FAMILY REUNION

Well Christmas is looking like Christmas. Rebekah arrived home on Monday and Nathan came in late Friday. Leben ist recht,und Gott ist Gut.



I will post a new picture of Nathan a little later. It is hard finding him as he has lost so much weight in boot camp...He looks great.

God bless all and Merry Christmas.

AND CAIN SLEW HIS BROTHER ABEL

And Cain talked with Abel his brother: and it came to pass, when they were in the field, that Cain rose up against Abel his brother, and slew him. Genesis 4:8

In light of the murders here in Colorado this last weekend it is fitting that we remember the beginning of the rampage of man murdering his fellow man. I have many thoughts opinions and emotions in regards to the "MURDERS" (They are not "shootings" as the press prefers to call them). But instead of me giving you my thought and opinions I would rather that any of you reading this instead take a moment and remember the Works family. The two that were killed at the church in Colorado Springs were two teen aged sisters; Stephanie Works and Rachel Works. Their father remains in the hospital from a gun-shot wound. With great sorrow sympathy and respect for the Works family I would ask that you pray for them and the great mourning that this family is going through. The christians of Colorado Springs are praying for them and stand ready to love them in whatever way God directs and that they need.

ABRAHAM'S FOUR SEEDS

*******************************************************
Below is the introduction to a booklet that I highly recommend. It is very easy reading and is one of the most profound things I have ever read on the topic. I have only posted the introduction, but would encourage you to go to the link posted or click on the title of this post "ABRAHAM'S FOUR SEEDS" (Above) and read it in its entirety.

http://www.geocities.com/pvrosman/Abrahams_Four_Seeds_menu.html

*******************************************************

Abraham's Four Seeds
by John G. Reisinger

New Covenant Theology

Introduction

Background and Reason for Writing

This book originated as a short presentation for public discussion. A group of Amils and Premils got together (along with some of us who are not convinced of any prophetic position) and discussed each other's view in the same session. Three different men spoke on the subject "Who is Abraham's Seed." This was followed by a long and profitable discussion period. I was one of the three speakers (I was assigned the "middle" position) and my preparation led to the start of this book.

Several years later I gave a twenty page paper entitled "Abraham's Four Seeds" at a Reformed pastors' meeting in Toronto, Canada. I was encouraged to enlarge it and develop some of the applications to Dispensationalism and Covenant Theology. The result is as much a study of the basic presuppositions of these two systems of theology as it is a clear cut study of Abraham's seed. This accounts for the lack of logical flow at times and the long digressions. However, since the real purpose of the book is not Abraham's seed for its own sake, but rather to demonstrate how a correct understanding of that subject is a key to harmonizing Scripture, it seemed wise to digress as far as was necessary when either Dispensationalism or Covenant Theology was directly involved. This approach sometimes made necessary a lengthy discussion of the basic position of either, or both, of these systems of theology. Some of these digressions appear as an appendix.

Appendix number one is a very brief outline of Covenant Theology using the Westminster Confession of Faith as a source. Appendix number two does the same thing with Dispensationalism using the Scofield Reference Bible and Major Bible Themes by Lewis Sperry Chafer and edited by John F. Walvoord. If the reader is not familiar with those systems, it might be well to read these two appendices first.

Appendix number three deals with Covenant Theology's insistence on using theological terms instead of Scripture texts. This appendix repeats some of the material in the main text. I am not suggesting that we must never use theological terms, but I am urging that we not use theological terms as the foundational blocks of our system as both Covenant Theology and Dispensationalism do. The basic presuppositions of any system of theology must be established with specific texts of Scripture and not with theological terms. If this is not done, then our basic building blocks will be the product of logic and not the Word of God itself. We must not produce a theological lingo arrived at only by "good and necessary consequences" deduced from our system and then force those theological terms into the Scripture and refuse to allow the words used by the Holy Spirit to mean what they actually say. Human logic must never become a tool more valuable than texts of Scripture in either establishing or teaching truth. Logic is a good mistress but a very bad master.

Appendix number four is a short exposition of Acts 2:39 showing how it cannot be used as a proof text for infant baptism.
We believe that historic Dispensationalism, as a system, is not Biblical (even though it contains truth and is held by many godly men) simply because its basic presuppositions are either assumed or wrongly deduced from their theological system. We are also convinced that Covenant Theology, as a system, is just as unscriptural (even though it also has truth and many godly exponents) for the same reasons. Until recently most people felt that you had to believe one or the other of these two systems.

Many people today, especially young pastors from various backgrounds, are exegeting the Word of God and discovering that you do not have to be locked into either Dispensationalism or Covenant Theology. They are also discovering that the Reformation, great as it was, never totally got rid of all of Rome's errors. Some great men brought some "priestcraft" over into their basic presuppositions at the time of the Reformation. Their view of the relationship between Church and State (the doctrine of Sacralism) is the logical conclusion and application of their Covenant Theology. It was this view that kept the Puritans from establishing churches that could live and worship consistently in the spirit of the New Covenant. Their view of the ordained ministry ("holy orders") made any practical use of the "priesthood of believers" impossible. This is also the reason that present day Presbyterian groups, such as the P.C.A., cannot effectively deal with the issue of Theonomy within their ranks. The Theonomists have both the Westminster Confession and Puritan history on their side.

Reformed Baptists are among the leaders in the present day revival of Calvinistic literature. On the one hand, we gladly acknowledge our debt to the Reformers and Puritans and do not hesitate to own them as our forefathers in certain aspects of our faith. However, on the other hand, we also know that those same men, almost without exception, bitterly persecuted, and in some instances, actually killed some of our other forefathers among the early Baptists. We find ourselves in the odd position of being stepchildren of both the Reformers and the Anabaptists, but the true heirs of neither.

Our clear-cut view of the Doctrines of Grace and the unity of the Scriptures aligns us with the Reformers and the Puritans. The Anabaptists will never teach anyone the Doctrines of Grace. Our view of the unity of the Scriptures make it impossible for us to accept the Dispensationalism set forth in the Scofield Reference Bible. On the other hand, our Baptistic view that the New Covenant in Jesus Christ has replaced the Old Covenant at Sinai makes it just as impossible for us to accept the Covenant Theology set forth in the Westminster Confession of Faith. It was that very Covenant view of Scripture that was used by the Puritans to justify the use of the steel sword against our Baptist forefathers. The true heirs of the Puritan view of Covenant Theology are those who today espouse what is called Theonomy. Some people feel that if the Theonomists were to gain control, Baptist blood — along with other kinds — would once more be shed in the name of "God's holy truth."

More and more writers and preachers are demonstrating that both historic Dispensationalism and classical Covenant Theology are bankrupt as far as being complete systems. Both systems are being greatly modified today, and there is a move toward "seeing some truth in both systems." In no sense does this mean there is an attempt to "synthesize" the two systems. It means that people in both camps are starting with the Scriptures and discovering two things. They are seeing that (1) their own system is not totally consistent with many texts of Scripture, and (2) those same texts are forcing them to accept some things held by the other system. This is happening simply because honest men are admitting that they simply cannot prove some of their basic presuppositions with actual texts of Scripture. They realize that they "assume" the basic system before they ever get to the Word of God itself. Many young men are seeing that both of these systems "assume as facts" their basic presuppositions without any clear Biblical proof.

The Word of God itself is once more becoming the final authority in the conscience of Christians. The footnotes in Bibles, the pronouncements of men with papal personalities, and the creeds of our fathers no longer exercise unqualified control over the minds and hearts of many sheep. The cry, "What saith the Scriptures themselves?" is being heard in the land as it has not been since the days of the Reformation. Some of us dare to believe that this may be the generation that shall see the remaining vestments of Rome removed from our Calvinistic churches.

There is no question that we are seeing a reformation of the church. It is the prayer of many that our generation will emulate the great things that the Puritans and Reformers did and avoid the tragic mistakes they made. We need a "reformed" reformation and not just a repeat of the sixteenth century. I would say here what I wrote in my booklet When Should A Christian Leave A Church?:

Let us not make the same mistakes that the Reformers made. They thoroughly reformed the gospel message of justification by faith but failed to reform some other doctrines. They threw out justification by the works of the law, but held on to sanctification by the law. They rejected the Church's authority over your soul, but hung on to the Church's authority over your conscience. They discarded priestcraft and substituted clericalism. They rejected the authority of Church tradition (which taught Papal infallibility) but replaced it with man-made creeds that soon became as authoritative as Scripture. In reality they replaced a two-legged Pope with a paper Pope. They cried sola Scriptura while waving a creed in one hand and a sword in the other.

