Posts tagged worldview

Book Review: Satan: His Personality, Power and Overthrow

May11
2012 Leave a Comment Written by Warner Smith

Many of the works of E.M. Bounds are still in print today, but three books, one which was among the only two published during his lifetime, have not been reprinted.  Bounds, Satan: His Personality, Power and Overthrow,1 published after his death is one of his books not currently reprinted.  In Satan, Bounds is interested in clarifying for Christians the characteristics and methods of their enemy.  He writes in reaction to those who denied the authenticity of God’s Word (28), as well as the other basic tenets of Christian theology (36), Christ’s resurrection, miracles, and the reality of heaven and hell.  In this work Bounds suggests that these erroneous beliefs are the direct result of the devils activity.

He begins by acknowledging that Scripture does not contain a description of Satan’s origin (11) nor his activity directly, but that the Bible does deal indirectly with Satan as he relates to the overarching scriptural theme of man’s redemption (13).  In the Bible there is enough information “to light the unseen world, its persons, places, facts and history, not. . .in minute detail, but full enough to provoke thought and reflection, and to create and inspire faith” (14).  In spite of myths which are commonly believed concerning the devil, Bounds counsels that there are truths which can and should be known pertaining to him.  Furthermore, Bounds accepts that demonic possessions occur, and that mankind is under assault by fallen angels who with Satan “are ready . . . to hurt man and defeat God’s Kingdom on earth” (17).

Two characteristics of Satan are brought into focus by Bounds.  First, is the ability of Satan to conceal himself and his work, and second, the personhood or personality of Satan and his demons.  Of Satan’s ability to conceal his activities Bounds writes that a person would have to exercise a “breach of logic and faith” not to believe in the existence of the devil.   “To Christ the devil was one of the most real persons” (29).  Satan “infuses thoughts, makes suggestions and does it so deftly that we do not know their paternity” (35). Bounds also points out that Christ reacted personally to the devil during exorcisms.  Christ “makes a clear distinction between the human personality possessed by the devil, and the personality of the devil who holds possession.  The two are to his eye two persons” (28-29).  According to Bounds Christians must recognize the work of Satan and his forces as that of personal beings who are organized, methodical, and hard working.  Jesus’ example in relating to Satan should be followed by all Christians, “he recognized his person, felt and acknowledged his power, abhorred his character, and warred against his person and kingdom” (29).

Bounds perceives Satan through his position as “prince of this world” (31) more than any other of his agencies.  As one who rules Satan is involved in all of the activities of the world, and Church.  It is the work of the Holy Spirit to execute the ultimate breaking of Satan’s power which has already been adjudicated by Christ’s work on the cross.  Since Satan’s sentence has not yet been administered he is enabled to continue to usurp God’s authority, for a time, on the earth (30-31).  During this time man must respect the position of Satan, because  “man’s words are not to be victors in this conflict.  God’s words . . . broke the power of his assault and defeated his fell intents”(32).

Bounds next discusses the activities and methodologies of Satan.  Satan’s activity is constant, “he is a very busy character.  He does a big business a very mean business, but he does it well” (34-35). “There is no greater worker than he.  His inveterate industry and tireless perseverance are the only things in him worthy of imitation” (99).  “His method is to assume that shape which will suit his purposes at the time” (98).  “He makes people sick . . . entices men to do wrong, and inflames. . . them to do evil” (99).

By him sin loses its sinfulness, the world is clothed with double charms, self is given a double force, faith is turned into fanaticism and love into hate. . . Goodness is the point of his constant attack.  He says nothing good about the good, nothing bad about the bad.  He is always at church before the preacher is in the pulpit or a member in the pew, to hinder the sower, to impoverish the soil, or to blast the seed, that is when courage and faith are in the pulpit, and zeal and prayer in the pew. (35-36)

Another method of Satan is “to establish a wrong estimate of church strength” (44).  His goal is to make the church “become thoroughly worldly while boasting of her spirituality” (45).  Churches must be taught that “the strength of the church lies in her piety.  All else is incidental.” (46) Bounds concludes that the church is influenced far more by evil through the world and desires of the flesh than she is attacked by demons.

Unwittingly Christians display common weaknesses that enable Satan to gain the upper hand in spiritual combat.  “Heaven’s trinity of foes are the world, the flesh, and the devil” (72).  These three align themselves against the Christian.  “The world is first, most powerful and engaging” (72), receiving from Satan “a beauty and seductive power as the rival of heaven” (72).  Money, fashion, and education, are often used as weapons against the Christian.   An “unforgiving spirit” (114) will also open the way for Satan’s attack.  “As soon as a spirit of unkindness possesses us for the wrong done, Satan has the upper hand” (115).  Finally, Satan will seek to use “lust, strong natural desires” (127) against us.  In order to succeed as a Christian these lusts must be “banned and reprobated” (128) from the life of God’s children.

