Tuesday, January 15, 2019

Abundance of Healing Diminishing, but Not Gone.


    CHAPTER VIII.
    GIFTS IN THE REFORMATION
    “And, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world.” Matt. 28:20.
    The term “Reformation” is not here used as applying exclusively to the work and times of Luther. The Reformation from the darkness and the errors of Romanism then commenced, but was not then consummated. It progressed powerfully in the days of the Wesleys, and remains yet to be perfected.
    We have no sympathy with the course of those who quote history and offer the opinions of uninspired men to prove points of doctrine. But when we come to facts of existence we must appeal to history. And more especially are we warranted to do so in this case, for history attests the continued existence of that which the Scriptures inform us should continue to exist. Now we are brought to the question, Is there evidence that the gifts of the Spirit have existed and have been manifested in the church since the days of the apostles? The field is a very wide one. Testimony to almost any extent might be given; but we shall content ourselves with giving a few cases which we believe to be well authenticated.
    Milner, speaking of the third century, says:—
    “Though the miraculous dispensations attendant on Christianity form no part of the plan of this history, I cannot but observe on this occasion
    91
    how strongly their continuance in the third century is here attested. Pionius affirms that devils were ejected by Christians in the name of Christ; and he does this in the face of enemies, who would have been glad of the shadow of an argument to justify their bitterness, resentment, and perfidy.”—Milner’s Church History, p. 143.
    Cyprian speaks thus of the gifts of the Spirit:—
    “Hence, an ability is given with sober chastity, uprightness of mind, and purity of language, to heal the sick, to extinguish the force of poison, to cleanse the filth of distempered minds, to speak peace to the hostile, to give tranquility to the violent, and gentleness to the fierce, to compel, by menaces, unclean and wandering spirits to quit their hold of men, to scourge the foe, and by torments bring him to confess what he is.”
    Upon which Milner remarks:—
    “The testimony here given to the ejection of evil spirits, as a common thing among Christians, even in the third century, deserves to be noticed as proof that miraculous influences had not ceased in the church.….Indeed, the testimony of the fathers in these times is so general and concurrent that the fact itself cannot be denied without universally impeaching their veracity. We may safely, therefore, infer that such things were frequent among Christians.”—Church History, Am. Ed., p. 254.
    Mosheim, speaking of the progress of Christianity in the third century, says:—
    “Among the causes which belong to the first of these classes we do not only reckon the intrinsic
    1. force of celestial truth, and the piety and fortitude of those who declared it to the world, but also that special and interposing Providence, which, by such dreams and visions as were presented to the minds of many who were inattentive to the Christian doctrine, or its professed enemies, touched their hearts with a conviction of its truth, and a sense of its importance, and engaged them without delay to confess themselves the disciples of Christ. To this may also be added the healing of diseases, and other miracles which many Christians were yet able to perform by invoking the name of the divine Saviour. The number of miracles, however, we find to have been much less in this than in the preceding century; nor must this alteration be attributed only to the divine wisdom which rendered miraculous interpositions less frequent as they became less necessary, but also to that justice which was provoked to diminish the frequency of gifts, because some did not scruple to pervert them to mercenary purposes.”— History, vol. i. p. 78.
    This diminution of the frequency of the gifts in the third century is just what might have been expected in view of the “falling away” of which Paul prophesied, and which was then fully in progress; of the “grievous wolves” who should enter the church, the “false prophets” and the “damnable heresies,” of which Peter wrote, and whose “pernicious ways” so many followed by which the Spirit of God was grieved away. But we cannot see the reasonableness of the historian’s conclusion that the gifts were “less necessary” under such circumstances. Inasmuch as they were given “for the perfecting of the saints, for the edifying of the body of Christ,” they were really more necessary, but less frequent because of the unbelief and worldliness of the church.
    Much more reasonable than the conclusion of Mosheim is the answer of Mr. Wesley to the question, “If you allow miracles before the empire became Christian, why not afterward?” He replied as follows:—
    “Because after the empire became Christian, a general corruption of both faith and morals infected the Christian church; which, by that revolution, as St. Jerome says, ‘lost as much of her virtues as it had gained of wealth and power.’ And this very reason St. Chrysostom himself gave in the words you have afterward cited: ‘There are some who ask, Why are not miracles performed still? Why are there no persons who raise the dead, and cure diseases?’ To which he replies that it was owing to the want of faith, and virtue, and piety in those times.”—Wesley’s Works, p. 700.
    Again, of the fourth century Mosheim speaks thus:—
    “But I cannot, on the other hand, assent to the opinions of those who maintain that, in this century, miracles had entirely ceased; and at this period the Christian church was not favored with any extraordinary or supernatural work of a divine power engaged in its cause.”—Church History, vol. i. p. 105.
    In the time of the Reformation it was the belief that the Spirit of God was yet in the church, in its gifts, and in special answers to prayer. D’Aubigne says:—
    94
    “John Huss did more; prophetic words issued from the depths of his dungeon.”
    Huss saw the Reformation about one hundred years before Luther came, and was, says D’Aubigne, “the John Baptist of the Reformation.”
    Martin Luther not only believed in the direct interposition of God by the power of the Spirit, but he recorded the following remarkable case:—
    “A woman at Isenack, lying very sick, had endured horrible paroxysms, which no physician was able to cure; for her indisposition was directly the work of the devil, and an unnatural thing, occasioned by devilish frightenings, insomuch that she fell into a faint swooning, and thereupon had four paroxysms, each enduring the space of three or four hours; her hands and feet bended in the manner of a horn. She was chill and cold, her tongue rough and dry; her body, by reason of the disease, was much swelled; she, seeing Luther, who came to visit her, was much rejoiced thereat, raised herself up and said, ‘Ah! my loving father in Christ, I have a heavy burden upon me. Pray to God for me;’ and so she fell down into her bed again—whereupon Luther fetched a deep sigh and said, ‘God rebuke and command thee, Satan, that thou suffer this his creature to be in peace!’ Then, turning himself to the standers-by, he said, ‘She is plagued of the devil in the body, but the soul is safe and shall be preserved. Therefore let us give thanks to God and pray for her.’ And so they all repeated aloud the Lord’s prayer. After which Luther concluded with these words, ‘Lord God, Heavenly Father, who hast commanded us to pray for the sick, we beseech thee, through thy
    95
    only beloved Son, that thou wouldst deliver this thy servant, from her sickness and from the hands of the devil. Spare, O Lord, her soul, which together with her body thou hast purchased and redeemed from the power of sin, of death, and of the devil.’ Whereupon the sick woman said, Amen. The night following she took good rest and the next day was graciously delivered from her disease and sickness.”—Table Talk, p. 359.
    Zwingle, of Switzerland, the great reformer, was seized by the plague called “great death,” which was sweeping off its thousands; and he was so near gone that he was supposed by some to be dead; but he was miraculously restored in answer to prayer. D’Aubigne says:—
    “The believers cried to God night and day, earnestly entreating that he would restore their faithful pastor. The prayer was answered, and the news was soon flying everywhere that Zwingle had been snatched from the brink of the grave.”—Hist. Ref., vol. ii. p. 331.
    Mr. Wesley records the following case of the healing of a Mrs. Jones, an eminently pious woman:—
    “She had various physicians but still grew worse and worse; still perceiving herself to be no better, she left them off. She had a continual pain in her groin, with such a prolapsus uteri as soon confined her to her bed. There she lay two months helpless and hopeless; till a thought came one day into her mind, ‘Lord, if thou wilt thou canst make me whole! Be it according to thy will!’ Immediately the pain and the distress
    96
    ceased. Feeling herself well, she rose and dressed herself. Her husband coming in and seeing her in tears, asked, ‘Are those tears of serious joy?’ She said, ‘Of joy!’ on which they wept together. From that hour she felt no pain, but enjoyed perfect health. I think our Lord never wrought a plainer miracle, even in the days of his flesh.”— Wesley’s Journal, vol. iv. p. 748.
    All who are not deeply prejudiced will acknowledge that there was much consecration among the early Methodists, and that the Spirit often witnessed to their work with great power. There were among them many godly persons of strong faith, and the fruits of faith were often manifested according to the gracious promises of the Saviour. The following case of curing of blindness is copied from the life of Bramwell:—
