therefore we can now ascend – one at a time! – as a disembodied spirit, into the presence of God in
heaven at the time of Death: a ‘body’ “flesh and bones” (Luke 24: 39) is no longer necessary! This, dear brothers and sisters in Christ, is
the teaching of Gnosticism; and it comes from evil spirits and the devil
himself. How many regenerate believers
today are affected by it? Multitudes!
“I have referred to
the implications of a Paradise (or Hades) occupied now, and perhaps millennially, by Christians,” writes A. G. Tilney, “a striking, a startling, fact is this:
not only is Hades not at present empty, but
even after the Millennium (‘the rest of the
dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished’ may, unpalatable
as it sounds, include Christians!) – even after
the Millennium, a company of saved souls apparently issue therefrom, to
be judged ‘according to their works,’
for ‘death and hades (that is, both compartments of the underworld,
on both sides of the ‘great golf fixed’ of Luke 16) delivered up the dead which were in them’ (Rev. 20: 13).”
This is ‘the cutting edge’ and it explains what is
involved in DEATH, RESURRECTION and the “SALVATION READY TO BE REVEALED
IN THE LAST TIME” – “the salvation of SOULS”* (1 Pet. 1: 9): and it is the teaching
of Jesus Christ, not that of Roman Catholicism! None of God’s regenerate people should be
ignorant of this truth and the importance of it to them, for it carries with it far-reaching and age-lasting
consequences.
* See also, Matt. 16: 25-27; Heb. 10: 39; Jas. 1: 21.
Without any
further preamble, let us proceed with
PART 1]
-------
The
Future Apostasy
By Robert Govett
“If thou put the brethren in remembrance of these things, thou
shalt be a good minister of Jesus Christ.”
Moses, before his people had entered into the land of promise,
was inspired to foretell their falling away from Jehovah, the God of their
fathers. And thus the Lord Jesus, at the
sending forth of his Gospel into the world, foresaw and foretold that declension
from it, and that open rejection of it, which have yet to be fulfilled.
Of these intimations, none is perhaps, more plain and full,
than that offered to our notice in the first Epistle of Timothy.
“These things I write unto thee, hoping to come unto thee
shortly. But if I tarry long, that thou
mayest know how to behave thyself in the house of God, which is the church of
the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth. And confessedly great is the mystery of
godliness. God was manifest in the
flesh, was justified in the spirit, was seen by angels, was preached among the
Gentiles, was believed on in the world, was received up in glory.”
“But the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times
some shall apostatize from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and to
doctrines of devils speaking lies in hypocrisy, having their own conscience
seared with a hot iron, forbidding to marry [and commanding] to abstain from articles of food, which God
created to he partaken of with thanksgiving, by those who believe and recognize
the truth. For every
creature of God is good, and nothing is to be cast away, if it be received with
thanksgiving. For it is
sanctified by the word of God and prayer.”
“If thou put the brethren in remembrance of these things thou
shalt be a good minister of Jesus Christ, nourished up in the words of faith
and of good doctrine, whereunto thou hast attained.”
“But refuse the profane and old-womanish fables: but exercise thyself unto godliness.
For bodily exercise is profitable in some degree; but godliness is
profitable for all things, having promise of the life that now is, and of that
which is to come” (Greek) (1 Tim. 3: 14:
4: 8).
This passage has been commonly supposed to be fulfilled by
Romanism, and still continues to be applied to it. Without in the least
desiring to palliate the destructive doctrines of that corrupt system, I yet
feel persuaded, that another form of evil is here presented; and would briefly
offer some of the stronger proofs in this
place; reserving others to the more minute examination of the prophecy
further on.
1.
A conclusive proof that Romanism is not the evil thus depicted by the
Holy Ghost arises from the fact that the Church of Rome holds every article of the faith which
is mentioned by the Apostle.
It believes
that Jesus is God manifest in the flesh, that he died,
rose and ascended, with every other point of the faith that Paul has specified
as that mystery of godliness from which the apostates of the latter day would
fall away.
2. The abstinence from marriage and
articles of food here supposed is essentially connected with the apostasy
foretold; so that if any leave the faith, they must abstain from both marriage and meats; and those only who abstain from both, leave the faith. It is the listening to and receiving these
principles of abstinence, that produce the apostasy. Wherefore, if any marry or use articles of food indifferently, they have
not departed from the faith. But this is true of the great body of Romanists; therefore
they have not apostatised from the Christian faith. And if now it be said, ‘At least it
has its fulfilment in the monks, and nuns, and priests
of the Romish church, for these abstain from both marriage and meats.’
I answer - First, these do not forbid marriage, but promote it in the
case of others. And secondly, as noted
above, they maintain all the articles of the faith exhibited by Paul. Therefore theirs is not either the abstinence
or the apostasy contemplated by the Holy Ghost.*
Much less do they forbid either marriage or meats as things evil in themselves which is the ground of the objection
and of the abstinence supposed in the text.
* I would
briefly throw into this note some objections to Mede’s interpretation of the
passage. (1) He makes “spirits”
equivalent to doctrines, and supports the view by quoting John 4: 1.
But that passage is quite against him for the trial there supposed is a personal
one; a trial which cannot be made of doctrines. How could
transubstantiation be asked to confess if Jesus Christ has come in the
flesh? (2) He makes (with others in the
present day) “doctrines of devils” to be “doctrines concerning demons,” and then interprets the phrase of the
Romish adoration of saints. Against which
I object – First, that in the other instances in which [the Greek word …] is
found in construction, it does not take the signification he supposes. Thus “doctrines of men” (Col. 2:
22) signifies “doctrines taught by men.” And in the 2nd Epistle to Timothy we have – “Thou hast fully known the doctrine of me” (2 Tim. 3: 10), which signifies, “doctrine taught
by me,” not “doctrine concerning me.”
Secondly, the word “demon” never
in the New Testament has a good sense; but the equivalent expression is always
“evil spirit.”
And by Augustine, Clemens Alexandrinus, Minucius Felix, Origen,
Tertullian, Julian, Josephus, Eusebius, with others of the fathers, are
regarded as evil beings.
Thirdly, personal apostasy from the faith here mentioned,
supposes previous personal profession of it, and afterwards entire abandonment
of it for some other faith or infidelity. But Romanists never have fallen
away to any other faith; and as to their opinions concerning fasting and
celibacy, since the Christian faith does not consist in these things, and is
consistent with them, the holding them is not apostasy.
[The Greek words …] cannot be rightly translated
“By the hypocrisy of liars.” (1) The sense of … for … is uncommon, and not to be
resorted to without necessity. (2) The
absence of the article shews, that the phrase … is to be taken adverbially.
If it meant, “through the hypocrisy of liars” it would have been …
. (3) …
being an adjective, it cannot be fairly connected with a substantive not
implied in the context, but must take as its substantive … that has just preceded. If men were intended, … must have been expressed.
(4) As to the sense, this introduces unnecessarily a new class of
deceivers: and men are made the means of the apostates giving heed to evil
spirits, while it is not said that the liars themselves depart from the faith.
Can it be supposed, that all these obliquities of construction,
and syntax, and meaning of words, must meet to give us the true sense of the
passage before us?
I would now consider the prophecy before us in its real
bearing, and shew the heresy against which it is levelled.
With all the early Christian writers, I interpret it of the
Gnostics. These were persons who sought
to incorporate Christianity with their false philosophy. Hence Paul’s caution, “Beware lest
any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit” (Col. 2: 8).
They attempted to explain the origin of evil by their own
understanding, unenlightened by divine grace, and God’s Holy Word. It is not wonderful then that they erred.
(1) They maintained that matter was eternal, and the cause of
evil, and that the Supreme God was not the Creator.
(2) From the Supreme God, who dwelt far from matter, there
flowed forth, at different times, various beings inferior to Himself, whom they
denominated Aeons. This view of theirs
explains Paul’s twice repeated caution to Timothy and Titus, to give no “heed to
fables and endless genealogies” (1 Tim. 1: 4; Tit. 3: 9).
The epithet “endless” used here by Paul, shews that not
the Jewish, but the Gnostic
genealogies were in question, for the Jewish genealogies were bounded, on the one
hand by the known pedigree of Abraham, and on the other by their own
times. The Gnostic genealogies of their
Aeons had no limit but their fancy; and hence some sects supposed thirty Aeons,
some three hundred and sixty-five, and others might, if they would, have made
thirty thousand.* To these Aeons, they gave the names of the Word,
Light, Life, Truth, the Only-Begotten. All these names,
* “I would therefore conclude [because the Jewish genealogies
were not subversive of the faith of Christian converts, nor were they foolish]
that what is here said of ‘endless genealogies’ may very probably relate to
their successive generations of aeons.” –
** The author’s very valuable note on the
correct statement of the Origin of Evil will be found in DAWN, vol. 2, P. 129.‑Ed.
3. The Creator
(or Demiurge, as they called him,) was therefore an
inferior and evil being. He was also the
God of the Jews, the giver of the Law and of the Old Testament.
4. Christ was the
Son of the Supreme and Benevolent
God, who came to deliver men from the tyranny of the Creator, the God of the
Jews.
5. Hence it
followed, that Christ, according to their theory, was neither born nor
died. For how could he, who came to
deliver men from the dominion of matter, voluntarily take upon himself that hateful thing, - the
cause of sin? And as he had not a
real body, he was not properly a man, and did not die; much less did he
rise again. The resurrection, the
atonement, and the general judgment were therefore denied.
6.
From the same principles it likewise flowed naturally, that they
accounted marriage, and wine, and animal food, evil. Denying atonement, they rejected animal
sacrifice, as unworthy of a benevolent God; and refused therefore to take away
life themselves. And against marriage ‘they spoke impiously
under the pretext of continence, and blasphemed the creation and the Demiurge,
the One Almighty God, and taught that marriage was not to be received, and that
men should not introduce into the world others to be wretched as themselves,
nor supply death with food.’* The practice that resulted from such
awful principles, was of different kinds. Some lived lives of austerity and
self-infliction, attempting to subdue the body and wear it out; that the soul
might be free from the chains and pollutions of matter. Others ran to a frightful length in
licentiousness; affirming that knowledge was every thing, and that souls
purified, as theirs were, by the true knowledge of God, could not be defiled by
any action, however evil it might appear to those who were still in ignorance.