MORE PICTURES FROM MISSOURI

Nathan in front of a military veterans memorial in Cabool, MO.

Nathan on stage during the graduation ceremony, he had to step forward and declare his name rank and home of record. "Private Nathan Rogers, Colorado."

A picture of my Great Great Grandmother's grave stone. The inscription says; "He Giveth His Beloved Sleep" which is a quote a portion of Psalm 127:2

A picture of my Great Great Grandfather's grave stone, showing his service in the civil war which was actually in the 6th Indiana Infantry, Company A, not the 5th. His first name was "Gameliel", but most people called him 'G'.

NATHAN AFTER BOOT CAMP

Here as promised are some pictures of Nathan After boot camp.

Nathan in formation.

You may be wondering about the grave marker behind Nathan in the picture. Well my Great Great Grandfather and Grandmother are buried in Cabool, MO just about 45 miles from the Army base where Nathan did his boot camp. I thought since I had never seen it I would take Nathan there and show him some of his past. My ancestor in the picture lived from 1838-1923, fought in the civil war and was a circuit riding preacher after the war.

I had a wonderful time getting to see Nathan as he finished this milestone in his life. While there he lost 40 pounds and was quite exhausted. He looked great. More to come.

NATHAN's TRANSFORMATION

The above picture is a "Before" picture of Nathan at his enlistment ceremony in August. He has been away at boot camp for sime time in Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri. Tomorrow I will drive across the great state of Kansas and into Missouri to attend his graduation from boot camp. From there he will go to Fort Gordon, Georgia to attend AIT (Advanced Infantry Training) or as we call it in the Air Force; Technical Training. he will be studying Sattelite Equipment Repair. His school should last until next October when he will come home to Colorado Springs and be assigned to a unit at Fort Carson, Colorado. From there he will begin a two track career...College and Army National Guard duty. I am excited to see what the Army has done with my son in the three months he has been in their care. When I get back I will post an "After" picture.

HAPPY THANKSGIVING

The picture above was made by my 21 year old daughter, a college junior at Oklahoma University. She told me that she felt deprived from her youth having not ever made a hand turkey for her parents on Thanksgiving. Of course she had to add the political commentary on her very first attempt. She is not an animal rights freak, she just has a good sense of humor.

I wanted to wish all who may read this blog and especially all of you whom I love dearly a wonderful Thanksgiving. I am grateful for each of you. My life is what it is because of the people who God has sent to be a part of it. Thank you. Below is an essay from a newsletter that I receive; The Spurgeon Baptist Association Of Churches, newsletter. Weekly Update ~ November 20, 2007 Volume 3, Issue 46.

**************************************************************
It is time for Thanksgiving. What that means to many people is
time off from work and the opportunity to go spend time with
family or simply go play games as they wish. To some people it
is a time in history that some superstitious people thought that
God helped some ancient people to survive some harsh conditions
in a new land. To a few people Thanksgiving is a religious
holiday. In Scripture giving thanks comes from a heart of gratitude
that is expressed in words and lives intended to glorify the
living God and it is to happen on a constant basis.
On the one hand not giving thanks is a sign of a person or a
people under the judgment of God: “For even though they knew
God, they did not honor Him as God or give thanks, but they
became futile in their speculations, and their foolish heart was
darkened” (Romans 1:21). A people not giving thanks are a
people that have suppressed the truth about God and are being
given over to a hardened heart. Giving thanks does God no
good at all since no man can do any good for God and cannot
serve Him with his hands. When a person gives thanks in reality
it is a sign of a heart that God has softened and enlightened and
so the person with gratitude in the heart expresses praise to the
sovereign God of this universe. But let us not be deluded to
thinking that God needs our thanksgiving.

Hebrews 12:28 teaches us that without gratitude (which is necessary
to give thanks) there is no acceptable service to God:
“Therefore, since we receive a kingdom which cannot be
shaken, let us show gratitude, by which we may offer to God an
acceptable service with reverence and awe.” We can see from
Hebrews 13:15 that the sacrifice of praise to God is the fruit of
lips that give thanks to His name: “Through Him then, let us
continually offer up a sacrifice of praise to God, that is, the fruit
of lips that give thanks to His name.” In other words, without
gratitude and the giving of thanks there is no true worship or
praise.

We must also not make the mistake of simply thinking that we
should give God thanks because He has given us food and
physical blessings. We must also be careful not just to say
words of thanks to God for spiritual blessings. This would turn
the giving of thanks into something of a mercenary activity.
God gives us something and so we simply say “thank you” or
something like that. We must understand that giving of thanks
with gratitude is a heart that sees that God is the sovereign
Creator and that humanity consists of nothing but sinful creatures.
God only shows mercy and grace because of who He is.
When God grants physical or spiritual mercies it is because He
decides to do so based on His great name. Psalm 26:7 gives the
heart of the issue: “That I may proclaim with the voice of
thanksgiving And declare all Your wonders.” It is with thanksgiving
that His wonders are declared. We should not simply
recite a few things that God has done that we think is to our
benefit, but in thanksgiving declare the wonders and glories of
our God and King.

Colossians 3:16 tells us that our praise should be done with
thanksgiving: “Let the word of Christ richly dwell within you,
with all wisdom teaching and admonishing one another with
psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing with thankfulness
in your hearts to God.” Colossians 3:17 continues the
thought and tells us that “Whatever you do in word or deed, do
all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks through Him to
God the Father.” This teaches us a couple of things that are
missing in our present “worship” services. Larger congregations
hire the finest of musicians and purchase the finest arrangements
of music. But money cannot buy thankfulness of heart
and there is no true worship apart from that. Psalm 42:4 has
another insight which we tend to have backwards in our day:
“For I used to go along with the throng and lead them in procession
to the house of God, with the voice of joy and thanksgiving,
a multitude keeping festival.” True thanksgiving is with joy
in and to God, not self.

If we are to have a time true thanksgiving this Thanksgiving, we
must look to Scripture for instruction. If we are not truly thankful,
it means that we have a hardened heart and are suppressing
the truth about God. If we don’t have true gratitude in our heart,
we are not truly thankful. If we are not declaring the wonders of
God from that gratitude, it is a self-centered thanksgiving. If we
don’t give thanks to the Father through Christ and that with joy,
we are not offering biblical thanks. As with all other things that
traditions have gobbled up, we must look in our hearts and realize
that Thanksgiving can become nothing more than a time of
idolatry of keeping certain practices with God’s name tacked
on. But then again, the “worship” services at the local church
can be the same way. Our whole lives can be the same way.
Perhaps we should spend time this Thanksgiving examining our
hearts to see if we are truly giving thanks. Then we should
spend time examining our hearts to see if we have thankful
hearts. If we give true thanks, then we truly have something to
be thankful about. It is the grace of God in Christ Jesus.

Richard Smith
***************************************************************************

REFORMATION DAY THOUGHTS

(Citation of Source)
Spurgeon Baptist Association Of Churches Weekly Update
October 25, 2007
Volume 3, Issue 42
Richard Smith

We are approaching the yearly observance of Reformation Day. This Sunday is Reformation Sunday. There are many reasons that people remember the Reformation, and some of them are actually good. What was it that happened in the Reformation that was worth remembering? Was it the doctrines of the Reformation? Was it that the Reformation was a catalyst that sent forth political freedom as well? Was it the restoration of the Gospel? Was it freeing slaves of sin from the superstitious rites and works of Roman Catholicism? Was the Reformation nothing more than a powerful personality controlling the minds of the masses? Was Martin Luther a virtual madman? There are many ways to look at the Reformation. However, we must not miss the most important part; God.

The real issue of the Reformation was God and a returning to a God-centeredness in all things. We must not miss this point or all of our efforts at reform and revival in our day will be man-centered. While there is a “revival” of Reformed literature and to some degree of Reformed theology in our day, we have yet to see a true revival of God-centeredness. A quote from A History of the 1859 Ulster Revival (volume 5 of 7, pp. 9-11) might help us see the true nature of these things. The reason is that the Reformation was a true revival and not just a movement.