    “William Greensmith, son of Thomas Greensmith, of Watnal, near Nottingham, when about nine years of age, was severely afflicted with a scrofulous humor in his eyes, so that he was unable to bear the light, even with a bandage upon them. Mr. Bramwell was then in Nottingham circuit, and went in his regular turn to preach in Mr. Greensmith’s house. On one of these occasions he remained all night; and previous to his departure the next morning, when his horse was brought to the door, he asked where the boy was who had sore eyes. Mrs. Greensmith replied that he was in a dark room behind the door. He wished him to be called out. He came and stood near Mr. Bramwell, who put his hand on the boy’s head, and looked upward as if in ejaculatory prayer. He then went out leaving the child
    97
    standing, while the latter, as if conscious of some important change, pulled off his bandages, looked out of the window, and asked if Mr. Bramwell was gone. On perceiving that his eyes were perfectly healed, all the family were completely astonished. He is now about thirty years of age, and has never since had any complaint in his organs of sight.”—Memoir, p. 157.
    The following is one of many cases of healing by faith, recorded in Wesley’s Journal:—
    “In returning to Canterbury I called upon Mr. Kingsford, a man of substance as well as piety. He informed me, ‘Seven years ago I so entirely lost the use of my ankles and knees that I could no more stand than a new-born child.…. I could not move from place to place, but on crutches. All the advice I had, profited me nothing. In this state I continued about six years. Last year I went on business to London, then to Bristol and to Bath. At Bath I sent for a physician; but before he came, as I sat reading the Bible, I thought, Asa sought to the physicians and not to God; but God can do more for me than any physician. Soon after I heard a noise in the street; and rising up found I could stand. Being much surprised I walked several times about the room, then I walked into the square, and afterward on the Bristol road; and from that time I have been perfectly well; having as full a use of all my limbs as I had seven years ago.’”—Wesley’s Journal, vol. iv. p. 682.
    The reader must not suppose that these things transpired without awaking some opposition in the minds of the unconsecrated. Prejudice was aroused which often manifested itself in bitter
    98
    reproaches. To the charge of egotism and self-righteousness Mr. Wesley made the following reply, which we would commend to the consideration of all who think there is a lack of humility in claiming answers to the prayer of faith:—
    “Now let the candid man judge, does humility require me to deny a notorious fact? If not, which is vanity? to say I by my own skill have restored this man to health, or to say that God did it by his own almighty power?”
    Bishop Hall, speaking of the good offices which angels do to God’s servants, says:—
    “Of this kind was that marvelous cure which was wrought upon the poor cripple at St. Marden’s, in Cornwall; whereof besides the attestation of many hundreds of the neighbors, I took a strict examination in my last visitation. This man, for sixteen years together, was obliged to walk upon his hands, the sinews of his legs being so contracted. Upon following an admonition in his dream to wash in a certain well, he was suddenly so restored to his limbs that I saw him able to walk and get his own maintenance. The name of this cripple was John Trebble.”
    Wesley remarks: “And were ‘many hundreds of the neighbors,’ together with Bishop Hall, deceived in so notorious a matter of fact? or did they all join together to palm such a falsehood on the world? O incredulity! what ridiculous shifts art thou driven to! what absurdities wilt thou believe rather than own any extraordinary work of God!”—Wesley’s Journal, vol. vi. pp. 565, 566.
    Wesley’s Journal, Dec. 20, 1742, says:—
    99
    “When I came home they told me the physician said he did not expect Mr. Meyrick would live till the morning. I went to him, but his pulse was gone. He had been speechless and senseless for some time. A few of us immediately joined in prayer (I relate the naked fact); before we had done, his sense and his speech returned. Now, he that will account for this by natural causes has my free leave; but I choose to say, This is the power of God.
    Saturday, 25. The physician told me he could do no more. Mr. Meyrick could not live over the night. I went up and found them all crying about him; his legs being cold, and (as it seemed) dead already. We all kneeled down and called upon God with strong cries and tears. He opened his eyes and called for me; and from that hour he continued to recover his strength till he was restored to perfect health. I wait to hear who will either disprove this fact, or philosophically account for it.”—Vol. iii. p. 275.
    Mr. Bramwell’s biographer writes:—
    “I was once attacked by a violent pleuritic fever, when all around me despaired of my life. Many of our kind friends visited me in my affliction; and almost unceasing supplication was offered up to God for my recovery. But all prayers appeared to be without effect till Mr. Bramwell came home out of the circuit. He immediately came to see me, and on entering the room was quite astonished at beholding such a woeful change in my appearance. He thought. I had all the marks of a speedy dissolution upon me; and giving me a look of the greatest sympathy he raised my head a little higher by means
    100
    of a pillow. He then went to the foot of the bed and began to pray to God in my behalf. His faith seemed to gain ground as he proceeded. He continued his intercessions with the greatest fervency; and, in agony, asked in submission to the will of God, that I might be restored. The Lord heard and answered his servant’s prayers; for I immediately experienced such a sweet tranquility and melting of soul, as I am unable to describe. From that moment my recovery commenced, and I was soon strong enough to resume my ordinary occupations.”—Memoir, pp. 163, 164.
    Mr. William Carvosso, who was sixty years a class-leader in the Wesleyan Methodist connection, gives an account of the healing of a sick woman as follows:—
    “The next morning, a friend asked me to visit a woman who was sick, and offered to accompany me. When we arrived at the house, we were informed she was very ill. I went up stairs and found her, to all appearance, on the borders of eternity. Finding that she had been three years a member of the society and knew nothing of salvation by the remission of her sins, I felt no little concern for the salvation of her soul.…I explained to her the plan of salvation.…’And now,’ said I, ‘it is a duty which God requires of you to believe in Jesus Christ and in the truth of his promises.’ While I was thus speaking to her she was seized in a strange manner; and it appeared to me and those present that she was dying. But in a moment or two she lifted up her hands and eyes to heaven, and cried out, ‘Glory be to God, I am healed! I am healed!’ And for some considerable time she kept on repeating,
    101
    ‘The Lord has healed me, body and soul.’
    “The news of this was soon conveyed to her neighbors, who rushed into the chamber in such crowds that I was afraid the beams would give way. But she continued saying, ‘The Lord has healed my body and my soul.’ We then kneeled down to praise the Lord for what he had done; and while engaged in prayer, two of those who came in were awakened and began to pray for mercy. With these distressed souls I was occupied four hours before I could leave the place. The next day Mr. Sibley, from Truro, came there to preach, and dined with us at the friend’s house where I lodged; when the friend who had been with me the preceding day related the circumstance to him. Having expressed a desire to see the woman, I went with him to the house; and to our very great astonishment, we found her down stairs, sitting by the fire. I visited her several times after this, and found her not only happy in God, but confirmed in her restoration of health. I have seen many of the mighty works of the Lord, both in convincing and converting sinners, but never before saw the body healed as well as the soul.”—Memoir of Carvosso, pp. 73-75.
    The memory of Hester Ann Rogers will ever be precious to the Christian world. In her journal of June 29, 1782, she says:—
    “This day the Lord instantaneously removed a rapid mortification in my dear mother’s limb, in answer to prayer. The doctor having given his opinion that in a few hours it would be fatal, I flew to my almighty Refuge, and felt I had power with God, through faith in that promise— ‘The prayer of faith shall save the sick.’ And
    102
    when in half an hour I looked again at the wound, all the bad symptoms were gone; and the same doctor, standing astonished, said no danger now appeared. I could not forbear weeping aloud for joy and gratitude, praising the God of my life.”
    “June 10, 1794. I had a peculiar season in wrestling prayer with my God this night, on account of my dear little Mary. The great weakness of her limbs for three months past, and her seeming total inability to walk, has caused much pain to my dear husband as well as myself. It appears to me I had used every possible means in vain. But this night I had power to cry unto my God, and tell him, ‘Thou art the same yesterday, to-day, and forever: thou art my God! Thou hast said, Call upon me in the day of trouble, and I will hear thee. Thou hast healed cripples, made the lame to walk, yea, raised even the dead in answer to praying faith! Lord, hear me now; stoop to my request; let the child’s feet and ankle bones receive strength; give power to walk, and let me soon know thou hast heard my prayer;’ and I had power to believe it would be done; my soul was filled with the divine presence.
    “Thursday, the 12th. I already see in the child an answer to my prayer. She is greatly strengthened in her limbs. How good, how faithful, how condescending is the Lord! We may—I may, like Abraham, like Moses, like Elijah, ask and obtain.”—Journal, pp. 116, 119, 120.
