Partial Rapture: Erroneous

A SIMPLE WORD REGARDING A "PARTIAL-RAPTURE!"

In telephone conversation with a brother last night I was reminded of a 19th/20th Century brother of independent thought. I have a copy of his auto-biography, and I have read it twice. He held a "partial rapture" view, as indicated in his writings on eschatology, as well as in his auto-biographical work.

In very real simplicity I would challenge this highly gifted and much-used servant of the Lord as to this error.

If the Rapture is to be but "partial," there are obvious consequences as a result, such as cannot be reconciled as in accord with the Word and will of God.

Simply reminding ourselves of the various figures used in the N.T. to symbolise the Church (Assembly) will reveal the resultant outcome;-

A DISFIGURED "BRIDE,"

A DEFORMED "BODY,"

A DILAPIDATED "BUILDING."

How would it be possible then for the Lord Jesus, the Heavenly Bridegroom, to present to Himself "a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish?"

Ephesians 5:27.

A Personal Disclaimer

A PERSONAL DISCLAIMER

I am exercised to publically disassociate myself from the website connected with my "home" Assembly. Publically because it is in the public domain and accessible for any and all to peruse.

Besides being very unprofessional, with grammatical mistakes and incorrect spellings, (which I am able to "live with,") there are fundamental difficulties.

The website is in the hands of a woman who is an UNBELIEVER! Thus it is evident there MUST be CONFUSION!

The only listed "corresponding brethren" are two SISTERS!

The description of the way in which we gather to the Lords' Name is fraught with error.

Bethany Gospel Hall in Filton, Bristol is the building in which an Assembly (Brethren) has met for many decades. It is the premises used historically, practically and in principle for the gatherings of a local (Brethren) Assembly. Until now it has never been suggested to be otherwise.

The website dilutes this distinction, and may well give the impression that the company meeting there are an "Evangelical Church," whatever that misnomer may convey. (A church is NOT a church if it is not evangelical!)

We continue to refer to "it" as an Assembly in all our conversations, but it is apparent that the majority would rather no one knew that we met as "Brethren commonly-so-called."

Every believer repudiates these titles, but it is deceitful to pretend, even if the reason is the refusal to be viewed as just another  "denomination" in Christendom. This too we refuse ABSOLUTELY, acknowledfing it to be sectarianism.

But I further refuse to relinquish my association with a movement of the Spirit which has furnished us with such a legacy, such a heritage.

I wish to state unequivocally that this "post" is my own PERSONAL" statement and

wholly mine alone. Please understand it to be the exercise of heart of one feeble servant of Christ who wishes to maintain a pristine testimony for our soon-coming Saviour, the lovely Lord Jesus Christ.

Never forget He is the Head, and the Lord, and every Assembly answers to Him alone! 



J.G. Bellett: Short Meditations

J.G.BELLETT

I am currently reading "Short Meditations" by J.G.Bellett. His way of expressing truth is totally unique; I mean, if I compare him with many other "Brethren" writers, even of the same "generation."

He has because of the help afforded him by the Holy Spirit, given me new insights into the Word. His method of teaching by means of his written ministry is precious, especially in his reverential handling even of the most profound of subjects.

It is impossible to convey his personal approach to all things spiritual, heavenly, unseen; he needs to be read if his so-refreshing ministry is to be enjoyed by the Lords' people.

The testimony he bore to the last was most Christ-exalting; his contribution to our heritage is of very real and lasting value.

I commend this "work" to the souls of the saints for edification, exhortation and comfort; in order to be built up, stirred up and cheered up in this "vale of tears."   

WHAT SAITH THE SCRIPTURE? by C.F. HOGG

What Saith the Scripture?

 

I have just purchased a copy, (secondhand,) of the above book. The condition is somewhat "shy" of the sellers' description! It was nonetheless fairly inexpensive and difficult to obtain in hardback.

Just now I am trying to remember why I decided on buying it. I think I had been reading other ministry by this servant of the Lord, and I must have been impressed. But truthfully I don't know. I have been engaged in reading a number of books at once, probably not the brightest idea!

I must now turn to the purpose for writing  this current "post."