Then the Lord raised up a great army of Reformers, and the Reformers were but revivalists. They did not proclaim a new religion. They restored an old religion. They revived a decayed religion. They burst the bars that confined it. They went into the sepulcher of death, in which a corrupt system had contrived to bury it, and disinterred it. A divine voice spoke, and like another Lazarus, religion, true religion, spiritual and saving, came forth and walked abroad in beauty and power, under the protection of God, defiant of all its foes. The Reformation was but a revival. It cast down all the corrupt devices and imaginations of men, and enthroned Jesus as the Savior of men—the only Mediator between God and man. It put down all the pretensions of men, and exalted Jesus, the High Priest of our profession…it put down all trust in human merit, and declares to the sinner the truth of God, that whosoever believeth on the Lord Jesus Christ shall be saved. And the world felt the power of God’s revived truth when preached with the Holy Ghost sent down from heaven, and now the first of its nations, England and America, are rejoicing in the truth—in the fruits of the Reformation revival of God’s truth. But a true creed is not a guarantee for true religion. Many a man believes aright in theology who does not believe aright in Christ. Many a man is ready to sign the most orthodox standards while his heart is hard, his soul is still corrupt and endangered. He has never felt that he is a sinner, although he admits himself to be a sinner. He admits his need of Jesus, but he has not felt his need. He allows that Jesus is the chief among ten thousand, just because the Bible declares it—and the Bible is true. But he has never seen, his soul and never thrilled with the perception of Jesus’ loveliness. The rapture of the true believer [rapture in the sense of being caught up with delight and joy in God] he cannot understand. He does not like excitement. He is afraid of physical manifestations. And the Christian whose heart glows with the love of Jesus, and whose tongue testifies to His glory is chilled and frozen in the company of that hard, impenitent, orthodox heart. When he leaves those whose hearts the Lord has touched to go into the society of such a one, it is like a transition out of the warm and balmy air of summer into the chill and frigidity of an ice-house.

What we see from this lengthy quote is the core of true religion and the central issue of the Reformation. It was the life and glory of God. The doctrines that came from the Reformation were not bare truths with aridity to them. No, no and a thousand times no. The doctrines of the Reformation came forth from men who were trained by God to see the depths of their sin and so they were broken from all human merit. Those men studied and meditated on the Scriptures and the Spirit gave them a sight of God and so they were strengthened to set out truth as the life of the living God. The real issue of the Reformation was God and God alone. It was a turn from man-centeredness to God-centeredness. It was a turn from rites and rituals to God in the soul. It was a turn from a creed confessed to truths burning in the hearts of men and women. The Reformation was far more than a discovery of the old Gospel; it was a coming down of the Holy Spirit to give power and life through the Gospel. During the Reformation Roman Catholicism was shown for what it was and that was a dead and lifeless form of religion. It was not just that it had bad theology and superstitious rites, but it was a dead, lifeless religion. Theoretically one could have removed Christ’s name from what was going on and it would have continued with no loss.

If anyone truly wants to see true reformation in the modern day, s/he must understand that it will not happen from pure churches and pure doctrine alone. It will only happen if our sovereign God pours out His Spirit and grants a true revival at the same time. We can recover our doctrine until it is pure, but that does not mean that the power of God is present. We can have pure churches as such, but that does not mean that the power of God is present. We can write the purest of creeds, but that does not mean that the power of God is present. What must happen for a reformation to take place in our day is for men to give up all hope in themselves, their efforts, their theology and their churches. All hope must be lost in anything but God Himself and we must look to Him alone. Theology is not the sole means of revival, but it teaches the truth of God and His glory so that we may seek Him in truth. In our day we look at the Reformation and try to see what we can copy. It is easy enough to copy the outward means of the great revival that took place that we know as the Reformation. But what cannot be copied is the broken hearts over sin and the outpouring of the Holy Spirit. Contrary to modern belief, even among those that profess that God is sovereign, He is sovereign in fact and beyond our control and any and all points. God is not amused or humored when a speck of dust professes that He is sovereign. He already knows that and our professions do not add one thing to the infinite God who cannot be added to.

God is not humored and pleased when we profess that justification is by faith alone even if we are orthodox about what we mean by that. He knows what the Gospel is and our profession does not mean that we are saved by what we profess. God is not pleased until our hearts are truly broken and Christ lives in those hearts. But can puny man break his own hard heart? Can puny man see into the very Godhead and perceive the glories of the Gospel of God? No, all man can do is seek the Lord. It is the sovereign God alone who can break the heart and make room for His life to flow in. It is the sovereign God alone who can open man’s eyes to see His glory in the Gospel and so draw a sinful dead human being to Himself and give that person life from the spiritual dead. It is not a mere intellectual recognition of God that is enough, but it is the living God taking over that person’s heart and making that soul alive.

It would appear that many in our land that cry out for Reformation don’t understand the real heart of what happened in the sixteenth century. It was a profound revival in which God came down and brought life to dead souls. It was from that life that the doctrines of the Reformation spread. We sing the praises of the Reformers and of the theology of the Reformation in some circles, but we don’t have the heart that God gave them. We don’t have the deep love for the glory of God that they did. We are not willing to suffer as they did and even count suffering a privilege and a blessing. No, we are content with mere academic knowledge and a few conferences where we talk about it. But do we really desire for God to come in and take over? Do we really desire the living God to be sovereign? After all, He is not safe and He may want to do things we don’t like. He may use another and not us. He may cause life to come in other churches and not ours. Down deep, are we afraid of true revival? Are we so hungry for it that we don’t care what happens as long as the glory of God is manifested? After all, our minds know that His glory manifested is what is best in all ways. But do we really love it that way? Do we really believe it?

Let us ask ourselves a few questions. Are we afraid of a person who is excited about God? Are we afraid of people who are thrilled with a sight of the glory of God? Are we afraid of people who have a deep and/or bubbly joy in God? Are we afraid of those whose hearts glow with the love of God? Are we uncomfortable around those who are simply thrilled with the glory of a sovereign God? Are we uncomfortable around those that desire for God to be free instead of human beings? If so, it may be that we have a dead orthodoxy. It may be that when a true believer comes into our presence it is like walking into a freezer for them. It may be that our preaching may be precise in its orthodoxy but in reality belongs in the cemetery more than a church of the living God. It may be that we don’t need peace in the SBC among differing theologies but that we need peace with God. It may be that we don’t need more excitement worked up in our churches but we need the living God to come down with real life. It may be that we don’t need more programs and more entertainment for the carnal people that come to church but that we need the living God to come down. It may be that we don’t need more evangelistic training but need our own hearts broken in order to see the glory of God in the Gospel. Dead people don’t need training, they need life.

What we need in our day is God. That sounds so simplistic and so ignorant to many, yet it is exactly what we need. God does not cost money, though He might require more suffering than you can imagine now. God will not come until our hearts are humbled and contrite. He will not dwell with anyone until the heart is broken and contrite (Isa 57:15). It is not only foolish to try to bring revival apart from God; it is foolish to think that we can enrich our theology or programs in order to bring it about. It is when God comes down that life is brought to our theology. Perhaps what we need to do is to do less or perhaps nothing in order to seek God who alone can bring revival. “Do nothing but seek God and pray? But nothing will get done.” It won’t get done in truth unless He comes anyway. We are simply deceiving ourselves and others if we think it will. The truth of the matter is that it makes us feel like we are helping God by doing our religious duties. We have forgotten what the Reformers knew and that truth is that God is sovereign whether we like it or not. He is sovereign whether we profess it or not. He is sovereign and is not manipulated by our professions. It seems so easy to think that we can manipulate God by professing certain beliefs or doing certain actions. That is nothing but Pelagianism in disguise of Reformed theology. God is sovereign so let us all bow and seek Him for a heart to truly seek Him. We will not see a true Reformation and revival without it. But don’t think that God will send it because we are doing it, but we will only be doing it because He may send it.

Richard Smith

COME YE SINNERS POOR AND NEEDY

A Beautiful October snow.

Come, ye sinners, poor and needy,
Weak and wounded, sick and sore;
Jesus ready stands to save you,
Full of pity, love and power.

I will arise and go to Jesus,
He will embrace me in His arms;
In the arms of my dear Savior,
O there are ten thousand charms.

Come, ye thirsty, come, and welcome,
God’s free bounty glorify;
True belief and true repentance,
Every grace that brings you nigh.