The devil possesses power, great power, power that is “far greater than that of God’s highest and saintliest earthly ones” (89).  Satan is able to neutralize the word of God (98), cause suggestions of evil to arise within people, even godly people, and possess the body of an individual.  We may take comfort, however, from the fact that “the power of Satan is not supreme” (94), it is limited by God.  For example Satan did not have the power of death over Job (86), and the ultimate limit to Satan’s power comes from the cross of Christ through which God “gave a shock to Satan and his power” (94)

In order to protect oneself from Satan wiles, defenses are necessary.  Greatest among these for Christians is to renounce the world which “is to renounce Satan.  This is the deadliest blow at his rule.  The friendship of the world is violative of our marriage vows to heaven” (73).  Another defense against the devil which Christians must employ is to rid themselves of what Bounds calls “a paralyzing attitude” (114).  The lingering to listen to what one knows as the voice of ruin and not truth is fatal to anyone who is serious about living purely before the Lord.  Bounds further suggests that a growing piety and spiritual development (135) through which one learns to depend solely on the power of God’s Word is the comprehensive strategy one should utilize against Satan’s attacks.

Bounds purpose in writing Satan is disclosed as he writes;

Nothing advances Satan’s work with more skillful and readier hands than to be ignorant of Satan and his ways.  To escape his snare, we must not only have a strong faith in the fact that Satan is, but also must have a most intimate knowledge of him and of his plans and many-sided ways. (112)

E. M. Bounds was a quiet and reserved man who was thoroughly Western in his mindset, meticulous in his lifestyle, and strictly biblical in his approach to doctrine and church practice.  A serious man, marked by his experiences in revival and war, he viewed prayer as a weapon.  He prayed often and understood prayer and encouraging others to pray as major components of his ministry.  These factors may bias him against many of the conclusions reached by contemporary warfare writers.  One could imagine Bounds retiring to his west Georgia home to pray down power rather than provoking a power encounter himself.

This work has many strengths, and should be read by those who are interested in a prayer centered view of spiritual warfare.  Bounds affirms at least two positions advanced by the contemporary warfare movement.  Evidence exists in his writing that he recognized at least in part the concepts of territorial spirits, and legal rights of access.  He would accept potentially at least the need for power encounters, as in the case of demon possession, but Bounds would not favor the boisterous manner utilized by some deliverance ministries.  Instead he observed that Jesus was quiet in the presence of Satan, and “awed into silence at the devil’s approach” (32) One might summarize Bounds strategy in a power encounter to be defensive rather than offensive.  While Bounds would not understand the concept of territorial spirits in the same way as Peter Wagner or Bob Beckett, he does acknowledge that Satan may also work beyond the level of persons and seek “to direct the policy and sway the scepter of nations”(43).  He realizes that “there are special seats or headquarters of his power, places where the devil makes his home and rules with an absolute sway” (90).  In these bastions the power of Satan is magnified by pagan worship and the lifestyle of the unregenerate.  Bounds writes that;

The devil’s power is greatly enhanced by his system of worship… pagan worship and devotion is very powerful.  It is not a work of chance, neither does it spring from native religious instincts.  It is a system of rare power and of rare skill, constructed by a graduate in the craft of seduction and delusion.  Satan’s hand and head are in it, all planning, ordering, and inspiring it.  It is this fact which gives it strength and influence. (91)

Although Bounds does not use the vocabulary of the proponents of a legal access theory of spiritual warfare he does suggest that Christians make themselves easy targets, occupying exposed spiritual positions, by living worldly lives.  By willingly allowing lusts of the flesh and worldly desires to remain within ones heart one gives a mighty tool to the enemy with which he may attack again and again.

One weakness of this work is its lack of biblical references in its numerous scriptural quotations.  Since most of Bounds writings are compilations he often makes similar points from many different passages of scripture.  While the passages are familiar it would be very helpful to follow his arguments if the references were cited.

Satan is a powerful book for those who are seeking information about the enemy, however, this work would be ill-fitted for one expecting a treatment of spiritual warfare in contemporary terms.  This work examines Satan from a Biblical, and conservative point of view.  Bounds emphasis on personal piety is helpful also, particularly today, in calling all Christians to a deeper spiritual life.  In Satan he identifies the drastic consequences for failing to heed this call.

We would all do well to heed the lessons taught in the poem Bounds uses in the beginning of chapter 2.