* Clem. Alex. Strom. Lib.iii, 6.
p. 531. Ed. Potter.
Some have thought, that the accounts given by the fathers of
the lives and practices of the Gnostics are not to be trusted; but the New
Testament describes men of just such characters as the ecclesiastical writers
of the day testify the Gnostics to have been.
Paul declares some to be magical deceivers; (…, 2 Tim. 3: 13)* as Simon of Samaria was, and as many
of the Ephesians had been; while we also find travelling exorcists there
attempting to dispossess a demoniac by the name of Jesus: Acts. 19.
Titus is warned against men whose very “mind and conscience was defiled, who professed
that they knew God [whence they took the title of Gnostics], but in works denied him,
being abominable, and disobedient, and to every good work reprobate:” Titus
1: 15, 16. They
were patrons of fornication and of every evil lust (2 Pet. 2).
And it seems probable, from the apostle’s words, “by reason of
whom the way of truth shall be blasphemed,” that the Gnostics really were guilty
of some prodigious acts of wickedness, which came to be imputed to true
believers (1 Pet. 2: 12-15). The Lord Jesus rebukes Thyatira for doctrines
upholding uncleanness and idolatry:
Rev. 2. Covetousness and hypocrisy also
are imputed to them.
* “The seducers, or … were evidently
men who dealt in magic.”
7.
From the same principles it followed, that they admired and praised the
evil-doers of the Old Testament, as those who had manfully resisted the evil
Creator or God of the Jews; and Cain and Korah, and Balaam and Judas, were the
patterns they sought to follow.
8. It was the natural consequence of the
same doctrines, that when Apostles came, publishing, either by word or by their
writing, the truth, they denied the correctness of their teaching. Paul and others were, to their eyes, Jewish teachers, who,
through prejudices of early life, had misunderstood their Master. They were the scientific and philosophical, who were able to
detect the truth, and discard error in the mixed form in which it was presented
by the half-taught. It was against this
system, rather than Romanism, that both Paul and John wrote; if we will believe
both outward testimony and internal proof.
Paul assures us, that the mystery of iniquity was already at work in his
day, (2 Thess. 2.), and this is the warrant for expecting to find, in the false doctrines
afloat in that day, the types of those who shall prevail in the extensive
abandonment of Christianity, now near at hand.
With this view we shall find not only the Epistles to Timothy
to be in accordance, but the Gospel and Epistles of John, the Epistles to
Titus, the Hebrews, and Colossians.
But let us examine more closely the prophecy which has been
quoted.
In it the visible church is set forth as appointed to be “the pillar
and ground of the truth.” It was the pillar of
the truth, as supporting it, and bearing inscribed upon it, as it were, the
doctrines authorized of God. It was the
ground of the truth, as staying and steadying it against the adverse blasts of
error. This testimony to the truth it
gave in two ways; first, by the sacred rites it publicly celebrated; and
secondly, by its very constitution.
In baptism it testified the death and resurrection of the
Great Founder of the church; and the hope of the believer, as consisting in resurrection. In the Lord’s Supper it
presented the emblems of blood shed, and of his body
bruised for sin; thus witnessing the reality of his incarnation and death. But, moreover, it upheld, in the most solemn way, the truth that wine is a good
creature of God, fit to be partaken of by the faithful, in direct opposition to
the Gnostic doctrines of old; revived, alas! in our
own day.
By the very constitution of the church, moreover, the lawfulness of marriage was upheld; for its elders,
deacons, and widows (or deaconesses), must all either be married, or have once
entered that state. Thus against deadly
error, the Lord in his mercy set a double fence, to keep his flock from the
Destroyer.
From the succeeding words, “And confessedly great is the mystery
of godliness,” I
think we may gather, that it was a subject of reproach by those opponents of
the Gospel against whom the apostle was writing, that their doctrine made
Christianity full of mystery, while the Gnostic theory was simple and easy of
comprehension. ‘We
confess, therefore,’ says Paul, ‘that the
doctrine of the Godhead manifested in a human body is a great mystery; we deny
not, that its successive steps are full of wonders. Let proud human reason call for that alone
which it can understand: we are content to bow ourselves before this
transcendent mystery!’
Observe, so closely connected are the mystery and the faith,
that the apostle in another place says, “Holding the mystery of the faith in a
pure conscience.”
But let us
notice with care its six steps.
1. “God was manifest in the flesh.”*
* I take it for granted, that …
is the true reading, both from external and internal proofs.
The Gnostics denied one or other of these terms: either the “Godhead” or the “flesh.”
The denial of either of these is the overthrow of the mystery of the
faith, and the bringing in of ungodliness.
Some then took one path in error, and some another. By most the
reality of the Saviour’s manhood (or flesh) was denied.
It was affirmed that his body was
a mere phantom, a delusion that imposed upon the senses of men; or else that it
was composed of celestial materials, and not like ours. All lowered the Godhead, believing that
Christ was one of the inferior Divinities (or aeons), that had sprung from time
to time from the Supreme God. Hence Paul
in this epistle speaks of “the man Christ Jesus,” and of Christ as the “one
Mediator,” in
opposition to the many aeons: 1 Tim. 2: 5. The same truth is affirmed in Heb. 2: 6-14, and from several marks, it appears, that
Jewish Christians also were exposed to this desolating heresy. Hence also Paul, speaking to the Elders of
2. God “was justified in
the spirit.”
“In the spirit,” stands exactly
opposed to “in the flesh,” we may not unnecessarily alter the
form of expression. I regard then the
phrase as referring to the human spirit of the Lord Jesus; the flesh and the
spirit being opposed to each other more than once; thus – “For though I
be absent in the flesh, yet am
I with you in the spirit” Col. 2: 5; 1 Cor. 7: 35.
The doctrine affirmed then will be, that Jesus being laden with the imputed sin of man, was
under it accounted guilty, and gave up the ghost [animating spirit]. That in that state, as a
disembodied spirit [soul], he was justified; or declared to have paid the penalty and to
have made atonement for sin. And
thus taken, the sentiment runs parallel with that of Peter.
“For Christ also once suffered for sins,
the just one for the unjust, that he might bring us to God; being put to death
indeed in the flesh, but
alive in the spirit, in
which he went and preached even to the spirits in prison:” 1 Peter 3: 18, 19.
Thus then Paul would give another contradiction to the Gnostic
doctrine, that Christ did not die. Some
of the Gnostics pretended that Jesus was a mere man, on whom the Christ (a mighty aeon) descended at the time of his baptism;
at which time (and not before), he became, by union of
the two, Jesus Christ. But all held that the Christ left Jesus before the
crucifixion; and some forged the story, that Simon the Cyrenian
was changed into the likeness of Christ, and suffered in his stead. In opposition then to this falsehood, which
denied the atonement for sin, Paul affirms most strongly Jesus’ death for human
trespasses, and that acquittal passed upon him while a separate spirit [soul*] in Hades.
[* See, Acts 2: 27. cf. Matt.
12: 40; Acts 2: 27, 34; Rev. 6: 9-11.]
3. “Seen of
angels.”
This is commonly interpreted of the angels beholding our Lord
during his career on earth: of their singing praises at his birth, their
ministering to him after his victory over Satan and their attendance upon him
in
These, as we know, after being cut off by the flood, were cast
into prison, “reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the
judgment of the great day:” Jude 6; 2 Peter
2: 4.*
To these angels, who had left the charge committed to them of God, in
order to become men, and had mingled in the sins of the old world, God, by a
mysterious mercy, sent the tidings of redemption, while they were reserved in
cells of darkness: and “the Gospel was preached even
to the dead, that they might
be judged as men* in the flesh, but live according to God in the spirit”
1 Peter 4:
6.
* Observe, it is not “the angels,” but “angels,”
in that passage.
This is a new
mystery.
4. “Preached
among the Gentiles.”
The expectation naturally to be formed
from reading the prophets was, that Jesus would be manifested in the body at
5. “Believed on
in the world.”
Though the world lie in wickedness,
yet some should believe; and that by the mighty power of the Holy Ghost,
mysteriously converting whom He will.
6. “Received up
in glory.”
The Saviour’s ascension in glory, before His appearing in glory to the Jew and the world, was another mystery. The prophets foretold His kingly
manifestation on earth: but that a long interval was to intervene between His
first appearing on earth, and His return in glory - an interval to be filled up
by His being seated on high on the throne of the Father, - this was the
mystery.
If I rightly apprehend the matter, the three first of
these mysteries are directed against the Gnostics; the last three against the
Jewish teachers of the law.
But whatever be the view taken by the reader,
certain it is, that not one of the foregoing mysteries is denied by the Church
of Rome. All are fully admitted by
it. And these mysteries constitute, in
their broad outlines, “the faith,” from which it is foretold that the
latter-day apostates shall fall away. As
long then as these mysteries of the faith are held by the Church of Rome,
corrupt as she is, she is not that form of evil against which believers are
warned in the present passage.
The Holy Ghost testifies, not in symbolic prophecy, but in
express words, and those not presented to Paul’s mind alone, but announced in the assembly of the saints, that from these
fundamental articles of the Christian faith, some [of
the saints], shall apostatize. They
will once have been [doctrinally sound] Christians, professing those foundation-truths but
will afterwards wholly abandon and deny them, professing another and contrary
belief. Apostasy is the
abandonment of views and practices formerly held, for something plainly opposed
to, and inconsistent with them.
Departure from the faith is in one place called “shipwreck” of the faith (1: 19), and in another “overthrow of the faith” 2 Tim. 2: 18.
Thus to leave Christianity for Paganism, as Julian did, was apostasy:
for Mahometanism denies the foundations of Christianity, as exhibited in the
apostolic summary before us.* He cannot be said to be an apostate whose opinions
have never changed. Thus none could
rightly call a Mahomedan born and bred, an apostate. Neither then can any one so denominate, with
justice, a Romanist.