Come, ye weary, heavy laden,
Lost and ruined by the fall;
If you tarry till you’re better,
You will never come at all.

View Him prostrate in the garden;
On the ground your Maker lies.
On the bloody tree behold Him;
Sinner, will this not suffice?

Lo! th’incarnate God ascended,
Pleads the merit of His blood:
Venture on Him, venture wholly,
Let no other trust intrude.

Let not conscience make you linger,
Not of fitness fondly dream;
All the fitness He requireth
Is to feel your need of Him.

Joseph Hart
Born: 1712, Lon­don, Eng­land
Died: May 24, 1768, Lon­don, Eng­land

Hart resisted Christ­i­an­i­ty while young, writ­ing the pamp­hlet "The Un­rea­son­a­ble­ness of Re­li­gion, Be­ing Re­marks and An­im­ad­ver­sions" on the Rev. John Wes­ley’s Ser­mon on Ro­mans 8:32. How­ev­er, Hart came to Christ in 1757, be­com­ing an e­norm­ous­ly pop­u­lar preach­er and hymn writ­er. Tens of thou­sands at­tend­ed his fun­er­al. Hart’s works in­clude:

Hymns Com­posed on Var­i­ous Sub­jects, with the Au­thor’s Ex­per­i­ence (Lon­don: 1759)
Sup­ple­ment to his Hymns, 1762
Ap­pendix to his Hymns, 1765

Other Hymns written by Joseph Hart:
Behold What Awful Pomp
Christ Is the Eternal Rock
Christ­ians, Dismiss Your Fear
Christ­ians in Your Several Sta­tions
Come, Ho­ly Spirit, Come
Come, Ye Sinners, Poor and Needy
Descend from Heaven, Celestial Dove
Dismiss Us with Thy Blessing, Lord
Fountain of Christ Assist Me to Sing, The
Gird Thy Loins Up, Christ­ian Sol­dier
Glory to God on High
Great High Priest, We View Thee Stooping
Ho­ly Ghost, Inspire Our Praise
How Wondrous Are the Works of God
If Ever It Could Come to Pass
Jesus Is Our God and Savior
Jesus Once for Sinners Slain
Jesus, While He Dwelt Below
Lamb of God, We Fall Before Thee
Let Us All with Grateful Prais­es
Lord, Help Us on Thy Word to Feed
Lord, Look on All Assembled Here
Lord, We Lie Before Thy Feet
Mercy is Welcome News Indeed
Moon and Stars Shall Lose Their Light, The
Much We Talk of Jesus’ Blood
No Prophet, nor Dreamer of Dreams
How Good Is the God We Adore
This God Is the God We Adore
The God Who Created the Skies
Now from the Garden to the Cross
O for a Glance of Heavenly Day
Once More We Come Before Our God
Pray­er Is Ap­point­ed to Convey
Sinner That Truly Believes, The
Sons of God by Bless’d Adoption
Suffering Savior, Lamb of God
That Doleful Night Before His Death

Thanks to "The Cyber Hymnal"
http://www.cyberhymnal.org

ASAHEL NETTLETON: THE FORGOTTEN EVAGELIST

[Here is Pikes Peak after the first good snow of 2007. October 15]


Here is a very good biography of a sovereign grace evangelist whose history and record has been overshadowed by Finney, Moody, and Sunday. This is one man who should not be forgotten.

Asahel Nettleton: The Forgotten Evangelist

By Jim Ehrhard

The year was 1812. America had just declared war on Great Britain in June and lost its first battle in October. In the midst of that climate, a young, unimpressive minister on his way to an assignment in New York stopped at a church in the community of South Britain, Connecticut. When he was invited to preach, no one could have anticipated the impact his ministry would have, not only on this small church, but also on all the East Coast over the next three decades.

As this visiting preacher spoke, the congregation became aware that something unusual was happening. His probing questions seemed to penetrate each heart, peeling back layer after layer, showing the reality of their sin. Many in the congregation wondered how he knew them so well. As he continued, he warned the audience of their desperate need for repentance and the danger of any delay. Many in the congregation were brought to a deep conviction of sin.

After the message, the congregation dismissed without any formal invitation. They returned home to deal with God regarding their sin. During the week, conversion came mightily to many. The revival that began that week spread throughout New England, spilled over into New York, and resulted in a deep work of regeneration that lasted until the mid-1800s. During that span of time, God graciously used this man to bring more people to Christ than any man since George Whitefield came to America a half century earlier. Who was this man?

Mention the names of Finney, Moody, Sunday, or Graham and visions of great evangelistic ministries are brought to mind. But mention Asahel Nettleton and few will have any idea who are talking about. Except for being remembered as the one who opposed Finney at the New Lebanon Conferences, even most histories fail to tell of the work of revival under Nettleton.

Asahel Nettleton is a significant figure in the history of revivals who has been sadly forgotten. Yet his ministry might have been one of the most effective ever. Though he never pastored a church, never wrote a book, or led an evangelistic organization, Nettleton’s preaching led directly to the conversion of well over 30,000 people at a time when the entire nation’s population was only nine million. Those figures, though large by comparison to most evangelists, are even more startling when one considers that his ministry encompassed little more than Connecticut and its bordering states. According to John Thornbury, the number of conversions in modern times “proportionate to the success of Asahel Nettleton” would be well over 600,000!

Thornbury is not alone in his assessment of Nettleton’s significance in history. His own contemporaries, who had heard such giants as Edwards, Whitefield, Finney, and Moody, counted Nettleton’s ministry as unusually successful. In 1844, The New York Observer said that Nettleton was “one of the most extraordinary preachers of the gospel with whom God has ever blessed this country.” The New York Evangelist agreed saying, “Few men, since the apostolic days, have been honoured with such a signal success in preaching the word, and in the conversion of sinners as he. . . .” Bennett Tyler said of him, “We do not claim for Dr. Nettleton the rank of Whitefield; but he stands very high among those who have ‘converted sinners from the very error of their ways, saved souls from death, and hidden a multitude of sins.’” Even Lyman Beecher, who had both Nettleton and Finney in his pulpits, said of Nettleton, “Considering the extent of his influence, I regard him as beyond comparison, the greatest benefactor which God has given to this nation.”

Perhaps what is most significant about Nettleton’s ministry is not the shear number of conversions but the number who remained faithful to Christ many years later. Most evangelists today would be delighted to “find” even a small percentage of their converts, much less to see them living for the Lord. Nettleton’s converts were surprisingly solid. For example, of the eighty-four converts in an 1818 revival at Rocky Hill, Connecticut, all eighty-four had remained faithful according to their pastor’s report twenty-six years later. Similarly, only three spurious conversions out of eighty-two professors were noted in another pastor’s report on a revival in Ashford, Connecticut.

In contrast, toward the end of his life, “after reflecting on the many who had claimed conversion [under his ministry] but had since fallen away,” the great evangelist Charles Finney “had mixed thoughts on the genuine results of his work.” He was not alone. In a letter to Finney, one of his co-workers raised some interesting questions about their work:

Let us look over the fields where you and I have laboured as ministers and what is now their normal state? What was their state within three months after we left them? I have visited and revisited many of these fields and groaned in spirit to see the sad, frigid, carnal, contentious state into which the churches have fallen and fallen very soon after we first departed from among them.

B. B. Warfield also tells of the testimony of Asa Mahan, Finney’s closest friend and long-time co-worker:

No more powerful testimony is borne ... than that of Asa Mahan, who tells us -- to put it briefly -- that everyone who was concerned in these revivals suffered a sad subsequent lapse: the people were left like a dead coal which could not be reignited ....

Nettleton’s ministry was decidedly different from that of Finney, not only with regard to conversions, but also with regard to the lasting impact upon the communities which he visited. One contemporary pastor, Bennett Tyler, noted the differences between the revivals of Finney and Nettleton:

These revivals were not temporary excitements, which like a tornado, sweep through a community, and leave desolations behind them; but they were like showers of rain, which refresh the dry and thirsty earth, and cause it to bring forth “herbs meet for them by whom it is dressed.” These fruits were permanent. By them the churches were not only enlarged, but beautified and strengthened; and a benign influence was exerted upon the community around.

Although Nettleton and Finney were contemporaries, Finney has eclipsed Nettleton completely. Today, these questions must be asked: Who was this man so specially used by God in the conversion of many souls? Why has one of such significance been sadly forgotten in our generation? And what makes his ministry so different from the evangelistic ministries seen today? Such questions form the focus of this paper.