    What has been said of the early Methodists may be said in truth of the people known as Christians. I mean those who are now bearing the nick-name of New Lights. Elder William Kinkaid was a well-known writer, and minister, and missionary of that church. He said:—
    103
    “There have been in the bounds of my acquaintance many miraculous cures performed in answer to prayer. I have been acquainted with several of the people who were healed, conversed on the subject with the persons who were present at the time, and some of these cures I have seen myself. I as firmly believe that Elder David Haggard had the gift of healing, as that the apostles had. He has fallen asleep, but there are many alive who saw him perform cures, and what I saw myself puts the matter beyond doubt with me. I state these facts in honor to God, who, in every age of the world, has shown a willingness to bless his creatures in proportion to their faith and obedience.”—Bible Doctrine, p. 341.
    “Discerning of spirits” was set down by the apostle as one of the “gifts of the Spirit” which was “set in the church” according to the promise. The following instance of the exercise of the gift of discernment is recorded in the Memoir of Mr. Bramwell, whose sincerity, piety, and Christian graces were questioned by none:—
    “Mr. Bramwell was by no means of a censorious disposition; yet he had the gift of discerning the spirits and dispositions of men in a remarkable manner. I have frequently known him to detect impostors who have stepped forth to exercise in various meetings. On one occasion when he was desired to visit a dying man I went with him. We beheld the wretched object without a shirt to his back. The few rags which hung on him scarcely covered his body. His habitation was a damp, miserable cellar, and a woman was attending him who was represented to be his wife. For some time after our entrance
    104
    into this dwelling, Mr. Bramwell remained silent. At length he exclaimed, ‘All is not right here! I am clear there is something amiss in this place!’ Then turning to the woman he said, ‘This man is not your husband. You never were married to him, but for several years you have been living together in sin and wickedness!’ His word went with power to their hearts. They both wept exceedingly, acknowledging the charge to be true, and began to entreat the Lord to have mercy upon them.”—Memoir, p. 155.
    Other instances in his life might be given, but we omit them for the sake of brevity, promising to refer to facts which have occurred in the present generation as notable as any recorded in the times of the reformers, Luther and Wesley.
    The following cases of deliverance from enraged enemies are recorded by John Wesley and Dr. Adam Clarke. While the facts cannot be disputed we must look upon them as direct interpositions of divine grace, and as truly miraculous as any case recorded in the New Testament:—
    “The circumstances that follow I thought were particularly remarkable: That many endeavored to throw me down while we were going down hill on a slippery path to the town; as well judging, that if I was once on the ground I should hardly rise any more. But I made no stumble at all, nor the least slip, till I was entirely out of their hands. That although many strove to lay hold on my collar and clothes, to pull me down, they could not fasten at all: only one got fast hold of the flap of my waistcoat, which was soon left in his hand; the other flap, in the pocket of which was a bank-note, was torn but half off.
    105
    That a lusty man just behind, struck at me several times with a large oaken stick; with which if he had struck me once on the back part of my head it would have saved him further trouble. But every time the blow was turned aside, I know not how; for I could not move the right hand nor the left. That another came rushing through the press, and raising his arm to strike suddenly let it drop and only stroked my head, saying, ‘What soft hair he has!’ That I stopped exactly at the Mayor’s door as if I had known it (which the mob doubtless thought I did) and found him standing in the shop, which gave the first check to the madness of the people. That the very first men whose hearts were turned were the heroes of the town, the captains of the rabble on all occasions, one of them having been a prize-fighter at the bear garden.…. By how gentle degrees does God prepare us for his will! Two years ago a piece of brick grazed my shoulder. It was a year after that the stone struck me between the eyes. Last month I received one blow, and this evening two; one before we came into the town, and one after we had gone out; but both were as nothing; for though one man struck me on the breast with all his might, and the other on the mouth with such force that the blood gushed out immediately, I felt no more pain from either of the blows than if they had touched me with a straw.”—Wesley’s Journal, vol. iii. pp. 297, 298.
    Dr. Clarke’s account is as follows:—
    “A missionary who had been sent to a strange land to proclaim the gospel of the kingdom of God, and who had passed through many hardships,
    106
    and was often in danger of losing his life through the persecutions excited against him, came to a place where he had often before, at no small risk, preached Christ crucified. About fifty people who had received impressions from the word of God, assembled. He began his discourse, and after he had preached about thirty minutes, an outrageous mob surrounded the house armed with different instruments of death, and breathing the most sanguinary purposes. Some that were within shut the door; and the missionary and his flock betook themselves to prayer. The mob assailed the house and began to throw stones against the walls, windows, and roof; and in a short time almost every tile was destroyed, and the roof nearly uncovered, and before they quitted the premises, scarcely left one square inch of glass in the five windows by which the house was enlightened. While this was going forward a person came with a pistol to the window opposite to the place where the preacher stood (who was then exhorting his flock to be steady, to resign themselves to God, and trust in him), presented it at him and snapped it, but it only flashed in the pan! As the house was a wooden building, they began with crows and spades to undermine it and take away its principal supports. The preacher then addressed his little flock to this effect: ‘These outrageous people seek not you but me; if I continue in the house they will soon tear it down, and we shall all be buried in the ruins; I will, therefore, in the name of God, go out to them, and you will be safe.’ He then went toward the door: the poor people got around him and entreated him not to venture out, as he might expect to be instantly massacred.
    107
    He went calmly forward, opened the door, at which a whole volley of stones and dirt was that instant discharged; but he received no damage. The people were in crowds in all the space before the door, and filled the road for a considerable way, so that there was no room to pass or repass. As soon as the preacher made his appearance, the savages became instantly as silent and as still as night; he walked forward, and they divided to the right and to the left, leaving a passage about four feet wide, for him and a young man who followed him to walk in. He passed on through the whole crowd, not a soul of whom either lifted a hand or spoke one word, till he and his companion had gained the uttermost skirts of the mob. The narrator, who was present on the occasion, goes on to say: ‘This was one of the most affecting spectacles I ever witnessed; an infuriated mob without any visible cause (for the preacher spoke not one word), became in a moment as calm as lambs. They seemed struck with amazement bordering on stupefaction; they stared and stood speechless; and after they had fallen back to right and left to leave him a free passage, they were as motionless as statues! They assembled with the full purpose to destroy the man who came to show them the way of salvation; but he, passing through the midst of them, went his way. Was not the God of missionaries in this work?’”
    By reference to the “Life of Adam Clarke,” it will be seen that the “missionary” above referred to was no other than Clarke himself. From page 209 we take the following:— “During the whole time of his (Clarke’s) passing
    108
    through the mob there was a death-like silence, nor was there any motion, but that which was necessary to give him a free passage. Either their eyes were holden that they could not know him; or they were so overawed by the power of God that they could not lift a hand, or utter a word against him. The poor people, finding all was quiet, came out a little after, and passed away, not one of them being either hurt or molested. In a few minutes the mob seemed to awake as from a dream, and finding that their prey had been plucked out of their teeth, they knew not how, they attacked the house afresh, broke every square of glass in the windows, and scarcely left a whole tile upon the roof. He afterward learned that the design of the mob was to put him in the sluice of an over-shot water— wheel, by which he must necessarily have been crushed to pieces.”
    It would seem that no one could read this without being struck with the conviction that an angel of God accompanied this humble servant of the Lord as he passed through the midst of the enraged mob who sought his life. What but the power of God could have held them thus in quiet, peaceably making way to him whose life they came to take, until he passed beyond their reach? He who said, “Lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world,” always means what he says, and always fulfills his promises. He never changes and it is as safe to trust him now as it ever was.