Charles Frederick Hogg was born in 1859 and "called home" in 1943. He was much associated with the Assemblies and laboured in Great Britain, and as a missionary in China for many years. Unfortunately he was connected with one of the better known "Missions." It is not my intention to condemn him, but just to point this out as it may have had some bearing on his teaching. 

I did read a brief biography of him, and learnt something of his legacy to the Lords' people during his life of service, and since in his written ministry preserved to us.  

The book is subtitled "Concerning 200 Questions of Interpretation, Faith and Practice." I readily admit to reading just a few "answers." My immediate and considered judgement was that of surprise; I found it difficult to concur with his replies in a number of cases and that within , as I stated, just a few answers.

Please, if any of you who read my "posts" have any thoughts about this dear man of God and this book in particular, would you aid me by leaving a comment?

 

BAPTISM - WHAT IT IS AND WHAT IT IS NOT

BAPTISM WHAT IT IS AND WHAT IT IS NOT

This does not purport to be a definitive treatise on the subject of Christian Baptism. it is just a compilation of a few personal thoughts.

I am and have been troubled for some time over the practice of many Assemblies as to the ordinance of Christian Baptism. (Just for your assurance, I do not subscribe to either infant or household baptism, both are contrary to the N.T. Scriptures.)

What does concern me is the commonly held view that an unbaptised believer cannot be "received" into the formal fellowship of an Assembly, and consequently cannot "Break Bread" with a company of the Lords' people.

Such practice indicates that Baptism is the way of entrance into Assembly fellowship, and the essential prerequisite to being permitted to remember the Lord in His death, in His own appointed way, and in answer to the longing of His heart.

Put very simply and briefly, Baptism IS identification with a crucified, buried and risen Saviour; it has to do with discipleship. "Go ye into all the world and make disciples of all nations; baptising them..."

Baptism is NOT the key that unlocks the door into Assembly fellowship. The local Assembly DOES NOT baptise any more than it teaches! The Lords' servants, particularly evangelists baptise. (Teachers and some elders teach.) Indeed baptism has nothing to do with fellowship! 

When asked to defend the practice to which I have referred, almost invariably the answer has been, "a believer who has not been baptised is disobedient." I agree this sounds entirely plausible. But is necessarily the case? Furthermore, if it is so, is this omission of obedience worthy of such magnitude as to require one to be "put away?" This is what it amounts to! Might I also enquire As to what "judgement" is meted out to sisters with short hair; sisters who refuse to wear head coverings; brethren and sisters who "forsake the assembling of ourselves together" and are only present at the Lords' Table? Are these not cases of disobedience? Who of us determines which "disobedience" warrants which particular act of chastisement?

False teaching and immorality are to be dealt with by "putting away;" is the failure to be baptised on a par with these gross sins? I think not.

When one is born anew, born from above, there is the impartation of new life and the introduction of a new nature. Fellowship is enjoyed with the Father and the Son; and in this precious dispensation the babe in Christ becomes a member of His body, the Church. But we determine so much by "LIGHT" when all that is necessary to be received by the saints is "LIFE." We refuse them fellowship while they are enjoying fellowship with Divine Persons! We refuse to allow them a place in the local expression of the Body of Christ when they are already members of the Church universal!

Finally please permit me to use a pertinent personal experience; experience does not begin to vie with the Word of God I readily own, but it can be of help.

When I met my Wife she was in the "denominations." She was poorly taught and I was certainly not a mature believer although in Assembly fellowship. The first Lords' Dy after we were married we went to our local (nearest) Assembly and asked to be received. The brethren were very gracious and on eliciting a confession of faith from us both they welcomed us and we "Broke Bread" with them. (The subject of Baptism was not raised.) The following Lords' Day after the "Remembrance" a dear elderly brother approached me and spoke to me regarding my wifes' uncovered head. I fully agreed with his teaching on this subject and spoke to my wife, as tenderly as he had spoken to me, I hope! That week my wife went out and bought herself a hat and wore it the next week. That lovely man of God came to us and thanked us for our having bowed to the Word of God; so moved was he that he wept in our presence! Imagine how that touched our hearts. My wife had never been Baptised, but for the next few years she was permitted to remember the Lord she loved in His appointed way. Then the moment came when she was exercised as to Baptism, and speedily requested that arrangements might be made for her to identify herself with her Saviour in the waters of Baptism. I was thrilled! Looking back now I wonder what might have been if the saints then had told her she had to be Baptised or she would not be received? I truly shudder to think what consequences may have ensued. Perhaps in these days of such little enlightenment Assemblies of the Lords' people might like to reflect on such a case, it cannot be an isolated one. To be "barred" from remembering the Lord in His death fills me with horror. I cannot imagine the extent of detriment I would experience to my soul.