His errors and superstitions have ever shut out the light of the way to
God: but false as his views are, since he has never held otherwise, he is not an apostate. The apostate
holds a new religion inconsistent with the foundation-truths of
Christianity. Out of it springs the
false Christ; all whose adherents, as we are assured, will perish beyond hope
of redemption.
* Such is the meaning of the Apostasy in
the Old Testament. As in Joshua 22: 19, 22; Num. 14: 9; Neh.
9: 26; Dan. 9: 9. Hence it is an unwarranted
use of the term to speak of the failures of those who still profess
Christianity as “Apostasy,” “the Apostasy of the Dispensations,” etc.
Moreover those who depart are “some,” not a whole system, but individuals leaving the
“They give heed to seducing spirits and
doctrines of demons.”
To explain this we must turn to the
Scriptures. There we are informed that
evil spirits exercise vast control over the world. In the Saviour’s day they bore concerning Him
witness, which He refused to receive from them.
“Unclean spirits, when they saw him, fell down before Him, and
cried saying, Thou art the Son of God:” Mark
3: 11; 1: 24-26; Luke 4: 33.
Again, in the damsel possessed by a spirit of divination, who “cried saying,
These men are the servants of the Most High God, who
show unto us the way of salvation” (Acts 16:
16-18), we have an
instance of a false spirit, or demon teaching.
From passages such as these, I gather that, as of old deceiving spirits
were abroad, misleading men to their ruin, so it will be in days close at hand.* For the Saviour teaches, that the last state of this evil
generation (which consists of both Jews and Gentiles) will be sevenfold more
possessed by Satan than at first, and that, too, after a time in which it would
seem as if the evil spirit had totally abandoned his habitation.
* Since this was first written the fact has come fully to
light. Spiritualism (or Spiritism is the
very thing here foretold.
But how will these evil spirits or demons deceive men? How will men give ear to them? In the same way as in
former times. By entering into
and inspiring some, who thereby become false prophets: 1 John 4: 1. An example of this
we have in the case of Barjesus, who was a sorcerer
and false prophet, and withstood Paul and Barnabas, “seeking to turn away
the deputy from THE FAITH:”
Acts 13: 6-8.
And where Paul gives believers marks whereby to discern the coming of
the day of the Lord, and forewarns us of “the falling away,” or “the apostasy,” he bids the believers not to “be troubled, neither by
spirit, [i.e. false spirit], nor by word, nor, by letter as from us:” 2 Thess. 2: 2.
The unseen originators of this scheme
will be evil spirits; the human agents will be the false prophets whom they
inspire; and the parties who give heed to them will abandon the Christian
faith. As Ahab gave heed to his false prophets, inspired by a lying spirit,
so will it be with these. “God will send
them strong delusion to believe the lie, that they all might be damned, who
believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness:” 2 Thess. 2: 11, 12.
These latter-day resisters of the truth are compared to the sorcerers, Jannes and Jambres, who by the
miraculous aid of demons opposed Moses and Aaron: 2 Tim. 3: 8.
That by demons are meant evil spirits, we have the fullest
proof. Let the reader only examine the
passages in which the word occurs, and he will feel no doubt. They are servants of Satan or Beelzebub: Matt. 12: 43-45. They are the objects of the worship
of the heathen, as opposed to the true God 1 Cor. 10: 20, 21.
But their character is farther given by the apostle.
They are, (1) “Speakers of lies in hypocrisy” and (2) “Having their own conscience seared.”
Probably two classes of agents are meant. Demons are spirits of Satan who never were
embodied. The ‘seducing
spirits’ are
probably the spirits of men departed.
1. The demons will be speakers of lies
in hypocrisy. Hypocrisy is the
pretending to better principles and practice than we really and inwardly
maintain. Now demons are evil: they love
sin, and rejoice to lead men into it.
But they know that naked evil, set before those who have had the truth
presented to them, would shock and repel men.
Therefore their device will be to suggest to men the desire for
something holier, purer, and more self-denying than Christianity. They will affirm, that their principles are
the only ones capable of producing true holiness; knowing all the while, that
they will lead to blasphemy against God, and the most unbounded licentiousness
and violence among men, and aiming at this is the result of their plans.
Those inspired by them are the false prophets against whom the
Saviour warns His disciples in the Sermon on the Mount. “Enter ye in
at the narrow gate.” “How (margin) strait (strict) is the gate, and narrow is the way
that leadeth unto life; and (how) few
there be that find it! But* beware
of false
prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravening
wolves:” Matt. 7: 13-15. In other words, the
Saviour would seem to say:- ‘My
doctrine is strict, and very self-denying, and few will in simplicity practise
it. But remember, strictness and
self-denial are not sufficient proofs that the doctrine comes from God; for the
false prophets of the latter day will, in their system of falsehood, present
the feature. They will offer to the
world a strict and severe discipline, but it will be the device of Satan. They will come, speaking much of brotherhood
and of the love that each ought to bear to his fellow; they will declare that
their hearts are on fire to banish dissension and disputes from the world. This is the sheep’s clothing they will wear;
and they will be men of much apparent sanctity and self-denial. But in their hearts they will be haters of
the sons of God, and will persecute and slay them, if they can: for within they
are ravening wolves.’ Thus it
will be seen that the doctrine of self-denial and subjection of the lusts of
the flesh is not in itself the production of love; but only as it is united to
the love of Christ Jesus. These are they
of whom Jude speaks as going in the way of Cain (Jude 11), seemingly devout worshippers of the
true God, but really fiendish haters of the saints of God. And therefore John in his epistles insists so
strongly that not knowledge, but love, is the mark of the sons of God. These
are the parties, too, of whom it is written, as one of the signs of the
Saviour’s approach, “And many false prophets shall arise and shall deceive many.”
Their appearance is to be at a time when there are the abounding of
offences, and the diminishing of love: Matt. 24: 10-12.
2.
But the demons are also “cauterized in their own conscience.” They are moral beings, discerning right from wrong and
perceiving that God will judge them according to their works: yet, being
without hope of recovery, they perversely oppose themselves to God’s designs,
and have trampled duty under foot, till they are become insensible to the
dictates of conscience. Now as they are hardened against compunction and
repentance, they are the fittest beings to lead others onward to the same
melancholy state with themselves. The
proof of their complete iniquity is, that
not only they do wrong themselves, but they seek to pervert others from the
truth knowing it to be such. The magnitude of the mischief and its terrible results
in the fierce judgment of God upon men and upon themselves would stagger any
but those thoroughly hardened, by the long continued action of sin for near six
thousand years. As the angels of God are
the fit agents to execute His purposes of good, so are Satan’s angels the fit
agents for bringing to pass his designs of malice.
But what are the doctrines which will exercise so deadly an
effect on men? They will
“Forbid to marry, and command to
abstain from articles of food, which God created to be received with
thanksgiving by those who believe and recognize the truth.”
A prohibition is either partial or absolute. If it be only partial, the exception must be
specified; or else it is to be taken absolutely. Thus, ‘Augustus
forbad senators and knights to become gladiators.’ This was partial prohibition. But it would be false to say that Augustus
forbid gladiatorship.
The Emperor Honorius forbad it absolutely, or entirely put a stop to it.
The prohibition then of marriage, and of certain articles of
food must, in this case, be absolute or unlimited unless the exception be specified.* Now as there is no exception specified, there really will be none
when this is fulfilled; and therefore any partial prohibitions of marriage to
certain parties, while it is permitted to others, cannot fulfil the prophecy
before us.
* In logical language, a negative
sentence distributes both subject and predicate.
Let us look, in order to clear the matter, at the prohibitions
of Scripture. To forbid then, in Old
Testament language, would be expressed by the words, ‘Command-not.’ “Jonadab our father commanded us, saying, Ye shall drink no
wine, neither ye, nor your sons for ever.”
“The words of Jonadab, the son of Rechab, that he commanded his sons not to drink wine, are
performed; for unto this day they drink none:” Jer. 35: 6, 14.
Would it be true to say, that in the Old Testament, God forbad wine?
Surely not.
Yet, if partial prohibition authorize us to affirm it, we may say so; for
He forbad it to the Nazarites. The Romanists only partially prohibit marriage and
meats.
Observe too the force of the word “forbidden” in another point of view. It
is not said “abstaining from marriage and meats,”
because the words relate to evil spirits, who have no power to partake of either. Had it been merely men who were spoken of, then, since both
the teachers and the taught must alike abstain, the second form of expression
would have sufficed. But now the teachers are of a
different nature from the taught; and the word “forbid” marks the teacher’s accredited
authority. So the Holy Spirit controlled
His inspired ones. “They were forbidden
of the Holy Ghost to preach
the word in
I gather assuredly therefore from the very force of the words
used, that marriage will by these evil spirits and their false prophets be
forbidden to all and each, as evil and unclean in itself, and defiling to every one.
This is
evident from the defence set up for it. “For every
creature of God [as
Eve was] is
good.”
Such a sentiment must be presented then by Paul in opposition to the
contrary doctrine - that some things created are evil. Such was the Gnostic doctrine, that marriage
universally was evil.
Therefore more than once the mind of God is given on that
subject in this epistle and elsewhere.
(1) The younger widows are to marry, and bear children: 1 Tim. 5: 14.
(2) The female officers of the church were to be widows who had brought
up children: vs. 9, 10. (3) The elders were to have been once
married, and to have obedient children: 1 Tim. 3: 2-4. (4) The deacons were
to have been once married: 3: 12. (5) And more especially, where the apostle is
treating of the position of believing men and women generally, he says,
“Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and love,
and holiness, with sobriety:” 2: 15.
Whence I conclude, that the doctrine was then afloat,
that the state of marriage was so defiling,
that there was no salvation in it.
In opposition thereto, the apostle declares that this state shall not
hinder salvation at all, if faith and the answering graces of the Spirit be
found in the husband and wife. Similar
to these Gnostic doctrines will be the views of Antichrist himself. “Neither shall he regard the God of
his fathers, nor the desire of women:”* Dan. 11: 37.
* It is
generally taken for granted, that “the desire of women”
means Messiah; Whom, it is said, the women of
Next, they will require men to abstain from meats or certain
articles of food not specified. If we
may judge from the past, these will be especially wine and animal food.