    To be continued…

    THE SPIRIT OF GOD:– ITS – OFFICES AND MANIFESTATIONS, TO THE END OF THE CHRISTIAN AGE.

    BY ELD. J. H. WAGGONER.  1877


Monday, January 14, 2019

The Holy Spirit Given Still Today.


THE SPIRIT OF GOD:– ITS – OFFICES AND MANIFESTATIONS, TO THE END OF THE CHRISTIAN AGE.

BY ELD. J. H. WAGGONER.  1877

Continued…

CHAPTER VII.
THE GREAT COMMISSION
“Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost; teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you; and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world.” Matt. 28:19, 20.
“Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned. And these signs shall follow them that believe: In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues; they shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.” Mark 16:15-18.
These texts are parallel, and they cast light upon each other. We admit that the expression, “the end of the world,” might be rendered, “the end of the age,” but it refers, of course, to that age in which the gospel was to be preached, that is, the gospel dispensation. And this is proof that the commission was not designed for the apostles alone, nor yet for their immediate successors, as is often claimed, for they could not preach the gospel to the end of the age or dispensation. This commission is as extensive as the preaching of the gospel was designed to be.
Now, as the passages quoted are parallel, the expression, “I am with you,” in one, is the equivalent of the manifestations of the power of
79
 the Spirit or the signs to follow, in the other. When Jesus said he is, or would be, in the midst where two or three are gathered together in his name, all understand that he meant, not personally but, by the Spirit. We learn from the Scriptures that, as the Son represented the Father, even so the Spirit represents the Son. As Jesus came in his Father’s name, John 5:43, so did the Spirit come in his name, John 14:26. And he promised to be with them to the end of the world. The evidence that he is with them, that the promise is fulfilled, is found in the signs of the Spirit’s presence and power, which were to follow them that believe. This is made very plain in Acts 2, where the promise first commenced its fulfillment.
When the commission was given they were told to tarry at Jerusalem until they were endued with power from on high. Accordingly they remained at Jerusalem and did not preach any until the day of Pentecost, when the promised power came. It cannot be disputed that their labor under this commission commenced on that day of Pentecost.
And we can trace an exact parallel between the commission of the Saviour and the preaching of Peter on that day. By this parallel the application of this subject is made clear and certain. Jesus in the commission, said that believers should be baptized, and, these signs shall follow them that believe. Peter, acting under this commission, said, Repent and be baptized, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. We see by the reading of Acts 2 that the promise of the Holy Ghost which was offered to believers on the day of Pentecost was the same promise
80
that was fulfilled to the apostles on that day. This also is made sure by the parallel which we have pointed out between the commission and the preaching of Peter on that day of Pentecost. Peter, in opening the work under that commission, commanded them to be baptized, because the Saviour, in giving the commission, said the believers should be baptized. In like manner, Peter said they should receive the gift of the Holy Ghost, because the Saviour said these signs shall follow them that believe. Therefore the gift of the Holy Ghost which Peter promised to them who received the gospel, is the exact equivalent of the signs which the Saviour said shall follow them that believe.
This conclusion cannot by any means be avoided, and it is decisive as showing the scope of the promise set forth by Peter on that day of Pentecost. It proves most conclusively that the signs were to follow them that believed even unto the end of the world, and were matters of promise to as many as the Lord our God shall call.
And with this agree the history of the early church, and the instruction given by the apostles. These gifts were in the church in the apostolic age; and they were not confined to the apostles nor to the ministers of the gospel.
Agabus was a prophet. Philip the evangelist had four daughters who had the gift of prophecy. This was according to the promise made by Joel, as quoted by Peter: “Your sons and your daughters shall prophesy”, and, “on my servants and on my handmaidens I will pour out in those days of my Spirit.” The promise of the Saviour in the commission is the same; for “them that believe” embraces males and females, sons and
81
daughters, alike. In the instruction of the apostles to the churches they make such reference to the gifts as to confirm the view that the gifts were quite general among the believers.
Paul wrote to the church of Corinth to “covet earnestly the best gifts,” but rather the gift of prophecy as being most useful to the whole body for their edification. He said:—
“I would that ye all spake with tongues, but rather that ye prophesied.” 1 Cor. 14:5.
This statement is not consistent with the idea that the gifts were to be confined to the laborers in the ministry. This whole chapter contains instruction to the church at large in regard to the operations of the Spirit among them. Of the benefits of the gift of prophecy he says:—
“But if all prophesy, and there come in one that believeth not, or one unlearned, he is convinced of all, he is judged of all. And thus are the secrets of his heart made manifest; and so falling down on his face he will worship God, and report that God is in you of a truth.” Verses 24, 25.
Thus Paul has stated, first, his desire that they might have the gift of prophecy; then, the usefulness of this gift, both to the church and to the conversion of unbelievers; and, finally, he speaks of what actually existed among them, thus:—
“When ye come together, every one of you hath a psalm, hath a doctrine [or instruction], hath a tongue [i. e., a gift of tongues], hath a revelation, hath an interpretation. Let all things be done unto edifying.” Verse 26.
Paul did not disapprove of these things, but gave such directions in regard to the use of their gifts as seemed necessary for their growth, and
82
 that the gifts of God’s Spirit might not be abused nor perverted. For he had before exhorted them to desire spiritual gifts, and to covet earnestly the best gifts. And again he said:—
“Forasmuch as ye are zealous of spiritual gifts, seek that ye may excel to the edifying of the church.” Verse 12.
In furtherance of this object he directs that he that hath a tongue, or the gift of tongues, shall keep silence in the church unless there be an interpreter, because others would not be edified by his speaking if it were not interpreted. But upon the gift of prophecy in the church no such restraint was laid. Of that he said:— “For ye may all prophesy one by one, that all may learn, and all may be comforted.” Verse 31.
In like manner he instructed the church at Rome. We observe that his argument in 1 Cor. 12, concerning the various members of the body, has respect to the gifts of the Spirit set in the church. And so to the Romans, carrying out the same idea, he says:—
“For as we have many members in one body, and all members have not the same office; so we, being many, are one body in Christ, and every one members one of another. Having then gifts differing according to the grace that is given to us, whether prophecy, let us prophesy according to the proportion of faith; or ministry, let us wait on our ministering; or he that teacheth, on teaching; or he that exhorteth, on exhortation;” etc. Rom. 12:4-8.
The mutual dependence of the gifts, one on the other, is shown in this text as it is in 1 Cor. 12. In that he says one member may not say to another, I have no need of thee. And those
83
least esteemed are often most useful and necessary. So in Rom. 12:5 it is said, Ye are members one of another. That is, to have a perfect and efficiently active body the members must all be perfectly united together. The hand is confessedly one of the most useful members of the body; but its connection with the head, and consequent usefulness, depends entirely on its connection with the wrist, arm, etc. Were it connected directly with the head, without the intervention of other members, it would be of no use, and mostly an incumbrance. In all this we are taught that we should receive with humble reverence whatever God has set in the church; for he who formed the body knows best the wants of the body, and best understands the proper order of its members.
James, writing “to the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad,” directs that prayer be offered for the sick, with the assurance that “the Lord will raise him up.” There is no force nor reason in the objection often urged, that answers to prayer in that manner are not now given. If that were true (but it is not), it would argue nothing against the certainty of the promise, for we might possibly find a reason for it in the following scripture, Isa. 59:1, 2:—
“Behold, the Lord’s hand is not shortened, that it cannot save; neither his ear heavy, that it cannot hear; but your iniquities have separated between you and your God, and your sins have hid his face from you, that he will not hear.”
The duty and privilege of prayer are greatly abused. While things which God has never promised are made subjects of prayer, to pray for the things which he has promised is often to subject ourselves to ridicule and reproach. As faith
84