His Early Years and Conversion
Born on April 21,1783, on a farm in North Killingworth, Connecticut, Asahel was the second of six children. Baptized as an infant, his parents taught him morality , the Westminster catechism, and farming skills. He attended the village school and participated in community parties, outings, and dances. As a youth, he had an unusual experience during a sunset where the falling darkness brought him his first serious thoughts about the reality of death. But these thoughts were fleeting, and no permanent fruits came from this momentary reflection.

In the fall of 1800, at age eighteen, Asahel began to come under the convicting power of the Holy Spirit. After an evening of merrymaking at the annual Thanksgiving celebration, thoughts of death returned to haunt his conscience. These thoughts led him to religious pursuits. Instead of relieving his troubled heart, his zeal to pray, read the Scriptures, and do good works only produced greater doubts and dissatisfaction.

These failures led Nettleton to all sorts of doubts. He began to question whether the Bible was true. When he came to the conclusion that the Bible could not be trusted, he concluded that there was no God. However, such conclusions refused to comfort his heart for he thought, “What if the Bible should prove to be true! Then I am lost forever.” The writings of Edwards and the Memoir of David Brainerd deepened his conviction of lostness. After ten months of anguishing conviction, Nettleton came to the end of himself:

All self-righteousness failed me; and, having no confidence in God, I was left in deep despondency. . . . After awhile, a surprising tremor seized all my limbs, and death appeared to have taken hold upon me. Eternity--the word Eternity--sounded louder than any voice I ever heard; and every moment of time seemed more valuable than all the wealth of the world. Not long after this, an unusual calmness pervaded my soul, which I thought little of at first, except that I was freed from my awful convictions. . . .

Nettleton had been converted. The character of God became more lovely, the work of Jesus more precious, and the doctrines of grace more delightful:

The character of God, and the doctrines of the Bible, which I could not meditate upon before without hatred, especially those of election and free grace, now appear delightful, and the only means by which, through grace, dead sinners can be made the living sons of God.

His conversion came during a period of revival in Killingworth under the ministry of Josiah Andrews. By March 1802, ninty-one new converts were received into the church. The effects of the revival gave Asahel new aspirations. While working in the fields, he often thought, “If I might be the means of saving one soul, I should prefer it to all the riches and honours of this world.” An epidemic swept through Killingworth during the spring and summer of 1802 killing his father and youngest brother. For the next three years, he cared for the farm and the family, taught in the village school, and studied under the tutelage of Josiah Andrews.

By 1805, Nettleton had committed himself to pursue missionary service. He enrolled at Yale and completed his academic training in an undistinguished fashion. Still the potential of Nettleton did not escape the notice of President Timothy Dwight, the grandson of Jonathan Edwards, who remarked: “He will make one of the most useful men this country has ever seen.” Upon his graduation in 1809, he remained at the college to work and repay some debts. Nettleton was ordained in 1811; and, while waiting for a call from one of the missionary societies, he ministered as pastor for a brief period in the “waste places” of southeastern Connecticut.[22] In the autumn of 1812, Nettleton received an invitation to preach in South Salem, New York. On his way to New York, he stopped over to spend a week in South Britain, Connecticut where his fame as an evangelist began.

Years of Revival

The years from 1812 until 1822 can be accurately characterized as the years of revival for the ministry of Nettleton. Although God continued to use this preacher in revival until his death in 1844, these years provided the most remarkable movements of the Spirit of God under his ministry.

Following the revival at South Britain, Nettleton continued on to his appointment in South Salem, New York. This community was considered another of the “waste places,” not open to spiritual revival. In a short time, the preaching of Nettleton began to take hold of the hearts and minds of the people. “The seriousness soon spread through the place, and the subject of religion became the engrossing topic of conversation.” In a few weeks, a great number had been surprisingly converted. Asahel was so well-liked that the church tried to call him as their pastor. However, he still considered himself bound for missionary service, and, after two months at South Salem, moved on to other preaching opportunities back in Connecticut. The results of his ministry were remarkably similar. In Danbury, Monroe, North Lyme, Hadlyme, and Bloomfield, “his labours were greatly blessed to the quickening of God’s people, and to the awakening and conversion of sinners.”[26]

In the autumn of 1813, Nettleton went to preach in a church in Litchfield known as Milton. The church had dismissed its pastor under “strained circumstances,” and the congregation was full of internal divisions. Again, the preaching of Nettleton brought many under great conviction. At one meeting, several experienced such horror of mind that they began to cry out in the services. Nettleton had them removed to a neighboring house to be counseled personally, while he continued with the meeting. In a few months, a large number had been converted. In just over one month, more than eighty people were converted from every age group, ranging from a twelve year old to a widow of seventy. Best of all, the breach in this once divided church had been healed. It was during his time at Milton that Nettleton became acquainted with Lyman Beecher who served as pastor in Litchfield.[28]

Revival seemed to follow Nettleton in each of the towns he visited. By 1815, it seemed that everyone desired his labors among them. In the spring of 1815, the ministers of New Haven invited him to come to their community. His work of revival there began when he visited a local school for girls. In a personal letter to his friend, Philander Parmele, Nettleton recounted the progress of revival in this school:A number have been alarmed. How many it is impossible to tell. It was just a week from the time I came to this place to the day on which the great inquiry openly and solemnly began. What must I do to be saved? For three days the distress of some was overwhelming. On the fourth day four were rejoicing. On the fifth day eleven more were rejoicing. From that time the work has been gradually spreading through the town. The prospect is still brightening. This morning I have found 2 more rejoicing in hope. Within about four weeks upwards of 50 have entertained hope in this place.

Similar experiences were recorded during Nettleton’s time ministering in Middleton, Connecticut in 1817:

There has been an increasing solemnity for some time past. Meeting were crowded and solemn. . . . One young man seized my hand exclaiming “I am a sinner. I am a sinner. What shall I do?” They [the people at the meeting] left the house and went home sighing, & sobbing in every direction. I came home & found a number around the door of Mr. Williams’ house, in the most awful distress, Some were standing, some sitting on the ground, & some on the door steps exclaiming “What shall I do” I shall die. I shall die. “I Can’t live.” This alarmed the neighbors who called to witness the awful scene. With much ado I got them into the house, about eight or ten in number. The fact was, the young man aforementioned, who left the meeting house in such distress, was walking in company with them, when all at once he found relief and exclaimed, “I have found the Saviour.” He was now very joyful. He sat clothed and in his right mind: and they were afraid. My first business was to warn them against a false hope. Prayed with them and enjoined it particularly on them not to go home together, but to go alone, & be alone, for the business must be settled between God and their souls. Maria (a young woman living in this family) was one of the number. She retired to her chamber, sighing and sobbing, and crying for mercy, and exclaiming “I shall die, I shall die.” She came down and went out doors and returned in the same awful distress to her chamber. And suddenly all was still and hushed to silence. I sat still below and said nothing. I soon heard the sound of her footsteps descending the chamber stairs. She opened the door and with a joyful countenance exclaimed O, Sir, I have found the Saviour. I continued to warn her of the danger of a false hope. She exclaimed “I love Christ. I do love him. O how sweet.” In the morning, early, she called to see one of her anxious mates, who was so distressed the night before; and Lo: Barsheba exclaimed “I have found the Saviour.” That was a happy meeting. The young man aforementioned resided in the same family (this was John Towner’s house). On Saturday evening about mid-night another, equally distressed, found relief. Within a few days 8 or 10 are rejoicing in hope.

What will be the end, I know not. Do pray for us, and your friend,

A. Nettleton.

In the summer of 1819, Nettleton’s ministry shifted from Connecticut to the area near Saratoga Springs, New York. Although he went there for a period of rest, local ministers pressed him into service once they learned of his presence. In Saratoga Springs, forty professed salvation, including some of the most respectable people of the community. In nearby Malta, crowds as large as fourteen hundred came to hear him. He remained in the area until February 1820, reporting over six hundred converts during that period.

From there, his work touched the students of Union College in Schenectady, New York. Nettleton gives one account of the awakening that took place among the students there:

The room was so crowed that we were obliged to request all who had recently found relief to retire below, and spend time in prayer for those above. This evening will never be forgotten. The scene is beyond description. Did you ever witness two hundred sinners, with one accord in one place, weeping for their sins? Until you have seen this, you have no adequate conceptions of the solemn scene.