Many of the Gnostics abstained from both these; and affirmed
them to be evil in themselves, and defiling to those who partake of them.
Hence the question of partaking of wine, as well as the subject of marriage, is treated of by
Paul in this Epistle to Timothy: and he gives directions concerning it to all the church officers, as before
concerning marriage. It was, it is
evident, the common drink of the country; and the Spirit of God requires of the
elders, deacons, and deaconesses, only that they should not take it to excess:
thus manifesting that it was fermented liquor:* 1 Tim. 3: 3, 8, 11; Titus 1: 7; 2: 3.
To the saints in general similar direction is given: Eph. 5: 18.
But moreover (what is especially worthy of notice), as Timothy before
was in the habit of drinking water only, Paul recommends him to take wine, as conveying with it benefit: 5: 23.
This command then was not a hint unconnected with the general scope of
the epistle, but a fresh blow at the
Gnostic deceivers and a lesson to us, that far from being evil, wine is worthy
of being used by the believer.
* Having seen a teetotal perversion of the word … as though it signified that the person of whom it
was spoken was to be “in the company of wine,”
I beg to deny that such is ever the sense, either in classic authors, or as
given in lexicons. It means “acting improperly under the influence of wine,” and
the sense of … is that of “beyond,” not “beside of.” See Athenaeus.
As to the flesh-meat or animal food, it is known that the
Gnostics many of them rejected it as evil.
And it appears that false views were abroad among some of the less
instructed Christians, leading them to imagine that it was unfit for a
believer. Hence Paul says, “One believeth
that he may eat all things: another, who
is weak, eateth herbs [vegetable food]. Let not him that eateth despise him that eateth not:
and let not him that eateth not judge him that eateth; for God hath received
him:” Rom. 14: 2, 3. Paul shows why the less instructed abstain from flesh, at the
same time giving the true view of the matter, imparted to himself by
revelation. “I know and am persuaded by the Lord Jesus,
that there is nothing unclean of itself: but to him that esteemeth anything to be unclean, to him it is unclean. But if thy brother be grieved on account of
any article of food (…) thou no longer walkest
according to love. Destroy not him with
thy meat (…) for whom Christ died.” “For the sake of an
article of food (…) destroy not the work
of God. All things indeed are pure : but it is
evil for that man who eateth with offence [i.e. laying a stumbling block
before a brother]. It is good neither to eat flesh nor to drink wine, nor any thing whereby thy brother
stumbleth, or is offended, or is made weak”:
The eating of flesh-meat then, and
the drinking of wine were things which were stumbling-blocks to some of the
believers in that day, who esteemed them unclean. And Paul classes them both under the question
of articles of food.
Again, “Wherefore if any article of food (…) maketh
my brother to stumble, I will eat no flesh (…)
while the world standeth, lest I make my brother
stumble:” 1 Cor.
8: 13. It appears that the same false doctrines had
found entrance among the Hebrew Christians, for among other indications, Paul
writes – “Be not carried about with divers (various) and
strange doctrines; for it is a good thing
that the heart be established with grace;
not with meats (…) which have not
profited them that have been occupied therein:” Heb.
13: 9. See also in confirmation, Titus 1: 14, 15; 2 Peter
1: 19; 2: 4.
The prohibition of these articles of
food will be as universal as that of marriage.
It will be Satan’s imitation of God’s work of old. To
Now it is the very wisdom of Satan to take up and use for his
own purposes that which God has laid down. He imitates the work of God to overthrow
it. The weapons of God’s armoury, as he
knows, are the strongest. In commands
concerning meats and drinks the law of old consisted: Heb. 9: 10.
And abstinence from these things and from blood constituted the inferior
and fleshly holiness of the Jewish nation.
“Ye shall be holy men unto me; neither shall ye eat any flesh
that is torn of beasts in the field: ye shall cast it to the dogs:” Exod. 22: 31; Deut. 14: 2, 3.
This is the seeming holiness which Satan will set up before the eye of
the world, and draw away thereby many from the truth. Against such a scheme of holiness as a thing
external, and a matter of eating and drinking, our Lord cautions us:- “Not that which goeth into the mouth defileth a man, but that which cometh out of the
mouth, this defileth a man:” Matt. 15: 11-20.
The true view of the matter is then presented by the Spirit,
as the corrective of the false doctrine.
“Articles of food were created by God to be partaken of with
thanksgiving by those who believe and recognize the truth.”
That is, the very purpose of God, in creating articles of food, was to
support the life of His saints thereby. God’s final end or intention in
creation is the very one which they reject.
The design of God ought to be the rule for His creatures: and if God gave animal food and wine for the sustenance and benefit of His
saints, to refuse them as unfit is rebellion against the Most High. Especially is it so, after the Lord has
condescended to teach us His purpose.
They are to be received with
thanksgiving: for they are a benefit received from the Creator: a benefit
designedly given, and not coming by chance.
It is the condemnation of the Gentiles that they were “not thankful.”
They were intended for believers: for such only are thankful,
and to such only are they working good. To all others they become (through their own
wicked hearts) snares, leading them away from God. But, so exquisitely cautious and wise is
scripture, that another word is added, to teach us yet more particularly for
whom they are designed. God purposed
them for “those that recognize the truth.”
For some, as we have seen, did not perceive that anything but vegetable
food was lawful; they therefore, as thinking animal food unclean, were to
abstain; to them it was
unclean. But to those who saw their
liberty in the Gospel, all things were clean.
In all these points here is an antagonist doctrine to
that of the Gnostics. They held, that some things (as for instance, woman, and the vine) were the creation
of Satan. They held that, in place
of being received with thanks, they were
to be cast away with abhorrence, as defiling and evil, a snare and a poison.
They taught that, while these things affected not the profane herd, yet that by those who wished to be pure they must be
refused, and that the perception of the truth would compel men to abstain from
such sources of pollution.
But we
advance more deeply yet into the question.
“For every creature of God is good,
and nothing is to be rejected, if it be received with thanksgiving; for it is
sanctified by the word of God and prayer.”
The error of the Gnostics struck at the root of the relation
between God and the beings He has made.
Twice therefore does the question of creation come before us.
“God created.”
“Every creature
of God is good.”
Such was their doctrines that discredit fell upon the Creator,
through their thoughts of His works, and
their speeches concerning them. They denied that they were made for the purpose for which God really
intended them. Still further
they maintained (and the latter-day apostates will again maintain) that some creatures, are evil in themselves. Paul had before asserted that they were good to the believer: he now adds,
that they were good in themselves.
The latter-day
deceivers will be at enmity with the Creator, and they will blaspheme Him
through His works. This is worse than
the heathen’s sin. They transgressed in
not giving God His due glory, and in withholding thanks. These will shift the fault of
sin from man to matter, and thus will impeach the Creator, and
openly blaspheme Him for His work in creation.
This doctrine, and this only, that certain creatures are evil in themselves, brings the Creator’s character into
question. To speak of creatures as they
are in themselves is to touch upon them as they are God’s workmanship, and upon
His original design in creating them at first.
Paul therefore brings out both questions, and thus we are led back to
the view presented at the first, which Paul here re-affirms. “God saw everything that he had made, and
behold it was VERY GOOD:” Gen. 1: 31.
The present assertion of the apostle gives the reason why
meats were to be used by the saints.
They were good in themselves, and so could not defile any by
the mere partaking of them. That which
is good in itself must be good to us, if we rightly use it. The only room for abuse, in the case of things inanimate, is
on the part of the rational creature who uses
them. Therefore, the apostle, in order
that they may be good to us, shows that thankfulness is required on our part.
That which is evil in itself must needs be relatively evil to us.
This is the reason of the prohibition uttered by the apostates. Under the law, certain creatures were
declared to be relatively evil, or unfit for the
Jews. But now that partial prohibition
being taken off, and Paul affirming that they were
ever good in themselves, it follows that
they are also good or clean to us.
By the expression, “Every creature of God is good,” is meant, not necessarily that it is
good for food, but that it is clean
to us; fit for our use, and a benefit.
This is carrying no defilement of spirit: in opposition to the thought
that it is evil and unclean. In short,
the word ‘good’ is taken in a moral and spiritual sense, and not in its physical sense, as
if referring to the bodily health of man.
Now such questions as these are never raised by the Romish
doctrines of celibacy and fasting. They
neither deny that every creature of God is good in itself, nor that it is
intended for the believer’s use. No sort
of food is held in abomination by them as evil; nor is marriage held to be
unclean. On the contrary the creed of Pope Pius professes, “That there
are truly and properly seven sacraments of the new law, instituted by Jesus Christ our
Lord, and necessary for the salvation of mankind, though not all for every one; to wit, baptism, confirmation, the eucharist,
penance, extreme unction, orders, and matrimony; and that these sacraments
confer grace.”
Wherefore I
conclude, that the apostle by the [Holy] Spirit is pointing at another doctrine than that of
Romanism. The forbidding meats on any lower ground than because in their
internal nature they are evil, does not come up to the apostle’s description. And as they are supposed to be evil in themselves, therefore they are
necessarily forbidden to all persons who hold their views, and at all times; for circumstances cannot alter that which in itself is evil.
Observe now the different ground on which Jewish abstinence
from certain kinds of food is set. These
articles of diet are forbidden as unfit for them, because they are holy.
“The camel, because he cheweth the
cud, but divideth not the hoof, he is unclean TO YOU.” “They shall be an abomination
UNTO YOU.”
But the absolute ground of prohibition here supposed, is destructive
of both the Jewish and Christian revelations.
If any ask, Why marriage is lawful? we must refer him to the revealed account of the
Creation. If any ask - By what right we
take away the lives of animals for food? we must reply
by turning the inquirer to the grant made to Noah, “Every moving
thing that liveth shall be food for you: even as the green herb, I have given
you all things” Gen. 9: 3. If he affirms that both marriage and animal food are evil, he
cannot believe in Judaism any more than in Christianity. The God of the Jews sanctioned both these
institutions and Jesus upheld them also.
Especially is it observable that in John’s Gospel we have at
These Gnostic views, as being destructive of Christianity, are
therefore the doctrines against which the Holy Spirit would warn us. For it is clear that, by holding opinions not
inconsistent with the foundation-truths of the Gospel, men do not depart from
the faith. It is also certain, that the
Roman Catholic doctrines concerning celibacy and fasting are not destructive of
any article of the Apostles’ Creed, or of any foundation-principle of the
faith.