is not without the word of God, Rom. 10:17, so there is no genuine hope unless it is fixed on the promise of God. Heb. 6:12-19. The custom now prevailing of praying all over the world, and concerning everything upon which the fancy chances to rest, and of slighting and neglecting those blessings which we immediately need and which God has promised to bestow, is practical infidelity in regard to the faithfulness of God. It is no test of faith to pray for things which we do not immediately need, or which, if granted, are so far removed from our personal experience and observation that we could not realize the answer. To pray for the heathen in a distant land, for the restoration of Israel, or for the conversion of the world, may gratify general religious feelings and satisfy the conscience in regard to the duty to pray; but that will never satisfy our consciousness that God is a present help in time of need, and that he exercises an immediate providential care over his people.
They who think lightly of praying for the Spirit of God, which Jesus assures us will be given in answer to prayer; or for the sick, whom James says the Lord will raise up in answer to prayer; or for any other blessing which is directly promised, really reproach God as if he would not fulfill his word. They are of those who are reproved because they “say in their heart, The Lord will not do good, neither will he do evil;” Zeph. 1:12; or of the perverse ones who say, “The Lord hath forsaken the earth.” Ezek. 8:12; 9:9. They think the Lord has no care for our wants, and will not regard our petitions. But he who hears the cry of the young ravens, and notices the fall of the
85
sparrow of the field, and numbers the hairs of the heads of his children, will not turn away from their cry when they are in affliction.
No reason can be given to show that this promise of James is not of general application and for all time. The frequent references in this chapter to the coming of the Lord, prove that it may be claimed by those who live in the last days (see Jas. 5:1-8), who have the assurance that “the coming of the Lord draweth nigh.”
Nor can it in truth be said that to claim answers to prayer in such manner begets egotism and self-confidence in religion. The reverse of this is truth. Nothing so makes a person feel his insufficiency—his entire dependence on God—as to be brought before him as a petitioner for a present—needed blessing. General blessings, or things afar off, may be prayed for with the unconcern of a formalist, or the self-complacency of a Pharisee; but to ask for a present blessing with the expectation of a present answer, is calculated to greatly humble the petitioner, to give a sense of entire dependence, and to produce exalted views of the faithfulness of God and trust in his providential care. Thus there is practical utility of great importance in the acceptance of these precious promises of direct answer to prayer, and in relying upon the gifts which God has graciously set in the church “for the edifying of the body of Christ.”
And thus it is shown that: 1. The commission embraces faith, obedience, and the signs or gifts of the Spirit. 2. The first preaching under the commission, on the day of Pentecost, embraced the same points; the same duty and
 86
the same blessing were presented to those who believed the gospel. 3. The history of the church shows that these continued in the church. 4. The instructions of the apostles prove that they looked upon the gifts as belonging to the church for all time. 5. The promise in the commission runs “to the end of the world,” or gospel age, which proves that the commission was intended to cover the entire age; while not a sentence can be found to show that it was limited by any time but the end of the world.
No truth of the Bible can be more clearly proved than this, that the signs following the believers, spoken of by the Saviour in the great commission, are identical with the gift of the Holy Spirit which was promised by the apostles who first preached under that commission on the day of Pentecost; and these signs were designed to continue in the church as long as the commission is of force, or as long as the gospel is preached.
But some object that the commission itself was limited to the apostles, and expired with them, and, therefore, they say that promise is no longer extended to believers. Let us look at the result of this affirmation. The commission included two prominent points: a duty and a promise. The duty is baptism; the promise is the signs or gift of the Holy Spirit. When the apostles first preached under this commission these two were associated. Now, if the promise is annulled by the expiration of the commission, then the duty enjoined has also expired. It cannot be controverted that the apostles baptized under this commission, and by no other authority. Therefore, if the commission was for the apostles only, and expired with them, then there has existed no authority
87
to baptize since their day; for no other authority in the gospel can be shown by which they or any others ever baptized. And it is a noteworthy fact that they who deny the perpetuity of the gifts, and of the commission under which they were promised to believers, yet go directly to Acts, to that day of Pentecost, for authority to baptize, both for precept and example. Such inconsistency on their part is evidence that they are in error. This thought should lead to more carefulness in taking their positions; for all can see that they are in error in regard to the commission and the gifts, or else the baptism they administer is unauthorized and unscriptural.
The perpetuity of the gifts is the subject of direct remark by another apostle who acted under this same commission, in 1 Cor. 13:9, 10:—
“For we know in part, and we prophesy in part. But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away.”
It is a truth to be deplored that men are sometimes so blinded as to rest their cause on the very texts which testify against them, as this has often been quoted by those who deny the perpetuity of the gifts. It is easy to catch at the sound of the words, “done away,” but quite another thing to point out the time when this shall be fulfilled. In regard to that we read farther:—
“For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known.” Verse 12.
This shows that Paul looked forward to a time when he should know more and see more clearly than he then did by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. And when we consider that he had been caught up to the third heaven, and by “visions
88
and revelations” had heard unspeakable words which it was not possible for a man to utter, and which, of course, exceeded in wisdom and glory all that he could speak or write, we see at a glance that the time is not yet in which that perfect is come; for the church has not yet attained unto wisdom and knowledge greater than that which the apostles possessed by inspiration. Hence, “that which is in part” is not done away.
On this text, as on Eph. 4: 8-11, an erroneous position is taken in reference to the object of the gifts. It has often been asserted that the gifts were conferred for the sole purpose of establishing the gospel in perfecting the canon of Scripture, and when the Revelation was completed they were withdrawn. But, as before said, when the apostles speak of the reasons of their being bestowed, that is never mentioned as being one of them. Not for the perfecting of a system of divinity, but “for the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry.” And so in 1 Cor. 13, it is not reaching unto the establishing of a perfect system of theology by revelation, but to a time when the inspired ones shall see more clearly and know more perfectly than they could by that inspiration. That time and position are not yet reached. We cannot know more nor see better by the aid of the revelation given than they could see and know who were inspired to give it. And especially is this true in regard to Paul, who saw and knew more than it was possible for him to write. And yet he knew only in part, and prophesied (for our instruction) only in part, and saw through a glass darkly, by the spirit of prophecy, compared to how we shall see and know when that which is perfect is come. Language could
89
 hardly be framed to more clearly teach the perpetuity of the gifts, to show that the time is not yet come for them to be done away, than it is taught in 1 Cor. 13.
The sum of all objections will be found to amount to this: They have ceased; therefore it was the design of the Lord that they should cease. But this is no reason at all; certainly it is no valid argument in favor of their having been abolished. In that manner a great declension of piety might be offered as proof that it was not designed that the spirit of piety was to be perpetuated in the church. But where is the evidence that they have been done away? Where is the evidence that they have not been in existence since the days of the apostles? Such evidence does not exist. But in favor of a position involving such consequences some clear and decisive evidence should be produced.
On the other hand, it is shown that the Scriptures contemplated their perpetuity. And in harmony with their teachings there is evidence clear and strong that they have existed since the days of the apostles. Moreover, there is proof that they exist even in our own generation. And why not? If they existed for a single century after the apostles, there is no reason, except the unbelief in the church, why they should not still exist. We call special attention to the following proposition: If a single well-attested instance of the manifestation of the Spirit of prophecy, or of any gift of the Spirit, can be produced this side of the apostles, then the force of every argument and of every objection against their perpetuity throughout the Christian dispensation is entirely destroyed.