Men don’t believe in a devil now,
As their fathers used to do;
They’ve forced the door of the broadest creed
To let his majesty through;
There isn’t a print of his cloven foot,
Or a fiery dart from his bow,
To be found in earth or air to-day,
For the world has voted so.

But who is mixing the fatal draft
That palsies heart and brain,
And loads the earth of each passing year
With ten hundred thousand slain?
Who blights the bloom of the land to-day
With the fiery breath of hell,
If the devil isn’t and never was?
Won’t somebody rise and tell?

- Alfred J. Hough 2

End Notes

1. Edward McKendree Bounds.  Satan: His Personality, Power and Overthrow. New York: Fleming H. Revell Company, 1922

2.Edward McKendree Bounds., Satan: His Personality, Power and Overthrow (Edited by Homer W. Hodge. New York: Fleming H. Revell, 1922), 18.

Posted in Book Reviews, Preaching - Tagged , , , , , , , , , ,

God Has A Personal Name And It Is Yahweh

May06
2012 Leave a Comment Written by Warner Smith

How well do you think you know God?  Do you think it is possible for anyone to know His name?  Is His name God?  It might shock you to know that according to the Scripture we can know His name, and that there is much for us to learn from this disclosure.

2 God spoke to Moses and said to him, “I am the Lord. 3 I appeared to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob, as God Almighty, but by my name the Lord I did not make myself known to them. 4 I also established my covenant with them to give them the land of Canaan, the land in which they lived as sojourners.     Exodus 6:2–4 (ESV)

God is telling Moses that He has revealed something about Himself to Moses which He had not revealed to Abraham, Isaac or Jacob. Think about that!  Would it not be incredible to know God so well that He would tell you things about Himself which He had told no one else.  We all have friends in whom we confide, but we only confide our secrets to close personal friends.

Moses was so close to God that God would tell him what he did not tell His other friends.  Abraham was His friend but God did not disclose to Abraham what He was telling Moses.

and the Scripture was fulfilled which says, “And Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned to him as righteousness,” and he was called the friend of God. James 2:23 (NASB)

Abraham, Isaac and Jacob knew two of the three names.  In the passage above the word translated God in Hebrew (the original O.T. language) is “Elohim.”  The word translated Almighty in Hebrew is “Adonai.”  The word translated Lord in Hebrew is “Yahweh.”  This is the personal name of God.  The word is the “to be” verb in Hebrew.  It literally means “He is.”  In other words God’s name means, I Am or I exist.  This name “Yahweh” is the name of God which the Hebrew people knew as the ineffable name of God.

They took the commandment not to take Yahweh’s name in vain so seriously that they refused to speak His name at all.  Their rationale was that if one never uttered His name then they could never take His name in vain.

You do not have to be able to read Hebrew to find God’s name in the O.T.  Look in your O.T. and find the word “Lord.”  Look closely and you will most likely discover that the word is written LORD.  When the “ord” are written in small capital letters “ORD” then the word which is being translated into English is “Yahweh” the personal name of God which the Hebrew people considered to be to sacred to speak.

Do you consider God’s name sacred?  How do you show your respect for His name?  Taking God’s name in vain can be done through our speech, but there are other ways in which His name may be taken in vain that do not involve speech.

Perhaps the greatest way we take His name in vain is when we profess to know Him but live a lifestyle which is at odds with His word and does not honor or acknowledge Him. I want to so live that I know, honor and obey!

Posted in Daily Devotions - Tagged ,

Book Review: Revivals, Awakenings and Reform

Apr27
2012 Written by Warner Smith

From a historian’s perspective William McLoughlin 1 sets out to analyze the phenomena of spiritual awakening and define it from a multi-disciplined point of view. As recorded in the foreword, McLoughlin takes Paul Tillich’s statement, “that religion is the soul of culture and culture the form of religion” (vii) literally. He is more interested in tracing the cultural implications of revitalizations, which meet his definition of awakenings, than maintaining any strictly Christian focus on awakenings. McLoughlin implements the formulation of cultural change as expressed by the anthropologist Anthony F.C. Wallace during his study of the Seneca Indians and applies it to five periods in American history which, according to his definition, have experienced Great Awakenings.

Wallace uses the term “mazeway” to describe patterns of thought and behavior which are readily accepted by persons within a culture. Awakenings are preceded by periods when the accepted answers to questions of value and meaning are no longer accepted or reassuring. At this point when individuals become hard pressed to create new “mazeways” (14), the stage is set for an awakening.