I know these lines will disturb and perhaps offend not a few; please believe me that is never my intention. But I fear that there are some "out there" that would be identified with us if we were just a little less determined that practices that exist are not NECESSARILY right. Please with an open mind reflect upon these things. Feel absolutely free to comment in any way you desire. I commend you all to God and the Word of His grace. 

The Languages of Judaism

"THE LANGUAGES OF JUDAISM"

The above title refers to an exhibition organised by: Patronat Call de Girona - Jewish History Museum. It is on-going now, having commenced in March, and continuing (D.V.) until September 30th 2013.

I was only briefly in Girona and stumbled across the exhibition as I always visit the Jewish Quarter there when I am in Spain. Although I only spent around half an hour viewing it, I found it totally fascinating.

Furthermore there proved to be something of invaluable interest to me, that may command your attention too. In the indispensable "Morrish Concise Bible Dictionary" first published in 1899, under the heading "Hebrew Bible," we read,"While the Hebrew language was a living language..."  and further, "There can be no doubt in studying Hebrew as a dead language..." (Emphasis mine.) At the time these statements were correct. But the exhibition educated me as to the present situation regarding the Hebrew language. I quote, "He (Eliezer Ben Yehuda*) was a great philologist who made it possible for the Hebrew language to become an active language again, spoken in all spheres, after many centuries of only being used as a language of prayer and writing."

Hebrew is undoubtedly one of the most singular languages in the history of mankind. One of the languages Divinely chosen to make known the mind and heart of God. It thrills me to know that it is once more a living language! 

*Eliezer Ben Yehuda 1858 - 1922.

 

Warning to Believers in New Zealand and France

WARNING TO BELIEVERS IN NEW ZEALAND AND FRANCE

I have noticed with some real dismay that legislation in both New Zealand and France has been passed to allow "same sex marriages."

In the U.K. during earlier times, homosexual practices were against the laws of our nation. Some few years ago such perversions were frowned upon, but the laws prohibiting such practices were abrogated. More recently homosexuality was condoned, then promoted, and now envisaged as something akin to normal sexual behaviour. More than this, it is regarded in some quarters as of a superior status, so that those who choose to live in this way can bring charges of discrimination on the basis of the flimsiest of evidence. Believers have to be constantly on their guard, as some elements among this "company" seek avidly to ensnare them. Some faithful believers have lost their livelihood for refusing to compromise.

Since our nation permitted civil partnerships, (often better provided for by the State than married couples;) and now that  "same sex couples" are allowed to "marry," our Nation has suffered  governmental dealings at the hand of our God. 

There have been "natural," economic, financial and moral eruptions. We have experienced weather conditions unprecedented here in the U.K. In every walk of life corruption has been exposed. The State Church and Romanism have both alike been revealed as evil, corrupt and immoral.

This Nation has nevertheless known a degree of mercy in the compassionate long-suffering of God. Why? I would love to think it was because of a little feeble "remnant testimony" maintained for the Saviour. I suspect that has helped to restrain the judgement of God somewhat. But I believe the under-lying reason is because of the bright testimony of bygone generations. This Nation has been singularly blessed with a great multitude of goodly men and women over a number of centuries.

With very real humility I must suggest that the same cannot be said for the above two Nations. Sodomy in all its forms is an abomination to God. Brethren and sisters in Christ pray earnestly that God would be merciful to your Nations. 

Finally, consider all the terrible disasters in nature that have befallen other parts of the world; tsunamis, hurricanes, earthquakes, floods and fires; and what about the numerous acts of terrorism, slaughter, murders and suicides.