One student particularly impacted by Nettleton’s ministry was Francis Wayland, the future president of Brown University. Wayland’s interests before the revival were almost entirely academic and religion was “a matter of small and distant reality.” Nettleton’s preaching changed the direction of Wayland’s life. Wayland stated, “I became intimately acquainted with Mr. Nettleton, and my conversations with him were of great use to me.” His children also noted Nettleton’s impact on the ministry of their father: “He gained lessons never to be forgotten in the mode of addressing men on religious subjects.” Wayland, though familiar with many of the great preachers of his era, said of Nettleton, “I suppose no minister of his time was the means of so many conversions.”

Nettleton stayed in the area until the fall of 1820. During that time, he was the instrument of revival in many congregations. In Nassau, New York, alone, over one hundred people were converted in the period from the end of April to the end of June. In one area, Nettleton himself estimated the impact of the revival: “Within a circle whose diameter would be less than twenty-four miles, not less than eight hundred souls have been hopefully born into the kingdom of Christ, since last September.”

Shortly after Nettleton returned to Connecticut, he began to preach in the church of Noah Porter in Framingham. Within three months, two hundred and fifty were converted. Not only this, the revival transformed the entire town. But the grueling schedule that Nettleton kept was beginning to affect his health. He retired to the community of Pittsfield, Massachusetts, for a period of rest. Once again, the local pastor requested that he preach. Within weeks, revival broke out and within a few months more than eighty persons (half of them “heads of families”) had been converted. In 1821 and 1822, Nettleton also labored in Connecticut and saw similar works of revival in such places as Litchfield (in Lyman Beecher’s church), Somers, Mansfield, Goshen, and other communities.

In early October, 1822, Nettleton visited a family in Wilbraham, Massachusetts, where there was a case of typhus fever. By the middle of the month, he began to have the tell-tale symptoms and retired to the home of his friend Philander Parmele in Bolton, Connecticut. By mid-November, he was so sick that he dictated his will. Shortly thereafter, he began to recover only to discover that his gracious hosts, the Parmeles had contracted the disease themselves. Mrs. Parmele recovered but Nettleton’s closest friend, Philander, succumbed to the disease on December 27. This news broke his heart, and he described that time as the “most trying” of his life. While he continued to recover from the disease and the loss of his friend, Nettleton was encouraged by reports of the continuing effects of revivals that had been initiated under his preaching.

Years of Conflict
For nearly two years after the attack of typhus, Nettleton preached only occasionally. His weakness prevented any regular ministry, and he sometimes had relapses that would force him to be bedridden for weeks. During that time, Nettleton put together a contemporary hymnal that met the need of churches in revival. Since Watts was so revered in the churches of his day, he wisely considered his publication as supplement to be used alongside of Watts rather than replacing it. In 1824, Nettleton’s Village Hymns for Social Worship, Selected and Original, Designed as a Supplement to the Psalms and Hymns of Dr. Watts was published and was extremely popular among the churches that had experienced revival.

In the final years of Nettleton’s life, the focus of his ministry changed from that of the prominent promoter of revival to the theological defender of true revival. While his preaching continued to be used by God as a instrument for revival in Virginia (1827-28), North Carolina (1829), New York (1830-31) and England (1831-32), his latter years are remembered most for two major controversies.

By the autumn of 1824, Asahel’s health had sufficiently improved to allow him to return to some preaching. He first went to Bethelehem, Connecticut, to preach in the former pulpit of Joseph Bellamy. Forty came to faith during his short stay there. From there, he preached in Brooklyn, New York, and Taunton, Massachusetts, with similar results.

In February 1826, he attended a congregation in Jamacia, New York, that was pastorless and full of strife. When the people learned of his identity, they asked him to preach; and an awakening ensued that lasted into the autumn. It was during his stay in Jamacia that Nettleton first received reports of problems arising from revivals in Oneida County, New York. It seemed the use of some “new measures” in revival was causing great division and confusion in the churches of that area. An increasing flow of people came to him to complain about what was going on in these revivals and to plead with him to help set matter right. Still, Nettleton hesitated:

Heretofore his battles had been with infidels and out and out enemines of the gospel. Although he had been engaged in minor theological debates with other preachers about the various points of theology, these discussions had taken little of his time and energy. Nothing had interfered with his concentration on the winning of souls.

In November, he went to Albany, New York, to talk with some pastors in that area. Charles G. Finney, the leading proponent of these “new measures,” was preaching across the river in Troy. He even met with Finney on at least two occasions during his time there, though little information about those meetings remains. In a letter to John Frost, one of Finney’s supporters in the area, Nettleton recounted that he was “already worn out with conversation” and that the first meeting contained little discussion of the new measures. In another letter to Frost, Nettleton is more specific about his concerns. There he cites a number of examples where the new measures and those using them were disrupting the churches of the area and “breaking down” the “settled ministers” of the churches. Finney initiated the second meeting by visiting the home where Nettleton was staying in Albany. According to Finney’s account of the meeting, he offered to accompany Nettleton to the service Asahel would be preaching. According to Finney, Nettleton “manifested uneasiness, and
remarked that I must be seen with him.” According to Thornbury, “The uneasiness which Nettleton may have felt at this time would have been based upon the fact that a public appearance of the two men together would have been used to advantage by the new measures advocates.”

Following his second visit with Finney, Nettleton wrote a letter to “the Rev. Mr. Aikin of Utica” in which he outlined his objections to the new measures. In beginning, however, Nettleton is careful to acknowledge the hand of God in the revivals of Finney: “There is, doubtless, a work of grace in Troy.” He further noted:

We do not call into question the genuineness of those revivals, or the purity of the motives of those who have been most active in them. . . . But the evils to which I allude are felt by the churches abroad; members which have gone out to catch the spirit, and have returned, some grieved, others soured, and denouncing ministers, colleges, theological seminaries, and have set whole churches by the ears, and kept them in turmoil for months together. Some students of divinity have done more mischief in this way than they can ever repair. . . .

The evil is running in all directions. A number of churches have experienced a revival of anger, wrath, malice, envy, and evil-speaking, (without the knowledge of a single conversion,) merely in consequence of a desperate attempt to introduce these new measures. Those ministers and Christians who have heretofore been most and longest acquainted with revivals, are most alarmed at the spirit which has grown out of the revivals of the west. . . . The friends of brother Finney are certainly doing him and the cause of Christ great mischief. They seem more anxious to convert ministers and Christians to the peculiarities, than to convert souls to Christ.

Some of the peculiarities he mentioned included the use of the anxious
bench, praying openly for sinners in the meeting by name, appointing new converts to lead revivals, and denouncing ministers who did not use their methods. Nettleton was especially concerned about the unwillingness of Finney and his co-laborers to have any of their methods examined. Futhermore, anyone who questioned the new measures was denounced as being “enemies of revival.”

Although Nettleton did not wish to be cast into a role of confrontation, his observations of the work in Oneida County convinced him that he could do no less:

Irregularities are prevailing so fast, and assuming such a character, in our churches, as infinitely to overbalance the good that is left. These evils, sooner or later, must be corrected. Somebody must speak, or silence will prove our ruin. Fire is an excellent thing in its place, and I am not afraid to see it blaze among the briers and thorns; but when I see it kindling where it will ruin fences, and gardens, and houses, and burn up my friends, I cannot be silent.

Thus the stage was set for what came to be known as the New Lebanon Conference on July 18, 1826, in New Lebanon, New York. Before the meeting, Finney printed a sermon he had preached on Amos 3:3: “How can two walk together except they be agreed?” In his sermon, Finney contended that all who opposed his new measures were opposed only because of “their frosty hearts.” Since they were not right with God, Finney reasoned, these could not appreciate “white-hot revivalism.”

Nettleton responded with a letter to Gardner Spring which was printed in the New York Observer . In it, he noted that Finney never really dealt with the
distinction between true and false zeal, calling all zeal a mark of religious affection.

The sermon in question entirely overlooks the nature of true religion. It says not one word by which we can distinguish between true and false zeal, true and false religion. If the tone of feeling can only be raised to a certain pitch, then all is well. The self-righteous, the hypocrite, and all who are inflated with pride, will certainly be flattered and pleased with such an exhibition, especially if they are very self-righteous and very proud. False affections often rise higher than those that are genuine; and this every preacher, in seasons of revival, has had ocassion to observe and correct .... If the preacher is not extremely careful to distinguish between true and false affections, the devil will certainly come in and overset the work, and bring it into disgrace.