In short, as to the fact, Romanists do not forbid marriage or meats in the sense
affirmed by the apostle; that is, absolutely.
Nor secondly, as to the reason, does their prohibition rest upon the motive supposed by
Paul. And motive is everything. Paul recommends abstinence from marriage and
meats himself (1 Cor. 7: 1; 8: 13), but then the motive was holy. Here the essential difference is, that the ground of abstinence is impious.
If again we enter into the comparison of the two cases more
closely, the difference will be yet more evident. In the Romish religion, there are two parties
concerned; the clergy and the laity. The
clergy on the one hand, abstain from marriage; but do not forbid it to
others. The laity, on the other hand, if
we consider them as forbidding marriage to the clergy, yet practise
it to themselves. But the case supposed
by the prophecy is, that the instructors (the spirits of darkness) forbid
marriage, abstaining from it because they are unable to practise it. And that the disciples, both abstain at the
word of their instructors, and dissuade all within the sphere of their
influence from it, regarding it as evil in itself. The parties seduced must abstain from
marriage; and only those that so abstain are seduced and leave the faith. The receiving these essential doctrines of
the apostasy is the signal for their leaving the faith. They first give heed to the doctrine, then
embrace it; and, as the result, leave the faith. Once they were [regenerate] Christians, so regarded by themselves and others;
but on embracing these views, they desert Christianity. Their abstinence from marriage and meats is
the manifestation of their change of sentiment.
But, as truth alone is my object, I hasten to admit an important
point. Paul in the epistle before us
sanctions marriage in a two-fold manner; first, to believers in general; secondly, to church officers in
particular.
Now, while
Romanism does not forbid marriage to the first class, it does to the last: and therefore in it we may detect the
commencement of the abandonment of the faith.
But the Gnostics maintained the absolute prohibition of
marriage and meats, and were inconsistent with the truths - that God was manifest in the flesh, and justified in
the spirit - that is, with the incarnation and atonement of our Lord. The true antagonist-doctrine to Romish
corruptions on this head would have been our liberty, as the servants of
Christ, from all traditions of men. This
we find the apostle presenting in his epistle to the Romans.
No article capable of sustaining life and health is to be
thrown away. “Nothing is to
be refused,” or
cast away. This command then is broken,
when any break in pieces casks of beer or wine, and suffer the liquor to run
down the street. All that is needed for
any article of food to be fit for the believer, is his
rendering thanks to God. The word of God
has sanctified it: that is, the grant of the animal and vegetable kingdoms to
man for his food, has made them ‘holy’ or fit for his use, if a
believer. Beside this, there should be
daily prayer and thanksgiving at every meal, recognising God’s bounty to us.
The whole question then concerns the ceremonial cleanness of marriage, and of certain articles
of food. ‘Both
are unclean,’ the apostates will say.
‘No,’ says the [Holy] Spirit;
‘be
you but of a thankful spirit, and both things are clean to you.’
The present question is quite similar in its nature to that of the
Corinthians – ‘Whether it were lawful for a believing
husband or wife to live with an unconverted partner?’
In that case, Paul, using the very expression applied here, decides that
“The
unbelieving husband is sanctified by the
wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband: else are your [unbelieving] children unclean [to you]; but now they are holy;” 1 Cor. 8: 14. That is, the husband in the
one case, and the meats in the other, are not unclean, or unlawful to
the saint.
We now come to that which has formed the author's warrant for the
present tract.
“If thou lay these
things before the brethren, thou shalt he a minister of Jesus Christ nourished
up in the words of the faith, and of the good doctrine, whereto thou hast
attained.”
The subject is of the highest moment: and it was one very
likely to slip from the recollection of the church, when those opinions were
not actually rampant before it. Yet, in
being forewarned against the danger, lies, under God, the Christian’s safety, “Behold, I
have told you before.” So that then, doctrines which
will shake and overthrow the faith of others, will but root and ground his;
and the rising up of this baleful doctrine will be but a proof, to his
well-instructed mind, that ours is a God who knows the end
from the beginning.
“The words of the faith” stand opposed to the teachings of the
apostasy; and “the good doctrine” to “the doctrines of demons.”
“But refuse profane and old wives’ fables, and exercise thyself unto godliness. For bodily exercise profiteth a little; but
godliness is profitable for all things, having promise of the life that now is,
and of that which is to come.”
The presence of the article before “fables” shows that certain
well-known fables were the object of the apostle’s warning. He had given a like exhortation at the
commencement of the Epistle. Timothy was
to “charge some not to teach false doctrine, nor give heed to fables, and endless genealogies:” 1 Tim. 1: 3, 4. Again he informs us,
that a time was coming, when men, tired of the truth, would
welcome these follies and falsehoods. “The time will come when they will not
endure the healthful doctrine, but according to their own lusts they will heap
to themselves teachers, having itching ears, and will turn away their ears from
the truth, and will be turned unto fables:” 2 Tim. 4: 3, 4. These fables were “profane”; and foolish to a high degree, so as
to be suited only for doting old women.
The same class of doctrines he more definitely points out in the close of
the Epistle, in a passage which is far more distinct in the original, than as
given by the English version. “O Timothy,
guard the deposit, turning away from the profane babblings and ‘Antitheses,’ or (contrasts) of the (system) falsely named Gnosis [‘Science’]* which some professing erred
concerning the faith:” 1 Tim. 6: 20, 21.
Here not only the apostle calls the system he is opposing ‘Gnosticism,’ but two of the most striking
characteristics are set forth. First, its ‘profane
babblings,’ or empty terms. It abounded with barbarous words that meant
nothing, except to deprive the true God of his glory, as possessed of all
perfections in Himself; while they distributed them among a number of imaginary
beings, whom they named Achamoth, Yaldabaoth,
Sigee, Bythos, etc.
* [See the Greek …] “The
oppositions of Science falsely so called, (…)
seems to point directly at the pretensions of the Gnostics, that we can hardly
doubt as to the meaning of
Besides these they had ‘Antitheses’ or contrasts. Gnosticism rested on the
opposition between Light and Darkness, God and Matter, the Good and the Evil
Principle. In order to prove that the God of the Old Testament was different from
the God of the New Testament, they collected passages from both, containing
opposite doctrines; these they called “Contrasts”;
and thence would have their disciples to
infer, that the Author of the one could not be the Author of the other. They looked with the eye of the infidel over
the Old Testament, and finding things
which they could not reconcile with their own views of goodness and truth, they
blasphemed. They saw that the principle
of the Old Testament dispensation was justice, and that the principle of the New Testament is mercy; but they turned God’s truth of
differences of dispensation into falsehood, by their wilful misuse of it.
In the next epistle we have a similar warning - “Of these
things put them in remembrance, charging them before the Lord not to contend
about words, which is to no profit (but) to the
overthrow of the hearers. Study to show
myself approved unto God, a workman
not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth. But shun profane babblings; for they will advance to a further
height of impiety, and their word will eat like mortification.”
In the present passage, then, Timothy is exhorted rightly to
divide the word of truth. There is a distinction,
great and broad, between the Gospel and the Law: between the earthly
dispensation of
[*It
was initially my intention to present ‘Part 2’ before
‘Part 1’ because of what Scripture teaches us
relative to “THE RESURRECTION
OF THE DEAD,” and the Intermediate
State and Place of the “Soul.”. The reader (it is hoped) will then better
recognise the errors of agnosticism now being taught through the Churches of God! To say a disembodied soul, now in
the underworld of “Hades” (Matt. 12:40; 16: 18; Acts 2: 27; Rev. 6: 9-11,
etc.), can somehow ascend into the presence of God in Heaven without
a glorified ‘body’ of “flesh and bones” (Luke 24:
39), is, what the author describes as ‘the
profane babbling of Gmosticism’! Should all the dead not be “waiting for … the redemption of the body” (Rom. 8: 8: 23b, R.V.), which will take place at
the time of our Lord’s return, (1 Thess. 4: 16. cf. John
3: 13; 14: 3.)?
“SAFELY HOME,”
at the end of the late Paul Neilly’s testimony, is therefore
a good example of going beyond what Scripture teaches, and making the time of
Death equivalent to that of Resurrection; and thereby deceives Christians into
believing that ‘the resurrection of the just was PAST already’!]
** After explaining the meaning of the
word ‘attain,’ and handing a tract on the “out-resurrection” which Paul - “if by any means” - wanted to “attain unto” (Phil. 3: 11),
the instant reply I received was: “That’s Impossible”! Since resurrection is an act of God which will take
place sometime in the future, a Christians’ ‘conduct’
– will be taken into account at the Judgment seat of Christ to determine if
he/she will “attain” that resurrection which the
Apostle Paul mentioned in Phil. 3: 11.
In Heb. 9:
27 we read: “It is appointed unto men once to
die, but after this [i.e.,
after the time of death] the judgment.” All dead saints must come into
judgment after death; and the standard of their righteousness –
not Christ’s imputed righteousness - will show who “are accounted worthy to attain to that
world [age] and the
resurrection from the dead” (Luke
20: 35). This ‘resurrection’ of
which our Lord spoke, is a select resurrection of REWARD “from the dead” similar to that which Paul wanted to
“attain unto”!
Daniel Steel, D.D., commenting on the Judgment in Heb. 9: 27, says - “The
strength of this argument is immediately perceived by the Greek scholar when he
sees that the word for ‘men’ is a term so broad as to comprehend the whole race. Then to make surety doubly sure, it is preceded
by what the grammarians call ‘the generic
article’, which must often be left untranslated
in English, but means all the human race.” Christ’s Judgment seat will determine at what
time the souls of the dead will vacate ‘Hades’ –
the place of all disembodied ‘souls’.]
But this view fully confirms our position, that it is not Romanism, but Gnosticism, which the apostle is
combating. For Rome’s power of error
lies in confounding the Law and
Gospel together; in leavening the new dispensation with the principles of the
old, and not in contrasting the one with the other; as did the system which Paul
opposed. Nor does Romanism deny the
resurrection. She asserts it in her
creeds. She corrupts the truth secretly,
but does not violently overturn it.