To be continued…

Sunday, January 13, 2019

The Bible and the Bible Only.


    THE SPIRIT OF GOD:– ITS – OFFICES AND MANIFESTATIONS, TO THE END OF THE CHRISTIAN AGE.

    BY ELD. J. H. WAGGONER.  1877

    CHAPTER VI.
    TRY THE SPIRITS
    “Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits, whether they are of God; because many false prophets are gone out into the world.” 1 John 4:1.
    That truth lies between extremes, is an old saying. On the subject now under consideration we find opposites of error; some accept every manifestation of power as from the Spirit of God, or from good spirits, while others discard every manifestation of spirit power as evil. One class overlook the injunction of the text; they do not “try the spirits whether they are of God,” but accept all without discrimination. The other class ignore the command given through Paul when he was speaking of the Spirit, to “prove all things; hold fast that which is good.” They will not take the pains to prove anything of the nature of a manifestation of the Spirit; they reject all, and without a trial.
    The first class are again divided into two parties, and to these we will at present give our attention. One of these parties is easily disposed of. It embraces all the Spiritualists of this age. That the media possess power, or are possessed by spirits, no one will deny who has examined the facts of their manifestations, and studied the prophecies which relate to them.
    N. P. Talmadge, an eminent and noted Spiritualist, in the preface to the book entitled, “Healing of the Nations,” claimed that 1 Cor. 12:6-10, is fulfilled in Modern Spiritualism; but in the
    69
    enumeration of the gifts which he copied from that chapter, he carefully excluded every sentence from which we can learn that all divine manifestations are by “one and the self-same Spirit.” This is a sufficient condemnation of all the theories and phenomena of Spiritualism, for in that, instead of “a diversity of gifts, but the same Spirit,” we find a great diversity of spirits. Spiritualists do not occupy, either in theory or practice, the position of God’s people upon whom he is pleased to bestow the gifts of his Spirit. They deny Jesus Christ, through whom alone “the promise of the Spirit” is given. Nothing more is needed to show that their gifts are spurious. The Scriptures represent them as “seducing spirits,” and their teachings as the “doctrines of devils.” We cannot deny their power, for they are again spoken of as “the spirits of devils working miracles.”
    The other party to which we have referred is composed of the “Latter-day Saints,” or Mormons. They have always claimed to have the gifts among them. The fact of their making this claim has, perhaps more than all else, created a prejudice against the truth, and brought this important doctrine into disrepute. These differ from Spiritualists in that they profess faith in Christ, and preach and claim the power of the Spirit only as a fulfillment of the promises of the gospel. And because of this claim and their profession of strong faith in Christ and the gospel, many are led to believe their gifts are genuine. But when we “try the spirits” by the gospel standard we shall find that these also are mere counterfeits of the gifts of the gospel. There are
    70
    certain rules to determine their character, given by the Saviour, which we will now examine.
    “Beware of false prophets.” A true prophet has a gift of the Spirit of God. False prophets may be of two kinds; mere pretenders, having no gifts at all, or, having spurious gifts by an evil spirit. The Saviour says, “Ye shall know them by their fruits.” We will make this our first ground of examination.
    1. The Mormons are well known to be egotistical and boastful of their gifts. Anywhere and everywhere they are ready to thrust their claims upon our notice. But boasting is excluded by the law of faith. Rom. 3:27. Humility and meekness of spirit can alone secure the blessings of the Spirit of God.
    2. Not only the boastfulness of their profession, but also the fruits of their lives have been inconsistent with the teachings and spirit of the gospel. They have manifested a spirit of worldly selfishness, and a disregard of the rights of others which is the reverse of that self-denying love to our neighbor which characterizes the true followers of Christ. Joseph Smith, the founder, leader, and prophet of the sect, set up a bank in Kirtland, Ohio, which proved to be a swindling concern. At Nauvoo a city charter was obtained and he became Mayor of the city. He placed his followers on a war footing, and he was Commander-in-Chief of the “Nauvoo Legion.” His conceit and ambition were so unbounded that he even announced himself a candidate for President of the United States! Outlaws were protected in the city over which he presided with despotic power. Freedom of speech was not allowed; a press was destroyed which was established with
    71
    the avowed purpose of exposing the iniquity of the place; the mob was screened, and it was openly talked by the leading men that no opposition press would be allowed in the city. They disregarded and even denied the rights of “the Gentiles,” as they called all who were not of their number. And their history at Salt Lake has shown a condition of despotism, oppression, and immorality even worse than at Nauvoo.
    1. In regard to the influence of their pretended gifts we will relate the substance of a conversation held a few years since with an aged person living in North-eastern Ohio not far from Kirtland. He was a Morman while Smith was in Kirtland, and remained a Mormon up to the time of our acquaintance with him. He admitted that there was iniquity among them in Kirtland, equal in amount to what common report had it. “But,” said he, “those wicked ones were not Mormons. They came among them for selfish purposes, and whenever their wrongs were found out they professed to repent, and the church was obliged to retain them.”
    Our answer was that the gifts of the Spirit were given for the perfection of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ. They professed to have all these gifts. Where then was their discernment, that they could not detect hypocrisy and expose wickedness, and so put it from their midst?
    He replied that it was reasonable to suppose that where all the gifts existed the church should have been purified to a greater extent than it was there. He said he could not understand it.
    The explanation is easily given: Their gifts were spurious; they were not of the Spirit of
    72
    God, and did not tend to purify the body, or to perfect the saints. The spirit of error was with them from the beginning, and it showed itself in both their doctrines and practices. The Roman hierarchy never showed a greater love for worldly pre-eminence, or greater disregard for the moral and legal rights of those who opposed them. It was truly fortunate for the peace and security of the people that they were not permitted to grasp the power which they coveted, and which they strove to obtain. They emigrated to Utah only because they would not live in peace with their neighbors. Because their leaders would not submit to the laws of the land, they sought a place where they could rule without restraint. We speak only those things which are well known to be true, and we are willing to leave it with the candid that the evidence of their fruits is all against the genuineness of their gifts.
    It is true that there are two parties of Mormons. Within a few years Joseph Smith, Jr., has headed a party repudiating Brigham Young, denying his authority, and opposing some of the abominations of Salt Lake. But Brigham Young succeeded Smith at Nauvoo, and was long recognized as the head of the Mormon people, and even now those who oppose him are a small minority. Young’s authority was established on the ground of the succession, and the assumption that he was gifted with prophetic power. Now if this was all a mistake, if the whole body of “the Saints” were deceived in regard to the claims of Young, as the other party assert, if the gift of prophecy was not conferred on him, then it is proved that their argument respecting the gifts is no evidence that they are the people of
    73
    God, or, in other words, that their gifts are genuine. The claims of the two parties, that of Utah and that of Illinois, are based on the same arguments respecting the gifts and the same assumption that the gifts are manifested among them. Therefore that argument, and their claim that they possess the gifts, are shown to be no evidence in their favor. Each denounces the other, while both stand on the same ground. Some have been led to believe that they have the true faith because of their gifts, but it is shown that we must determine their standing by some other rule of judgment.
    The Saviour has given that rule in Matt. 7:21-23. This is a continuation of his warning against false prophets. He says:—
    “Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of Heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in Heaven.”
    By this we are taught that faith in Jesus Christ will not procure an entrance into the kingdom of Heaven without obedience to his Father. Having thus introduced the time and circumstance of entering into the kingdom, he continues:—
    “Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me ye that work iniquity.”
    Again, granting all that the Mormons claim, that they prophesy in the name of Jesus, and in his name do many wonderful works, this text shows positively that that fact is no evidence that they are his followers. All this may characterize
    74
    the self-deceived; and this profession is made by those who work iniquity, and who are, therefore, commanded to depart from him when the faithful enter into the kingdom. Compare Matt. 25:34-41.
    To make more clear the application of the text above quoted we notice two points:—
    1. Iniquity is lawlessness, or law-breaking. So the original means. Greenfield defines it, “violation of a law, iniquity, improbity, sin;” from “anomos, lawless, without law, not subject to law; violating the law, wicked, impious, a transgressor.” So it is given in the Emphatic Diaglott. And so we find it in Ex. 20:5, 6, the second commandment: “Visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me; and showing mercy unto thousands of them that love me and keep my commandments.” Observe the contrast; hatred is placed in opposition to love, and iniquity in opposition to keeping the commandments of God. Therefore those described in the text are they who cry to Jesus, Lord, Lord, but do not the will of his Father—they do not keep the law of God. They unite the profession of faith and the claim of the gifts of the Spirit, with iniquity or disregard of the commandments of God. And it is a fact which has lately been confirmed to us by reading and by conversation, that the Mormons take antinomian ground, teaching that the commandments of God are abolished. Said the wise man, “Where there is no vision, the people perish; but he that keepeth the law, happy is he.” They who keep the law are happy; they do not perish. They who transgress the law, or work iniquity, have no
    75
    vision from God; they perish, for Jesus will say to them, “Depart from me.” No matter how loud their profession; no matter how “many wonderful works” they do in the name of Jesus, they are still self-deceived; their gifts are described in Ezek. 13, as a vain vision and a lying divination. “He that turneth away his ear from hearing the law, even his prayer shall be abomination.” Prov. 28:9. He that rejects the law of God, his religion is vain. How, then, shall God bestow upon him the precious gifts of his Spirit? We repeat what we have said, antinomianism and the Spirit do not—they cannot—go together.
    1. We admit that the gifts were lost to the church because of apostasy; and as she recovers from the darkness by true, genuine reform, the gifts shall be restored. This is according to the teaching of the Scriptures. But we insist that they are not restored among the “Latter-day Saints”, or Mormons. Their “fruits” stand as their condemnation.
    The restoration is brought to view in Rev. 12:17. “The remnant” here spoken of are the last state of the church; the same that are spoken of in Rev. 14:12, just before the Lord Jesus comes to reap the harvest of the earth. This remnant “have the testimony of Jesus Christ.” Now the angel said, in Rev. 19:10, “The testimony of Jesus is the Spirit of prophecy.” This is sufficient proof that the church in the last days will have the Spirit of prophecy. But this company are also said to “keep the commandments of God,” as it is said of them in Rev. 14:12, “Here are they that keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus.” This, surely, is not fulfilled
    76
    in those who “make void the law through faith;” see Rom. 3:31; who professedly substitute the faith of Jesus for the commandments of God, instead of keeping both together.
    But that is the position of the Mormons; they reject the law of God; they make void the commandments by their traditions, and are therefore workers of iniquity. Their profession of faith in Christ will not save them in the day when he comes to give to the little flock the kingdom. Their gifts will not procure his favor, because their lives are not right in his sight. Their spirit is a spirit of error, leading to darkness and delusion. “By their fruits ye shall know them;” not by their profession; not even by their wonderful works in the name of Jesus, for these are nothing without obedience to the law of the Father.
    We have seen that in the second commandment love of God is associated with keeping his commandments. In truth there is no love where obedience is lacking. Says an apostle, “This is the love of God, that we keep his commandments.” 1 John 5:3. Love and obedience are inseparable. This enables us to appreciate the words of Paul in 1 Cor. 13:1, 2:—
    “Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not love, I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal. And though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries, and all knowledge; and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have not love, I am nothing.”
    Now we discover the harmony between the words of our Saviour in Matt. 7, and the words of Paul in the above text. Bearing in mind that
    77
    iniquity is violation of the law, and love is the keeping of the law, the Saviour shows that to prophesy and to do wonderful works in his name will not secure an entrance into the kingdom to such as work iniquity. Likewise, Paul says that the gift of prophecy and faith to remove mountains is nothing without the love of God.
    It is only by examining these texts that we can appreciate the force of Rev. 12:17, that the remnant keep the commandments of God and have the testimony of Jesus, the Spirit of prophecy; and we are distinctly informed in both Testaments that they who reject the law worship in vain; they are workers of iniquity; they will be told to depart from the presence of Jesus in the great day of his wrath.
    These scriptures apply to the Mormons more directly than to any other people of this age. They have never occupied the position of those who are pointed out in the word of God as preparing to meet the Lord at his appearing. They have not fulfilled the prophecy of the remnant in any particular. And we entreat all who have been tempted to regard them as the people of God because of their supposed possession of the gifts, to “try the spirits whether they are of God;” to examine more closely the words of the Saviour in Matt. 7:15-23; and to study more carefully the position of the remnant who are accepted of the Lord when he comes to give the kingdom to his little flock. And let us each individually see to it that we are of that number “who keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.”
    “Where there is no vision, the people perish; but he that keepeth the law, happy is he.”