Nettleton’s letter attacked both the logical and scriptural foundations to which Finney had appealed. He pointed out that one cannot dismiss all evaluation as “unchristian”: “Without great care and close discrimination, the preacher will unwittingly justify all the quarrels and divisions in our churches.” He reminded readers that Paul would not even allow men to be teachers unless they were of “full age, who by reason of use have their senses exercised to discern both good and evil” and that Paul would not allow young converts to preach: “Not being a novice, lest he fall into condemnation, reproach, and the snare of the devil.” Finally, Nettleton listed Edwards’ observations about the marks of spiritual pride, concluding:

It is a mark of spiritual pride to refuse to enter into discourse or reasoning with such as are considered carnal men, when they make objections and inquiries. Humility would lead ministers to condescend to carnal men, as Christ has condescended to us, to bear with our unteachableness and stupidity, and follow us with instructions, line upon line, precept upon precept, saying: “Come, let us reason together;” it would lead to a compliance with the precept: “Be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh of you a reason of the hope that is in
you with meekness and fear.”

With these two great salvos fired, the conference was already in deep water when it convened. Little was accomplished, and both parties departed with no agreement about any issues. Finney felt vindicated as churches in the large cities of the East coast began to invite him to their pulpits. In fact, this conference was the last time the two leading preachers of New England, Asahel Nettleton and Lyman Beecher, stood together. The second crisis in Nettleton’s life, the debate over the theology of Nathaniel Taylor, would divide them forever and thrust Beecher into Finney’s camp.

During 1827, Asahel Nettleton experienced spells of fainting which prompted his doctors to encourage him to try a warmer climate as a remedy. Nettleton decided to spend the winter in the mountains of Virginia near Hampton-Sydney College. He preached in the surrounding towns with his usual effectiveness. While there, several students from Yale visited the college and created a stir by advocating the teachings of their president, Nathaniel W. Taylor.

Most alarming was Taylor’s denial of the complete depravity of man, the imputation of original sin, and the inability of man.[66] Apart from any special work of the Holy Spirit, man could refrain from sinning simply by choosing to do so. Likewise, no special work of God was needed to bring the sinner to Himself. Not only was this theology doctrinally unsound, Nettleton knew that it would serve to undermine true conversion by placing the focus on what man can do rather than on what God does in salvation. All that an evangelist needed was to present the truths in such a way as to persuade men toward a decision:

Dr. T. speaks as if the only difficulty in the way of a sinner loving God lay is their want of clear & distinct views of divine things. . . . Dr. T. takes it for granted that if the sinner only had clear views of God, he would love him. But the facts prove the contrary.

Nettleton also recognized that such a theology would support the very methods he sought to oppose in Finney’s ministry. The publication of Finney’s Autobiography confirmed any suspisions that Nettleton might have had. In it, Finney openly opposed any doctrine of original sin, referring to it as “anti-scriptural and nonsensical dogma.” Finney contended against the belief that the new birth was in any way a divine gift. He insisted that

regeneration consists in the sinner changing his ultimate choice, intention, preference. . . . when mankind becomes truly religious, they are not enabled to put forth exertions which they were unable before to put forth. They only exert powers which they had before, in a different way, and use them for the glory of God.

When such a theology is applied to revival, the revivalist may use any
means necessary to bring the church to a state of revival. Finney himself said of revival: “A revival is not a miracle, nor dependent on a miracle, in any sense. It is a purely philosophical result of the right use of the constituted means -- as much so as any other effect produced by the application of means.”

Nettleton’s stance against the New Haven Theology eventually led to the break in his relationship with Lyman Beecher. Beecher felt that the issue of theology was indeed the primary one that caused Nettleton to oppose both Finney and Taylor: “He wanted the battle to go on. He was one of those that never can give up their own will. He had the notion that the New Haven brethern were currying favor with Finney. . . . That was the origin of all his bitterness against Taylor.” The letters of Nettleton indicate no such bitterness on his part toward Taylor. Indeed, he remained Taylor’s friend until his death. In a letter to Taylor in the last year of his life, Nettleton mentioned the doctrinal debate and assurred Taylor that, although they had disagreed for many years, their personal friendship had not been affected:

I need not tell you that I love you. You know that I have ever loved you. . . . I impeach not your motives. I judge not your heart. I would cherish the hope that your own religious experience is at variance with some of the things which you have published -- I say this with the kindest of feelings, and with eternity in view. Receive it as my dying testimony, and as an expression of my sincere love. Farewell, my brother. We shall soon meet at the judgement seat of Christ. God grant that we may meet in heaven.

In his final years, Nettleton gave his time and energy to the students of the Theological Seminary of Connecticut in Hartford founded in response to the continued teaching of the New Haven Theology at Yale. Bennett Tyler became president, but Nettleton was the “father confessor to the campus” according to George Briney. Evangelism was his field, and the preaching of doctrines “emminently useful in winning souls” formed the theme of most of his lectures.

Nettleton became seriously ill in 1841 with what was diagnosed as gall-stones. Two surgeries proved unsuccessful, and Nettleton continued to weaken. He died the morning of May 16, 1844. He left behind a considerable estate mostly from income from the sale of his hymnal. Even his will indicated a man sold out to the cause of Christ: He willed small portions to his brother and sister and some friends; the balance he willed to the Seminary and to the American Board for Foreign Missions, the institutions “which represented the causes closest to his heart.”

Conclusions
One cannot overestimate the importance of the ministry of Asahel Nettleton. Francis Wayland, founder of Brown University, said of Nettleton, “I suppose no minister of his time was the means of so many conversions.” Most surprising to modern readers is the discovery that Nettleton’s tremendous effectiveness occurred without any of the methods that modern evangelicals think are so essential in evangelism. For example, in all his ministry, thousands came to a solid, lasting faith in Christ though Nettleton never once gave an “altar call.” In fact, one of the greatest struggles in Nettleton’s life occurred as he led the stand against such “new measures” employed by Charles Finney.

Without a doubt, Finney’s methods were effective in attracting large crowds and in securing large numbers of “professions.” But they involved many questionable aspects that Nettleton and other ministers could not accept. In one of his letters, Nettleton wrote of his great concern for future generations. Asahel recognized that the greatest danger might not be to his generation but to succeeding ones who would assume that all revivals were dependent upon such measures:

If the evil be not soon prevented, a generation will arise, inheriting all the obliquities of their leaders, not knowing that a revival ever did or can exist without all those evils. And these evils are destined to be propagated from generation to generation, waxing worse and worse.

Indeed, the fears of Nettleton have come to pass. Not only is Nettleton forgotten,the idea of revival apart from certain methods has also passed from memory. Nettleton has been forgotten because this present generation, like the followers of Finney, has become obsessed with results and statistics to the neglect of theology. Finney himself said,

The success of any measure designed to promote a revival of religion, demonstrates its wisdom. . . . When the blessing evidently follows the introduction of the measure itself, the proof is unanswerable, that the measure is wise. It is profane to say that such a measure will do more harm than good.

Every new church growth idea that works is deemed to be of God. “After all the results speak for themselves,” most argue. Nettleton refused to accept any new measure simply on the basis of effectiveness. Likewise, he knew that allowing any method to go untested by the truth of Scripture would ultimately lead to the ruin and discredit of any revival:

And all of those ministers who do not discriminate between true and false zeal, true and false affection, in their preaching and conversation, and make that difference, and hold it up to the view of the world, if possible as clear as the sun, heartily approving of one, and as heartily and publicly condemning the other, will turn out to be the greatest traitors to the cause of revivals.

Nettleton’s ministry also teaches about the importance of preaching in revival. Few men have ever preached with the power and effectiveness of Nettleton. Francis Wayland said he “would sway an audience as the trees of the forest are moved.” Thornbury summarized Nettleton’s preaching:

In the accounts and descriptions of the great revivals in which Nettleton laboured, one thing comes across very powerfully, and that is that he was able to bring home the awesome realities of the eternal world home to the souls of men. When he talked about the heinousness of sin, they felt its sting. When he portrayed the sufferings of Christ, they felt the trauma of Calvary. When he proclaimed the holy character of God, they trembled at the vision. When he thundered forth the judgements of hell, men were moved to escape that place.