Another of the features of Gnosticism
was austerity. On this Paul remarks,
calling its requirements of bodily self-denial by the name of “exercise.”
Such was the discipline used by the candidates for prizes at the
national games of
* Spoken of marriage: 1 Cor.
7: 1. To which I believe it
alludes here.
I have gone through the prophecy which
especially bears upon the future apostasy, and have pointed out in how many
particulars it differs from the corruptions introduced by
* The fallacy then, in applying this
prophecy to the Romish errors is the fallacy of turning a dictum simpliciter into a dictum secundum
quid.
Though the present prophecy in Timothy be the most clear and
definite declaration of the apostasy in the latter days from the Christian
faith, yet it is not the only one. 1. At the close
of our Lord’s sermon on the Mount, He gives distinct
intimations, that the faith of His disciples will be tried by false prophets
who will present a religion of self-denial.
Jesus then manifests the future failure of those who shall profess
themselves to be his disciples, while they obey not his words. The Saviour likens these to a house built
upon the sand, assailed by a threefold attack of wind, rain, and flood: two
aerial forces, and one earthly. The winds doubtless represent doctrine, (Eph. 4: 14) false doctrines, shaking
the true faith. The descent of the rain represents, I
believe, the energies of the spirits of darkness then cast out of heaven (Rev. 12.,) and exerting themselves to overthrow
Christianity. The rains raise a river
and the river beats against the house.
This, I judge, signifies the current of the world’s persecution setting
in against the [enlightened and obedient] believer, when Satan’s power and malice will swell
the tide of human rage and violence against the Christian. It seems, from the Saviour’s comparison, as
though the faith of half of those who wear the Christian name will give way
before the trial. In this awful lesson,
there is a word of
exhortation to practise now, before the evil day has come, whatever we see to be Christ’s commands.
2. The apostasy is also presented as the
ripening of the tares. At first, while
both wheat and tares sent out leaves only, the two different plants were not
distinguishable; but, as harvest draws on, the difference between the nominal [disobedient] and [obedient] real
Christians* will become more and more evident; and the false principles
long secretly held, will bear the fruit of utter apostasy. Matt.
13.
* Both classes are regenerate. Eternal salvation is not the issue here; it is
a disciple’s work and fruitbearing with a view of being “accounted
worthy” to enter the coming Messianic Kingdom. Luke 22: 28-30;
Rev. 3: 21.
3. In the Jewish nation, just before the
Saviour judges it, we find three forms of evil; (1) covert denial of civil
authority; (this we see in the matter of the tribute money;) (2) denial of the
resurrection; (3) and covert denial of the two
natures in Christ: Matt. 22. But that which was then secret
will be openly manifested at the close: 2 Peter 2: 3.
4.
The salt of the Gospel will have lost its taste, and be .cast out to be
trodden underfoot of men. The belief of
Christ’s principles, and the practice of Christ’s
commands gives the Christian his peculiarity of character. But the loss of these distinguishing
features, by embracing the principles and practices of worldliness, will be
followed by the Lord’s manifested displeasure, by the dissolution of the body
that wrongfully bears his name, and by its exposure to the contempt of men: Luke 19.
5. Jesus is to be rejected by this
generation before he appears as the lightning.
And the generation is a moral one, existing to this very day, and
composed both of Jews and Gentiles. In fact
it answers to the world: Luke 17: 25.
6. The citizens, hating the nobleman who
has been appointed king, will send an embassy, “We will not have this man to
reign over us,” Then the king comes, and his enemies are
slain before him: Luke 19.
7. The Gentile branches, not continuing
in God’s goodness, will be cut off: Rom. 11.
But it is time that I should turn the believer’s attention to
the form taken by these principles in the present day. I allude to
Teetotalism. This contains within itself
the very seed of the apostasy. But when
I say ‘teetotalism,’ I mean that form of it which carries out the principles to their full
length. Some abstain from wine, beer,
etc. in compassion to their fellow-men, not believing that the use of these
things wrong in themselves. This ground
of abstinence is not attacked here. But
teetotalism has reached its full development when it is affirmed, that ‘Alcohol, and wine containing it, are
not the good creatures of God: that they are to be rejected with abhorrence,
and that they are evil in themselves.’
Such statements come at once under the condemnation of the Holy Spirit
in the prophecy now commented on.
In the mind of a thoughtful teetotaller, either Christianity
must be overthrown, or teetotalism. For
Jesus drank wine: (Luke
7: 33, 34; Matt. 11: 19;) made wine; (John 2.)
and commands wine to be
taken (Matt. 26: 27-29) by his disciples.
Now how does teetotalism meet these facts? It maintains that the wine used, made, and
recommended by Jesus, was unfermented.* This is what is called, ‘Begging the question.’** But let it be granted. We are brought then to this dilemma. Either Jesus knew the teetotal doctrines, and
the distinction of wines into alcoholic and evil, or non-alcoholic and
innocent; or he did not. If he did not,
then, on one important point of man’s duty towards himself and his fellow,
the Saviour was ignorant; and he cannot have been the perfect teacher sent of
God. I assume therefore, that, as he was
sent of God, he knew the teetotal doctrines.
Either then he made the teetotal distinction - or, he did not. To suppose that Jesus taught teetotal
doctrines, but that the apostles and evangelists dropped all mention of them, -
would suppose, that the Holy Ghost by whom the sacred Scriptures were indited,
failed in his office of bearing witness to Christ. This therefore cannot be maintained.
* In all dictionaries I have consulted,
wine is declared to be the fermented juice of the grape. They
misuse words, then, who call unfermented juice, ‘wine.’ Sir
Edward Barry on the ‘Wines of the Ancients,’ asserts
the existence of alcohol to be the very essential and distinguishing principle
of all wines.
** To prove it is impossible, from the
very nature of the case. All probability
is against it; for the difficulty in hot countries is, not to ferment the
juice, but to prevent its fermenting.
And though the juice of the grape might be kept from fermenting, yet the
increase of expense and the necessity for peculiar accommodation,
would render such liquor much more expensive.
Neither would it I suppose be a desirable beverage. It was not therefore the ordinary fashion.
We must believe therefore, that Jesus knew the teetotal
doctrines, and the distinction founded thereon, but did not make the teetotal
distinction of wines. But if so, it is
manifest, that Jesus was opposed to teetotalism.
He made wine by miracle.
Would any teetotaller have done so?
Would any have thought it worthy of the character of the Son of God, to
use divine power for the purpose? without adding as a
caution, ‘Observe, this wine which I have made, is not
that deadly and poisonous beverage which contains alcohol, but is wholly pure
from every particle of it.’ We
might leave the reply with every thorough teetotaller, in full confidence, that
he would utter a hearty, an indignant, ‘No!’
Would Jesus, if he approved of teetotal doctrines, have
introduced wine into the most solemn rite of his religion?* Would any teetotaller have done so, and been silent on the
vital distinction of wines into poisonous or innocent, according as they contain
alcohol or not? But I go further. A thorough-going teetotaller would have cried
shame even on such a reduced and guarded introduction of wine. He would have said – ‘What a
favourable opportunity to impress upon the world the glorious doctrines of total
abstinence!’ ‘My disciples, I have called you to a feast. The feast of the worldly and the drunkard are
stained by the presence of alcohol; be it not so in your solemn feasts. Do you avoid all wines whether alcoholic or
not. Drink only of pure water, fresh
from nature’s thousand fountains.’ We might be content
to, abide by the verdict of thorough-going teetotallers, whether such would not
have been their feelings, such their words on such an occasion.
* Nay further, Jesus himself abstains from wine as a sign of his
separation from earthly-joy, and declares that he will not partake of it again
till the joy of his kingdom comes (Matt. 27: 29). Would not a teetotaller have rather
considered that a part of millennial bliss would consist in no wine being made?
Jesus then knew teetotal principles, but acted and felt in
entire opposition to them. He drinks
wine, he makes wine, he presents it with a solemn command to his disciples, at
His most sacred feast; and yet he never once makes that distinction in the use
of wine which is the very life of teetotalism.
Jesus then was not of teetotal
principles. He was not neutral as
regards them, but was actively, solemnly opposed to them. His Spirit has recorded for our instruction
and example, his thoughts and acts concerning wine. If Jesus be God, the divine sanction is given against teetotalism. Therefore the followers of Jesus should be
opposed to it.
In the minds of the thoughtful, consequently, who follow out things to their just consequences, either
Christianity will destroy teetotalism; or teetotalism will destroy
Christianity. For, from the above
reasoning it is evident, that if teetotalism be true, Jesus was not sent of
God. And if Jesus be sent of God,
teetotalism is a device of Satan.
Teetotalism will join itself with the other Gnostic principles
now afloat, and will then be consolidated into one fearful system, destructive
of all faith in Christ, and ensuring the perdition of the soul. For what are the principles now abroad
concerning wine, war, punishments - domestic, capital, and military - slavery
and universalism, but the preparation for the Great Apostasy? Especially do I look upon what are called “Vegetarian” societies, (that is, societies of those
who agree to abstain from animal food,) as containing within themselves the
germ of the predicted abandonment of Christianity. I mean not, that such are their principles
now: but, as it was in the origin of Temperance Societies, so it will be with
them; their principles will advance - till they end in the denial of all
revelation. For the Old Testament and
the New alike sanction both the use of animal food and marriage. The denial of these institutions, as given by
the true God, will issue in the entire abandonment of the true faith.
The reader can now judge whose views come up to the force of
the expressions of the prophecy.
The apostasy of the latter days will be threefold, answering
to the three-fold division in which God now regards the earth, as distinguished
into “the Jews, the Gentiles, and the Church of God:” 1 Cor. 10: 32.