    (((My note:  After reading this I took it upon myself to study more about the Mormon (LDS) religion in light of today. The fact that they still to this day hold the Book of Mormon as well as others not of the Bible as standards to their religion is true. They believe their founder Joseph Smith was a prophet who was given special instructions to write an addition to the Bible as being factual and from God. Their founder used a seer stone to interpret golden plates he found guided by an angel- this is the heart of their religion and without their book of mormon (as well as others) they would not have a religion as such. Their religion does not stand on the Bible and the Bible only, but they've added extensively to God's word through their own self-proclaimed prophets. If our standard is the Bible and the Bible only, we cannot hold with their religion and in truth, trying the spirits whether they are of God… will reveal much contradiction.  Isa 8:20  To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them. 

    Luk_24:27  And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself.

    Rev 1:1  The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John: 
    Rev 1:2  Who bare record of the word of God, and of the testimony of Jesus Christ, and of all things that he saw. 
    Rev 1:3  Blessed is he that readeth, and they that hear the words of this prophecy, and keep those things which are written therein: for the time is at hand. 

    Rev 22:18  For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: 
    Rev 22:19  And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book. 
    Rev 22:20  He which testifieth these things saith, Surely I come quickly. Amen. Even so, come, Lord Jesus. 
    Rev 22:21  The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all. Amen. 

    Additional note- while the Bible and its contents have been proven historically correct time and time again through archeological discoveries, this is written about Mormonism-

    Lee Strobel comments about the Book of Mormon: "Archaeology has repeatedly failed to substantiate its claims about events that supposedly occurred long ago in the Americas. I remember writing to the Smithsonian Institute to inquire about whether there was any evidence supporting the claims of Mormonism, only to be told in unequivocal terms that its archaeologists see 'no direct connection between the archaeology of the New World and the subject matter of the book.'" Archaeologists have never located cities, persons, names, or places mentioned in the Book of Mormon.3

    Also note- there are many religions that hold a lot of light, but just enough error to be very corrupt- the Seventh-day Adventist Church organization is one of these as well. Even though the writer of this book we are studying is a SDA from 1877, it doesn't mean the church itself adhered to its original beliefs, it did not.

    Truly the Bible and the Bible only has to be our standard.

    Here is a link to a very informative article: https://www.everystudent.com/features/bible.html

Saturday, January 12, 2019

Remission of Sins- No Sin Without the Law.


THE SPIRIT OF GOD:– ITS – OFFICES AND MANIFESTATIONS, TO THE END OF THE CHRISTIAN AGE.