While most modern preaching seeks to avoid doctrinal topics, Nettleton, like Whitefield and Edwards before him, preached the great doctrines of the faith. One pastor in East Granby, Connecticut described his preaching during the revival in his congregation:

Doctrinal sermons were frequent; but these had a practical turn. They were eminently scriptural and plain, and made men feel that they were the men addressed, and not their neighbors. He sometimes preached on the severer doctrines with great power, and apparent good effect.

Nettleton’s ministry reminds that all the great doctrines of the faith can be preached with great effect in awakening people to God.

The need for revival today is as great as it has ever been. But it is not just any kind of revival that is needed. The need is for a revival clearly based upon the work of the Holy Spirit rather than on the methods of man. Nettleton’s ministry, when compared with that of Finney, shows that real revival was not always dependent upon certain “laws of revival” popularized by Finney. It came simply upon the faithful and fearless preaching of God’s Word. Nettleton’s ministry testifies to the power of God’s Word in bringing sinners to faith. Most of all, it reminds all that revival, like conversion is truly a work of a sovereign God among His people.

Jim Ehrhard is the founder of Teaching Resources International, a ministry providing teaching ideas from the Puritans for pastors and missionaries (http://www.teachingresources.org/).

STAND FAST IN THE LIBERTY OF JESUS CHRIST

Friends...The "Facts" indeed were submitted to a candid world, and the results were global, they were world shaking. The freedoms that our founders sought, and we have enjoyed are not to be taken lightly. They are to be guarded with the intensity with which they were earned. I spent 21 years of my adult life standing guard with my brothers in arms. I hold this day as a sacred holiday just as I held the freedoms and their protection as a sacred duty. I will be enjoying this incredible day of celebration with my two daughters Hannah and Annika. I wish to spend it as well with you all who read here, if not face to face then in the shared joy of LIBERTY. Such liberty that is not just the political liberty of a free nation, but that liberty that was bought with the price of the blood of our dear savior Jesus Christ. Go from this day with a determination to live in THAT liberty: "If Christ has made you free, you are FREE INDEED."

Galatians 5:1 "Stand fast therefore in the liberty by which Christ has made us free, and do not be entangled again with the yoke of bondage."

IN CONGRESS, July 4, 1776.
The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America,

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.--Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

HAPPY FATHERS DAY

HAPPY FATHERS DAY!

In honor of Fathers Day, I put a picture of my four wonderful kids. These four people have been a tremendous blessing to me since their birth. God's true gift to a father is the love of his children. I will be on the road for fathers day visiting my own father in Eastern Kansas, so I will not be posting anything new this weekend, but I will try to put the next installment of the London Confession up when I get back.

Happy Fathers Day to all of you dads out there...count your blessings. For those of you who are not fathers, give thanks for the dad he has given you. At the very least thank God for the Father that your Heavenly Father is to us. He is all we need, even if we are without an earthly Father, our Father in Heaven is there for us at all times.

God bless you all

Jeff

LONDON CONFESSION OF 1644, ARTICLE V

[Yes, another photo from one of the trails I have hiked. This one is a hike that my daughter Rebekah did while she was visiting over the Christmas holiday this last year. It is a rock outcropping on the Waldo Canyon Trail.]

I am posting Article V without comment for the time being. Feel free to comment in the mean time. I would invite you to take the few bible references at the bottom and look for the language used in the bible reference in the article itself. I think you will be amazed at just how biblical the thinking was in that day. This biblical language came out of the people in their speech, their writings and their thoughts. They were deeply steeped in the vernacular and phraseology of scripture.
(See highlights)

All mankind being thus fallen, and become altogether dead in sins and trespasses, and subject to the eternal wrath of the great God by transgression; yet the elect, which God has(1) loved with an everlasting love, are(2) redeemed, quickened, and saved, not by themselves, neither by their own works, lest any man should boast himself, but wholly and only by God of(3) His free grace and mercy through Jesus Christ, who of God is made unto us wisdom, righteousness, sanctification and redemption, that as it is written he that rejoices, let him rejoice in the Lord.

1) Jer. 31:2
2) Gen 3:15; Eph. 1:3, 7; 2:4, 9; 1 Thes. 5:9; Acts 13:38
3) 1 Cor.5:21; Jer. 9:23, 24

WHY A CONFESSION?

Some may wonder why read study or discuss a creed confession or any other digest of biblical teachings. I believe that these historic documents divulge to us what our predecessors believed. It is instructive and even encouraging to see how their thought process worked. In the Baptist tradition; Baptists have not historically been a creedal nor a confessional denomination. But throughout history it has at times been necessary to identify what you believed so as to avoid persecution confusion or other misunderstanding. The London Baptist Confession of 1644 is no different. The Baptists at that time needed to identify how they viewed the scripture and declare where they stood. Below is a quote that, I think, very clearly defines the difference between a confession and a creed.

"A confession is voluntary and serves to inform, educate, and inspire; a creed is required and serves to discipline and exclude. A confession offers guidelines under the authority of Scripture; a creed tends to become binding authority, in subtle ways displacing the Bible."

H. Leon McBeth

The reason I like this particular confession is that the very words of the confession very closely mirror the words of scripture themselves. I would encourage any who are interested to look at the particular articles and the scripture references and see how closely the 1644 Baptists explanation were with the very words of scripture themselves.

LONDON CONFESSION OF 1644, ARTICLE IV

This forth article starts out with the glories of the creation. That God in the beginning created all things and declared them to be “Very Good”. That man himself was created in that beautiful image and likeness of God himself. In citing Ecclesiastes 7:29

“Lo, this only have I found, that God hath made man upright; but they have sought out many inventions.”

We see the pattern from creation to the fall. “God hath made man upright…” But in his desire for self he has “…sought out many inventions.” It is the inventions of man that got us in trouble in the garden and that continued to this day to be our downfall. We invent a God after our own image rather than fall in worship to a god who transcends man. We invent a religion of works dependent on the will of man, and yet these 17th century Baptists knew full well that “Salvation is of the Lord”…and so they boldly proclaimed. We have a tendency to blame Adam for our sinful nature once we have come to accept that he stood in our place in the garden. But we would have done no better. As Ecc 7:29 states, “God hath made man upright”, the word for “Man” in that verse is the same root Hebrew word that is translated Adam. It is Adam who was made upright, had we been there to represent our self we could have fared no better. Since that day none have been created upright, but have been conceived in sin and brought forth in iniquity. We are standing in peril of the judgment of the very sin that we want to deny. We must come to grips with that sin by way of repentance, agree with God about that sin and see that our nature is bound in sin until he looses it. At that time we can then find the satisfaction for that sin in the person of Jesus Christ who also stood in my stead and place when he died for those very sins that I could not pay for. He (the second Adam) has set in motion a new creation to restore to even better than the original the place of man in relationship to God. The fall is a tragic event that we cannot gloss over and must not take lightly. But it was an event that did not take God by surprise and he has more than satisfied the need for restoration and reconciliation in the person and work of Jesus Christ.
*******************************

ARTICLE IV

(1) In the beginning God made all things very good, created man after His own(2) image and likeness, filling him with all perfection of all natural excellency and uprightness, free from all sin.(3) But long he abode not in this honor, but by the (4) subtlety of the Serpent, which Satan used as his instrument, himself with his angels having sinned before and not(5) kept their first estate, but left their own habitation; first(6) Eve, then Adam being seduced did wittingly and willingly fall into disobedience and transgression of the Commandment of their great Creator, for the which death came upon all, and reigned over all, so that all since the Fall are conceived in sin, and brought forth in iniquity, and so by nature children of wrath, and servants of sin, subjects of(7) death, and all other calamities due to sin in this world and for ever, being considered in the state of nature, without relation to Christ.

1) Gen. 1; Col. 1:16; Heb. 11:3; Isa. 45:12
2) Gen. 1:26; 1 Cor. 15:45-46; Ecc. 7:29
3) Psa. 49:20
4) Gen. 3:1, 4, 5; 2 Cor. 11:3
5) 2 Peter 2:4; Jude 6; John 8:44
6) Gen. 3:1, 2, 6; 1 Tim. 2:14; Ecc. 7:29; Gal. 3:32
7) Rom. 5:12, 18, 19; 6:23; Eph. 2:3