1. The Gentiles will, by refusing
marriage and animal food, break the “everlasting covenant” with Noah, on which the regularity of the seasons depends. For that covenant (Gen. 9.) contains a re-institution of
marriage, a giving up of animals to be the food of man, and the appointment of
capital punishment for murder; which therefore supposes sovereign authority
lodged somewhere. But in the last evil days men will resist and put an end to authority, and
capital punishments, beside the points already noted. Therefore, as this is the breach of Noah’s
covenant, God is free to break up, by terrible judgments, the natural course
and order of things. Then new and
terrible scourges desolate the earth; as the Book of Revelation manifests. Therefore Isaiah discovering to us the state
of things in the latter day, exhibits the earth as [now] under the
curse, “because they have transgressed the laws, changed the
ordinances, broken the everlasting covenant” made with Noah
and his sons, and the creatures of the earth: Gen. 9: 16. Hence the
prophet sees the earth overturned, and laid waste; “the curse
hath devoured the earth.” As the blessing on
Noah and his sons was “Be fruitful and multiply, and replenish the earth,” so now the curse undoes the blessing,
and “therefore the inhabitants of the earth are burned,
and few
men left” Isa. 24: 6.
2. The same principles will produce
apostasy in the Jew. He will abandon the
law of Moses, and having received the principles of the false Christ, and been
beguiled by his false spirits, he will attach himself to the person of the
impostor-Messiah. If animal food and
marriage be unlawful, then the God of the Old Testament is not the true God;
and sacrifices of animals were cruel, and unworthy of the worship of the Most
High. He who entertains such views must
cease to be a Jew. And such cases of
apostasy the prophets foretell. Thus the
Lord says of his dealings with
3.
Lastly, the reception of these sentiments will overturn the faith of many
professing Christians, and they will go over to the false religion, or “the lie” of the Man of Sin. When then the covenant of Noah, the covenant
of Moses, and the grace of the Lord Jesus are trodden underfoot, vengeance, hot
and heavy, will launch the lightnings of the curse.
In conclusion, we observe, that the moral
causes that will hasten the reception of Anti-Christ’s principles, are
fearfully and thickly at work around us. To note these is the great practical lesson
of the whole. I would offer to the reader's consideration three principal ones.
(1) The first is,
mere formalism in religion, attended with inward
weariness of the truth of God. In the latter
day there is to be (alas! how true it is already!) “a form of godliness, but a denying of the power thereof:”
2 Tim. 3: 5. As the truth is not in men’s hearts, they will
grow weary of it, and desire something new.
They will seek for display and
eloquence, and power in the preacher.
Thus are they ready to listen to the new doctrines of the deceiving
spirits. Because of their not loving the
truth, but having pleasure in unrighteousness, God will in righteous judgment
send them an energy of delusion to believe Satan’s lie: 2 Thess.
2: 10, 11.
(2) The second cause of apostasy is the want of a good conscience. Four times in the two Epistles to Timothy is
this brought forward.
“The end
of the commandment is love out of a pure heart, and out of a good conscience, and out of faith unfeigned;
from which some having swerved have turned aside unto vain jangling;” 1 Tim. 1:
5, 6. Again, - “Holding faith and a good conscience, which some having put
away concerning the faith have made shipwreck:” 19.
See also 3: 9; and 2 Tim. 1: 3.
By these passages it is clearly taught, how necessary it is to live without
defilement of the conscience, and to leave whatever we see to be contrary to
God’s will. But alas! how
many have defiled and evil consciences!
Light has broken in upon them, disclosing many things in their business
or profession, which they see the Lord reproves, yet they will not
give them up; because of the loss of reputation, or of affection, or of worldly
substance which they would occasion. To
such the truth is unpleasant, because it condemns; and therefore falsehood is
ready to be welcomed as a composing draught to an uneasy conscience. How fearfully close may apostasy from the
faith be to a wilfully defiled conscience!
(3) Lastly, covetousness is presented as the ground of
apostasy. “But they that
wish to be rich fall into temptation and a snare, and into many foolish and
hurtful lusts, which drown men in destruction and perdition. For
the love of money is a root of all evil; which some coveting have erred from
the faith, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows. But thou, O man of God, flee these things!”
1 Tim. 6:
9-11. (Greek.)
It needs but little observation to be assured that
covetousness is a sin much abroad in our day, and palliated or justified even
by [regenerate]
believers. “In the last days
perilous times shall come. For men shall be lovers of their own selves
(selfish) covetous;” 2 Tim. 3: 2.
Apostasy then is not far off.
These sins are as the electric force that is filling the air, and lading
it with the heavy darkness and terrible might of the thunderstorm. May we be kept faithful to the Lord! And may not the writer exhort
his brethren in the ministry to bring this subject before those of the saints
who come within their sphere: for it is an approved subject of service to the
Lord. “If thou
put the brethren in remembrance of these things, thou shalt be a good minister
of Jesus Christ.”
How will the faith of those be shaken by the Great Apostasy, who have been led to expect that
the world is about to be converted to Christianity!
(The End)
APOSTASY – AND THE WORLD-CRISIS
“Are not these
evils come upon us, because God is not among us?” – Deuteronomy.*
“These powerful lines are
based also on the solemn command in (Hosea
4: 17): “Ephraim
is wedded to idols; let him alone” – D. M. P.
Slowly
our dreams dissolve, our visions fade;
Along
the vast horizons of the world
The
lamps by some invisible hand are dimmed,
While
darkness gathers. Now on every side
Is
heard a lamentable sound, the cry
Of
stricken hearts expectant of a dawn
That
never comes. Those sweet expectancies,
Which once sprang forth like rays of joyous light
New-issuing
from a cloud, have died away,
To leave no trace. Its future all
unknown,
The
world seems caught within a net of fears,
Despondencies, and doubts. For men
have lost
The
confidence long cherished while they felt
God
was their sovran master, moulding life
To some beneficent aim. Apostasy
Would thrust out God, and, in the
vacant place,
Set grim idolatries, strange leagues,
new creeds
Still to be tried, and, tried, found
lacking still.
And
so, in silence, God withdraws Himself,
And,
so, the world rejects Him, leaves that world
To frame its fond illusions.
“Ephraim
Is turned aside to idols: let him alone.”
‘Alone’:
the very word is like a knell,
A sad prophetic warning. Cast adrift
From the great source of Being and of
Truth,
Man –
what is he? a shadow and a shame;
No
light within, no grace to hold him fast
Against the imperious surge of strife and hate.
Not
statesman’s craft, not pact not stratagem,
Nor
all the proud accomplishments of time,
Have
power to guide our steps. We falter, reft
Of One that reigns in equity and love.
“Children of men, return!” (that
Voice is heard
Between
the solemn pauses in events)
“Return at length, or perish in your pride.”
For
who can stay the menace of the hour
Save
the all-seeing Ruler, whose right hand
Is
strengthened, as heretofore, to lead us safe
Through
perilous tracts and valleys dark with death
To paths of calm? Barren were earth,
indeed,
Disjoined
from Him in whose inscrutable will
We
find, at last, the peace that knows no end.
- E. H. BLAKENEY.
* * *
[BY WAY OF
INTRODUCTION
FAITH
Faith to go forward in the dark,
Faith, Lord Jesus, to embark
Once more on life’s wild, troubled sea,
In midst of earth’s calamity.
Faith to know that Thou dost still
Look down in mercy; at Thy will
Outstretched Thine arms, and fill’d with love,
Ready the hearts of man to move.
Faith to ‘press on’* with Thee
our Guide,
For Thou art with us by our side;
Thou seest, what we cannot see;
By faith we follow only Thee.
* Phil. 3: 13, 14.
Faith to look above earth’s night,
Away from lawlessness and man’s might,
Away from struggle, sadness, war,
To Thee, the Bright, the Morning Star.
- HETTIE K. PAYNE.
The
following testimomy by Paul Neilly,
is spoiled by what his wife has placed at its end. Of course her beliefs, relative to what
happens immediately after the death of a Christian, is not any different from
what multitudes of regenerate believers accept today; and without any scriptural proof to
support their popular theory!
Here
is part of what was added:-
SAFELY HOME
“I am home in Heaven, dear ones
Oh so happy and so bright!
There is perfect joy and beauty
In this everlasting light.
All the pain and grief is over.
Every restless tossing past
I am now at peace for ever
Safely home in Heaven at last.
Did you wonder I so calmly
Trod the valley of the shade?
Oh! but Jesus love illumined
Every dark and fearful glade.
And He
came Himself to meet me
In that way so hard I tread
And with Jesus arm to lean on
Could I have one doubt or dread?
Then you must not grieve so sorely
For I love you dearly still
Try to look beyond the shadows
Pray to meet the Fathers will.
There is work still waiting for you
So you must not idly stand
Do it now while life remaineth
You shall rest in Jesus land.
When that work is all completed
He will greatly call you home
Oh, the rapture of that meeting
Oh, the joy to see you came!”
If
Paul Neilly, our deceased brother in Christ, is now ‘safely home in heaven at last’; then he must have
been able to get there by a different route than what was taken
by
his Lord and Saviour, Jesus Christ! See, John
20: 9, 17. cf. Acts 2: 27; Matt. 12: 40.]
-------
The Testimony
of Paul
Neilly
M.D., F.R.C.S.
Consultant Surgeon,
-------
From Surgeon to Patient
Just over a year ago I had an article published in the Life
Times magazine. Unknowingly I was
describing a medical condition that was to change my own life and perhaps also
accelerate my promotion to a better place. None of us know what the future
holds and if we did perhaps we would not be so complacent about life, death and
eternity. My desire is to tell you my
story and hopefully by God’s Holy Spirit to encourage you to reassess your position
before God and ensure that you have made provision for the future.
Until this point in my life my daily schedule had been very
busy and I, like others, had my fair share of frustrations. However, I was satisfied that I had arrived
at where I wanted to be in life and had achieved most of my goals. I had a loving wife, three young children
with a bright future, a career with many rewards and most precious of
all I had the assurance of eternal life. Over recent months it has been my
relationship with God that has been the pivot around which my life has rotated.
The Early Years
As a seven year old I couldn’t have realised how important the
decision would be to ask Jesus Christ to be my own and personal Saviour. Even at that young age I felt convicted of being
a sinner and was convinced that I needed to ask for forgiveness of my
sins. It was on a Sunday afternoon
during a Crusaders class in Lisburn that I was
persuaded I needed to ask Jesus into my heart.