BY ELD. J. H. WAGGONER.  1877

CHAPTER V.
THE LAW AND THE TESTIMONY
+
Continued…

The evidence on the relation of the law of God and the gifts of the Spirit we have given only in part. It deserves further examination. According to Rev. 12:17, war will be made with the remnant who keep the commandments of God and have the testimony of Jesus. This shows both the perfect agreement between keeping the law and having the power of the Spirit, and the opposition which will exist, and already exists to a great extent, against the law and the testimony. It is a truth well known that the indignation of the world and a worldly church is quickly aroused against those who keep all the commandments of God in all things, just as they were written and spoken by the Lord. But nothing seems so readily to arouse the prejudice, yes, the hatred and malice, of the carnal mind, as the manifestation of the Spirit of prophecy. The world bestows its incredulous smile as if it pitied the folly of those who could embrace the promise of God as a reality; that incredulous smile often proving more cutting than the severest language; while a proud and worldly church cannot restrain its feelings of scorn or abhorrence of those who humbly and reverently claim “the promise of the
59
Spirit” according to the words of both Christ and his apostles. Surely the fulfillment of the prophecy, Rev. 12:17, is no mystery to those who are intently watching the signs of the times, and have noted the feelings of popular religionists toward those who dare to reprove the lukewarmness of the present age in which so many have “the form of godliness, but deny the power thereof.”
This connection between the law and the means and benefits of the gospel is logically deduced from the preaching of the apostle on the day of Pentecost. That the law was not abolished at the crucifixion is proved in this, that not a sermon was preached, not a duty made known, between the crucifixion and the day of Pentecost; and the first duties enjoined on that day were those of repentance for sin, and of baptism for the remission of sin. Now it is plain to see that if the law was previously abolished, and if men were to look to the apostles for the proclamation of a new code, then the whole transaction was a failure, inasmuch as “where no law is there is no transgression,” and of course no call for repentance. Again, “sin is not imputed when there is no law,” and therefore to preach baptism for remission of sin when no law existed would be a sheer absurdity. If the law which had existed were abolished at the cross, no one could be convicted under it, and as no law for the new dispensation had yet been given by the apostles, it would follow necessarily that no one was at that time bound by any law; sin could not be imputed to them at all. Therefore, according to this antinomian notion the preaching of repentance and baptism at that time was a nullity—
60
mere sound without sense. Thus it is easily shown that the doctrine of the antinomians—the no-law theorists— more than perverts the gospel; it subverts it; it saps its very foundations, leaving it destitute of life and power. It is virtually a rejection of the gospel both in its facts and in its promises.
It has been remarked that baptism has not only its form, but also its order and relations. It is often urged that if its form be changed—if it be no longer immersion or a burial, as the word signifies and the illustrations of Scripture indicate—it ceases to be the baptism of the gospel; and when administered under such change it is not valid. But let us consider its necessary relations. We learn that baptism is for remission of sin; also that sin is the transgression of the law, and that sin is not imputed when there is no law. Therefore if no law existed from the cross to the day of Pentecost, as must have been the case if the law was abolished at the cross, then there could be no sin imputed at that time, of which to repent or for which to be baptized. Now as baptism stands related to sin, and sin is related to an existing law, it follows that the law did exist, for sin was imputed to them.
Thus it is shown that Peter’s preaching would have been groundless and of no force if the law had been abolished. Even so now, all who preach the abolition of the law, preach a gospel (so-called) without any basis; it is a nullity. As it is a nullity, and not the gospel in fact, not being a system of salvation from the transgression of the law, the baptism enjoined in such preaching is not truly gospel baptism; it is deprived of its relations and of its significance, and, therefore, of its
61
efficacy. And all who administer baptism under such teachings are offenders against the gospel.
This conclusion is logical; it is unavoidable, and is not drawn from this text alone. In Rom. 6:1-6, baptism is called a burial, and, of course, should be subsequent to death, for all must admit that it is wrong to bury before death. But the death which precedes baptism is death to sin, to the transgression of the law. It is expressly said in verse 2 that we cannot be dead to sin and live in it; but we do live in it as long as we continue to transgress the law. We do not die to sin until we cease to transgress the law, and therefore baptism or burial cannot properly take place while we continue to transgress the law. We are to be buried in the order or likeness of Christ’s death, which is thus stated:—
“For I delivered unto you first of all, that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures; and that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day, according to the Scriptures.” 1 Cor. 15:3, 4.
Now if ceasing to transgress the law is dying to sin, as all must admit, then no one can be planted in the likeness of Christ’s death who has not ceased to transgress the law, from the evident truth that Christ died before he was buried. There is no mistaking this point. He that transgresses the law lives in sin: if he lives in sin he has not died to it; if he has not died to it he is not prepared to be buried; and if he is so buried he is buried alive, that is, without a death to sin, and hence not buried in the likeness of the Saviour’s death. Such baptism is not in the order of the gospel—it is only a perversion of gospel baptism.
62
And this is still further shown in Rom. 7:1-6. This scripture says the law holds a man as long as he lives, and the woman who marries a second husband before the death of the first is guilty of adultery. In the application of this fact Paul says to his brethren:—
“Ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ, that ye should be married to another, even to him who is raised from the dead.” Rom. 7:4.
The wages of sin is death. There would be no death if there were no sin. Thus we see that Paul is arguing concerning man in his sinful condition. The law would not thus hold man unto death if he had not sinned—if his life was not forfeited. The death here referred to is on account of sin; the same that is spoken of in chap. 6—there called a death to sin. But without this death they cannot “be married to another,” even to Christ. Marriage to another without such death would be spiritual adultery. This is the force and intent of this scripture. The old man must be crucified, the body of sin destroyed—chap. 6:6; and every effort to unite this body of sin to Christ must meet with his decided disapproval. On this subject it is said in another text:—
“For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.” Gal. 3:27.
As union with Christ is represented by the figure of being married to him, so baptism is the ordinance by which that marriage is said to be consummated. The marriage ceremony does not unite the hearts of the parties; if there is no previously existing union of hearts the marriage ceremony is but mockery. So baptism does not
63
in spirit unite us to Christ, but it is the legal rite by which that union is acknowledged and ratified. It is an established rule in all governments that he makes himself guilty who solemnizes the rite of marriage without legal authority, or where there are impediments and disabilities which forbid the marriage, while the parties suffer the shame of an illegal union. This is exactly the position of the parties where baptism is administered before the candidate has died to sin; while he is yet living in transgression of the law. The rite is illegally administered; the marriage is a nullity, and the administrator is liable to indictment.
The arguing of this point is not a digression from our subject. Its bearing on “the promise” of Acts 2:38, 39, is easily seen. “The gift of the Holy Ghost” is promised to those who repent of sin, and who are baptized for the remission of sin. But it is proved that antinomianism ignores genuine repentance and the burial of him who is dead to the transgression of the law, by ignoring the law itself, by which is the knowledge of sin. Therefore it has no just claim to “the promise,” not being the legal fulfillment of the condition. Thus it is shown that antinomianism, or a denial of the perpetuity of the law of God, shuts out the Spirit of God and neutralizes the promise of the gospel.” Where there is no vision, the people perish; but he that keepeth the law, happy is he.”
Here we will state an interesting fact and notice an objection. In a work on the relation of different church doctrines to moral obligations, we recently read the following words:—
64
“The Methodist conference under Wesley in 1770, declared that the universal immorality then prevailing was because of the wide-spread opinion that Christ had annulled the moral law, and that evangelical freedom dispensed with the ten commandments.”
“Wesley’s Notes” on this conference drew forth upon him and upon the work of the Methodists severe criticisms from certain dignitaries of the established church. And these in turn brought out “Fletcher’s Checks to Antinomianism;” a work worthy of the careful reading of every searcher for Bible truth. This is an interesting item of ecclesiastical history, and it serves to prove the statement we have made, that antinomianism has been deprecated by the thoughtfully pious of all ages. But an objection has been raised upon it which well deserves notice. It has been said that while the Methodists condemned the no-law theory, and advocated the ten commandments as God’s great rule of morality, they did not themselves keep the law, for the law says: “The seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work,” but they called the first day the Sabbath and kept it instead of the day indicated in the law; and that they therefore really occupied a ground similar to that of those whom they reproved.
Admitting the correctness of the statement concerning the teaching of the law, to argue which is not our present purpose, the reply is thus made: There is a very wide difference of position between those who acknowledge the authority of the law, who make it the avowed and actual intention of their lives to keep the law, even though they are mistaken in some
65
 points of duty enjoined therein, and those who deny the authority of the law, who declare it to be the object of their lives to repudiate and to disregard its claims. The position of the former is that of loyal citizens laboring under certain mistakes in regard to duty; while the latter are disloyal, virtually denying the constitutional authority of the government. If the ideas of the latter could be carried out to their legitimate results, the government would be entirely overthrown.
On this consideration we readily vindicate the early Methodists and all others who recognize the existence and the claims of the law of God, from the reproach which must fall upon those who repudiate the law and deny its authority. And the providence of God has justified our position in regard to this, for he has often blessed with his Spirit the former, while he has as generally withheld it from the latter.
But this vindication must not be abused, and made to favor selfishness in religion. When God in his providence calls our attention to any truth of his word, and gives us light thereon, there can be no excuse for rejecting or neglecting it, however sincere our former lives may have been, or however unpopular that truth may be, or to whatever extent it may cross our feelings or clash with our worldly interests.
Among those who have a form of godliness, but deny the power thereof in the last days, are said to be “false accusers.” One false accusation raised against those who plead for the power of godliness and for the divinely appointed means of Christian unity is, that to claim to be led by the Spirit, or to possess gifts of the Spirit, is to
66
claim infallibility. If any should make such a claim, or try to avail themselves of the benefits of such a claim, they would abuse the promises, and forfeit the favor, of God. The accusation might lie against such persons, but not against those who hold and rightly use the truth on the subject. God never inspired any one so as to make him infallible. To do this would be to take away his individuality or his freedom of will, and consequently to remove him from probation. Peter, Paul, and Barnabas were all highly gifted of the Spirit, and yet they all erred. Of the gifts of the first two there will be no question. Of Barnabas the record says: “He was a good man and full of the Holy Ghost and of faith.” Yet he and Paul so differed in judgment that they had a sharp contention and as a consequence separated in their labors. This was wrong, it was contrary to what Paul wrote by inspiration. Peter seriously erred and was rebuked by Paul. And thus it is shown that they who were most highly gifted were not always under the immediate influence of the Spirit so as to be preserved from erring. They were fallible and dependent upon Heaven for help and strength which they received only through faith and prayer.
When the apostles were first sent forth with power over unclean spirits, they could not cast a demon out of a certain child; and the Saviour said it was because of their unbelief. Paul said they prophesied “according to the proportion of faith.” Rom 12:6. God never endowed any one so that he could live at ease, or in carelessness, without constant zeal, and yet be in possession of supernatural power, which he could exercise
67
 according to his own will. It is God that doeth the work, and he will work to his own glory, and through such only as are humble enough to seek his glory. When “holy men of old spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost,” their speaking was the speaking of the Holy Spirit, and it must be infallible, even as God is true. But the men themselves were not infallible.
It is far from being true that the recognition of the manifestations of the Spirit leads to a claim of infallibility. They who take opposite ground are really the egotists. For that is egotism and self-esteem which leads any to profess ability within themselves to do all that God requires, to perfect holiness and to glorify him, without his aid, or independent of the means which he has ordained and set forth in the gospel. Without Christ we can do nothing; and we are strong only when strong in the might of God. “Not by might nor by power, but by my Spirit, saith the Lord.” The accusation is as unreasonable as it is unjust.
If we can do nothing without the aid of the Spirit of God, shall we therefore be content to do nothing, and so neglect to glorify him in our lives? Or if he answers our prayers and gives us his Spirit according to his promise, shall we deny the grace, and affect to work in our own strength, while God by his Spirit is directly aiding us? What is this but denying God, and robbing him of his glory? We repeat, that a denial of the gifts of the Spirit “for the perfecting of the saints,” leads to egotism and self-righteousness.

To be continued.