This is not to suggest that sodomy is the cause of it all; but that it does play a very substantial part is undeniable.

There are numerous references in Scripture to this abominable and immoral practice, and Gods' hatred of it.

Nb.Gen.13:13; Deu. 23:17; 1 Kings 22:46; Isa.3:9; Jude 7; Rev.11:8;      

Bibliographies in recent Brethren Writings.

 

Just recently I managed to purchase a Brethren Commentary at a very reasonable price. One of the first things I do on buying an addition to my library is to consult the

Bibliography. I  expected the worse and it proved so! There are two Books of the O.T. Scriptures expounded in this volume.

25 Books were used for reference in the first exposition, and 12 in the second. A total of three writers associated with "Brethren" were consulted by the two authors. What caused me some amusement was the comment regarding the one "Brethren" writer who spent all his life as a believer in the Assemblies.

I quote, "By far the most spiritual and uplifting of all the commentaries consulted." My response is simple, why not consult other "Brethren" writers, when we have such a goodly heritage?

I confess I read but very little, (if any,) writers not associated with Brethren. In my experience over a half a century I have never discovered any literary works to vie with those of such men as J.N. Darby, William Kelly, F.W. Grant, C.H. Mackintosh, C.E. Stuart, Edward Dennett, F.C. Jennings, C.A.C., Samuel Ridout, John Ritchie, and scores more. 

Some of the works that were produced by them are unparallelled in the English language. 
Synopsis by J.N.D.
The Pentateuch by C.H.M.
Judges by J.T. Mawson
1 Samuel etc. by H.L. Rossier
Rebuilding Zion by F.B. Hole
Job by Samuel Ridout
Song of Solomon by Andrew Miller
Isaiah by F.C. Jennings
Gospel of John by William Kelly
Romans by C.S.
G.C. Willis on Philippians
The list just goes on and on, but for sake of brevity I stop there, but would willingly recommend many others if anyone is interested. 
 



Do Elders Exist Today?

DO ELDERS EXIST TODAY?

My considered answer is that there should be qualified, recognised elders (plural) in every local Assembly of the Lords' people. But, sadly, I have never known of a single elder who met every requirement demanded in the N.T. as to their acceptance for the onerous task of oversight. This is NOT a condemnation of any particular individual or company of the Lords' people, simply a personal observation over a period of nearly half a century while "gathering to the Name of our Lord Jesus Christ."

I would perhaps of preferred to ask, "Is it better to have unqualified elders, rather than none at all?" To this I confess I have no suitable answer. But I do believe that there is a phrase in the N.T. Scriptures that may enable those in local Assembly fellowship to experience real help.
THE PHRASE: Those who "take the lead among you."

There is a certain calibre of believers who are referred to in the N.T. as those who "take the lead," not exclusively elders.These are brethren, (and sisters, in their own sphere,) who have Christ-given spiritual gifts and abilities, and who are recognised as such. Because they do no "aspire to oversight,"  should not preclude them from assisting in guiding, guarding, teaching and leading the "flock." With the assistance of these spiritually-minded brethren, the weighty burden of maintaining a bright testimony for the One "Whom having not seen" we love, will be a little easier. Furthermore it may well help avoid prejudice and partiality, real banes found in our Assemblies, often caused by near family relationships, (nepotism,) and close friendships; these sometimes result in wrong decisions, especially, but not only, in matters of discipline. We must remember that it is not an elder, nor the entire oversight, who make decisions, determine reception to the Lords' Table, or who "put away" offenders. They must give counsel and guidance, of course. But Assembly decisions are the responsibility of the whole company, in subjection to the Lord of the Assemblies.  

Qualifications for Eldership: 1 Timothy 3:1-7; Titus 1:5-9; 1 Peter 5:1-4.

The phrase those who "Take the lead among you:" (J.N.D.) 1 Thessalonians 5:12,13;
1 Timothy 5:17.
The expression, "Your leaders: (J.N.D.) "Hebrews 13:7,17,24.

I must emphasise that this is my own PERSONAL view, and is not intended to promote any disrespect or rebelliousness towards elders in the meetings. It is with a view to help local Assemblies, especially those who have so few numerically, in fellowship.