I walked home after the meeting with my older brother and knelt down
with my mother in our drawing room and prayed the sinner’s prayer.
My parents not only loved God but also served Him. My father had answered the call to be a
Presbyterian minister and my mother had been persuaded, perhaps against her
better judgement, not only to marry him but also take on the responsibilities
of a clergyman’s wife. The three
children that followed (Stephen, Paul and Mark) were affectionately known as
salt, pepper and mustard. In my defence
I was not very peppery but my younger brother certainly lived up to his
name! As a result of my family
background I was steeped in the importance of, not only knowing that there was
a God, but also that each one of us needed to have a personal relationship with
Him before we can expect to get to Heaven.
I am grateful to both my parents for my Christian upbringing
and the godly example they set. But, to
be honest, I never really enjoyed being a son of the manse. I would have preferred some degree of
anonymity in church life but this was not to be. As the minister’s son I tended to put on a
good show but underneath I had periods when only God knew how rebellious I was
towards Him. Thankfully God remained
faithful to me. My father was not only a
minister but also had important links with the Lord’s Day Observance Society,
subsequently becoming its Chairman. As a
result I had quite a strict Christian upbringing and, at that time, I was quite
resentful. However, I now appreciate the
discipline I experienced and feel that it is a lack of
discipline that is destroying both the Church as we know it and society in
general. The Lord’s Day* is no longer respected and despite God’s
instruction in the fourth commandment that we, our family and those who work
for us, should do no work, Christians continue to do their own thing on the
Sabbath. How can we expect our children
to respect God’s law if we allow them to undertake school work or partake in
sport on Sundays and we ourselves flout it by choosing to travel to holiday
destinations or business meetings on this special day.
[* Presumably
he means ‘the first day of the week.’]
Education
I saw school and education as an
interruption to what could otherwise be an enjoyable life. With my parents insistence that nothing in
life comes easy I worked just hard enough to pass my examinations. It was not until I reached sixth form that I
realised if I wanted to be the doctor in the family, which I believed was my
calling, I’d better knuckle down. Recognition of the importance of hard work in reaching this objective
nearly came too late. As a
result I had to spend an extra year re-sitting two ‘A’
levels to achieve my goal. At last I
started medical school in 1981 and there I met a lot of other people with the
same aims in life. Most significantly I
met many who had a love for Christ some of whom have remained dear
friends. It was mainly the
influence of good Christian friends that kept me on the strait and narrow in
what was a rather hostile student world.* During my five
years as a medical student I studied extremely hard but looking back on it I
enjoyed every moment. My objective was
not only to qualify as a doctor, which on its own was a daunting task, but also
to become a surgeon.
[* NOTE. “Men are never faithful in crowds. Our nearest and dearest can fail us. What is wanted to-day are men and women,
young and old, who will obey their convictions of truth and duty at the cost of
fortune and friends and life itself. It is to disciples that Jesus says (Matt. 7: 14):- ‘Narrow is the gate, and straitened the way, that leadeth unto
life, and few be they that find
it.’”]
I vividly remember attending a meeting for those in my
academic year interested in becoming surgeons.
It was made very clear that of the twenty-five or so in the room that
evening approximately only two would be successful in becoming consultant
general surgeons (although also a few would become specialist surgeons). I reckoned the odds were stacked against me
but, after ten years as a junior doctor, I was one of three doctors in my year
to become a general surgeon. I was
finally appointed as a Consultant General Surgeon with an interest in
Colorectal Surgery to
Family
Along the way I met the girl who was later
to become my wife. She was a nurse, and
a Christian friend; Walter Boyd, who was also a doctor, introduced us. He spotted her walking home from work and
reckoned she deserved a lift home. I
sometimes joke that this was the beginning of the end and that the downward
spiral continued until we finally tied the knot in 1989. Of prime importance Averil was a
Christian and she has taught me patience and the importance of taking one day
at a time in our Christian walk with God. After setting up home initially in Glengormley we now have 3 children; Hannah, Matthew and Samuel.
At the time of my father’s retirement from full-time ministry we started
attending Ballycraigy Congregational Church. There we were very blessed by the ministry of
the Rev Tom Shaw whose pastoral
care, in human terms, was second to none and continues to this day.
As part of my surgical training we
spent one year in
Changing Circumstances
As a medical student and a junior doctor, having cared for
patients with terminal illness, it became my firm desire never to have cancer
myself, and to die a peaceful death in old age.
This hope extended to my wife and family but since the winter of 2001 we
discovered that God had different plans.
We were to experience problems that would turn our lives upside down. On 14th December after returning
from a pre-Christmas meal with friends my wife developed excruciating abdominal
pain and within 12 hours was on an operating table in
My personal hopes of a long and
cancer-free life appeared to be dashed on 25th July 2002. After several months of symptoms I eventually
conceded to having investigations. This
included a colonoscopy and as a colorectal surgeon I was accustomed to
performing this test. Being on the
receiving end was however a different matter.
I was given light sedation and was able to make the diagnosis of bowel
cancer myself. To compound the issue I
then had a CT scan, which revealed multiple tumour deposits in both lungs. If
ever I needed God now was the time.
Averil was unaware of the fact that I was having the test that
morning. When she was called at home,
being the astute person she is, she quickly came to
the correct conclusion. The bottom had
fallen out of our worlds. Both father
and mother had developed cancer within the space of seven months and the
likelihood was that I would be dead within the next year. Naturally we were distraught but on returning
home we turned to God’s Word. Our text
for that day was Daniel 12: 13 but
more precious than the verse itself was the title in Spurgeon’s notes: Nothing to alarm us. We were obviously very alarmed but God was
offering reassurance of his protection and indeed I am living proof that He has
done so over the past year.
In
I was now on a conveyor belt, which at times felt more like a
roller coaster with many ups and downs, both physically and emotionally. It was never a concern of mine as to why we
should have been afflicted like this but rather it was my desire to know what
God was going to achieve through it. I
reckoned if anything good was going to come of this I would have to survive
long enough to at least regain some degree of good health. I felt compelled to tell others of God’s
mercy, not only by saving me, but also by promising eternal life
to anyone who simply puts their trust in Him.
I was aware of Christian stalwarts and men of God in scripture
who actually thanked God for the suffering they had experienced. I reckoned they must have been mad but having
experienced something of ‘the shadow of death’ (Psalm 23: 4) myself I now recognise ‘the peace of God which passeth all
understanding’ (Philippians 4: 7).
As a direct result of what we have been through we have
been blessed. It would not be
true to say that life is now simply beautiful like a bed of roses but, if so, there are the thorns, which can make life very painful at times. However, for those who have put their
trust in Him we have many guarantees of God’s provision for us. We have the reassurance that God is our
refuge and strength in times of trouble and that, if we leave
whatever is burdening us with Him, He will give us rest (Psahn 55: 22
& Matthcw 11: 28).
At times I didn’t know if I had any
future left here on earth.* Particularly as a result of the complications
associated with chemotherapy I have often had the heartfelt desire to die. On many occasions I have thought, as my
namesake Paul the apostle wrote, that it would be better to be with Christ (Philippians 1: 23 & 24.
However, God has given me more time to continue my responsibilities as a
husband and a father. He has allowed me
to fulfil all of my goals to this point. Initially I didn’t know if I would see
Christmas 2002. I did and, not only this
but, our family was able to go on holiday to
[* NOTE. This is mainly due to the fact that most of the divine
prophecies - having to do with an inheritance upon this earth during
the millennial era - are now being rejected and destroyed by false methods of interpretation! Accountable before God, are all those whom He
has placed in positions of authority in His churches, to declare the whole
counsel of God! See Ezekiel 3: 20; Acts
15: 22; 23: 6b; 24: 15, 16, 21; 26: 6, 7, 8; 28: 20, 23b. cf. 1 Cor. 6: 9; Gal. 5: 19-21;
Eph. 5: 5:1-6, etc.]
New Opportunities
Much more important than this God has given me a ministry which would otherwise not have
happened. I have been able to return to
work and can help my patients in a much more personal way than ever before. Having a worse medical condition than many of
my patients I am better able to address, not only their physical, but also,
their emotional and spiritual needs. I have had several opportunities to discuss spiritual problems with
members of hospital staff and have been able to witness to God’s grace at both
local and national medical meetings. I
know that many people have now heard my story and trust that God can use this
to His glory.
It is my hope that my story will encourage you if you are
walking on your own to earnestly seek after Christ.
The Bible tells that for those who seek Him they will find Him (Luke 11:
9) and that those who do not seek Him, the Bible tells us, are fools who will
ultimately be cast into the lake of fire (Revelation 20: 15).
One of the advantages of having cancer is that you often have time to
prepare for eternity. However, many
people die suddenly or unexpectedly and nobody knows when the Lord will return
to take those who trust in Him to their reward in Heaven (John 14:
3). The Old Testament prophet Isaiah instructed us to seek the Lord
while He may be found (Isaiah 55: 6) and Paul warns us that now is the accepted time to make
this decision for Christ (2 Corinthians 6: 2).
Have you turned to God and asked for forgiveness of sin? Do you have the promise of eternal life? Not only that, but He has promised He will never leave you or
forsake you in this life, as well as in eternity? I pray that you will answer God’s call and
that you find Him as your own and personal Saviour.
-------
Dear friends,
It is now near the end of January 2004 and I write from Foyle Hospice,
which humanly speaking should be my last port of call.
I arrived here via a short stay at Belvoir Park Hospital, where I had some Radiotherapy. Although Brain Metastases (Advanced secondaries) have now
developed, I thank God that, though weak in body, I am lucid in mind and,
reasonably so, in speech.
These past weeks have been an emotional rollercoaster, yet I have proved God’s unfailing and loving presence. He
has allowed me to see my young family saved, and to learn that my story is
being made known to a worldwide audience.
It is my prayer that it will be for His glory alone - and that
many will come to know my Saviour through its challenge. Life is brief - It is time to seek the Lord,
and there isn’t necessarily time to prepare.
I know God can yet touch me in response to the earnest prayers of His
people. However, he may wish to use me as a ‘corn of
wheat’ (
Whatever, His will be done - I am content.
Yours in Christ,
Paul.
- - - - - -