According to Wallace, revitalization movements follow a certain pattern. The first stage of a revitalization movement is “the period of individual stress”(12). One by one individuals lose their way. They begin to show signs of societal stress by neglecting their families, becoming physically or psychologically ill or other dysfunction on the individual and family level. This gives rise to the second stage which Wallace refers to as the “period of cultural distortion” (13).

Throughout this phase the institutions of society appear unable to respond effectively to the societal dysfunction occurring. During this period a “traditionalist movement” (14) arises declaring the need for a return to the “ways of our fathers” (14). Also, during this interval of social distortion, violence may erupt as “outsiders” easily become scapegoats for the misgivings of others. The third stage is the appearance of a prophet who personally undergoes a traumatic experience which epitomizes the crisis within the culture (16). The final stage occurs when this prophet begins to attract members of society who share his experience and worldview (19). This “new light” vision for the society begins to attract followers who are willing to experiment with the new way. As more and more adherents are attracted, emotional catharsis may affect large portions of the culture. During this emotional purging many experience “new birth” or “conversion” experiences. These experiences give credibility to the movement and force some measure of acceptance within the culture as a whole clearing, the way for the new consensus to be defined and institutionalized (21).

Basically, McLoughlin’s argument is this: a culture reforms itself by breaking its own rules until the old order is widely perceived as irrelevant. People then begin to seek new understandings of their society’s values. Eventually a charismatic leader arises and advocates a “new way”. If this leader can gain a substantial enough following, these new ideals will be widely accepted and institutionalized. For approximately a generation the culture will settle into this newly defined understanding until a subsequent generation begins the process over again.

Applying Wallace’s model, McLoughlin considers the American culture as having experienced directly, or having been directly influenced, by Five Great Awakenings. The first (Great Puritan Awakening 1610-1640) (10), while not directly experienced by our culture, has provided the core values for our culture’s beginnings (1). The First Great Awakening (1730-1760) (10), as named by history, is second according to McLoughlin’s count. He states that it “made the thirteen colonies into a cohesive unit, and inspired them to believe that they were a free and independent people” (1). The Second Great Awakening (1800-1830) (10) defined Americans’ belief that the nation has a manifest destiny (1). The Third Great Awakening (1890 – 1920) (10) is defined in seemingly secular terms to have led to understanding the theory of evolution and industrial progress (1). The Fourth Great Awakening (1960 – 1990 “?”) (11), McLoughlin further skews toward a wholly secular understanding by defining it as a time of reorientation in which America sought who she was and how she should relate to the universe (1).

McLoughlin’s purpose in writing is to show that the keys to great awakenings can no longer be found exclusively within the realm of Protestant mass revivalism (7), so that he can further “suggest the importance of an interdisciplinary study of religion in America” (217). If one’s worldview is not defined by biblical precepts, then the author’s proposition can succeed.  For anyone who takes the sovereignty of God, the inspiration of scripture or the supremacy of Christ seriously, however, his argument will fail.

To receive benefit from this work, one must understand the bias of the author’s opinion. He is not claiming to interpret awakenings in terms of evangelical Christianity. Instead, he approaches the subject of spirituality as a pluralist, the premise that all religious ideas have equal value. The only reason so much of his work discusses evangelical Christian themes is because of their historical significance in molding the core values (103) of our nation. He makes no value judgements between the validity of Christianity, Judaism, Catholicism, Zen Buddhism or Satanism. He simply is attempting to identify anthropological movements within the American society.

With this bias in view, one can agree with the observation that revival, or awakenings are preceded by a falling away of society’s authoritative norms. Also helpful is the discussion on how “new lights” and “old lights” relate one to another taken from the First Great Awakening through the Third Great Awakening. The concepts of original sin, regeneration or conversion and atonement are traced through an evolution of “new light” thinking from Jonathan Edward’s student Hopkins (78-79) to Taylor (117-119) to Rauschenbusch (176).

In his discussion of the third Great Awakening, a dramatic change occurs from Wallace’s third phase. McLoughlin points out that it is ironic that the greatest professional revivalist of his day was an old light (150), Billy Sunday. For Christians this is an important development. In past awakenings, and in Wallace’s model, the “new light” prophets redefined the social conception. This pattern, if followed in this awakening, would leave the basic Christian worldview in place. During this awakening, however, the “new light” prophets redefined God and his position within the social consciousness. For the first time the Bible and Christianity’s definition of the way of salvation were set aside. This marks a pivotal turning point in the Christian church’s role in defining America’s cultural norms.

It is into this void “a surrogate religion” (153) of agnostic humanitarianism, which fully accepted the evolutionist worldview, was placed. Adherents to this new found faith were completely willing to differ to the wiser verdict of science on any controversial biblical question (155). This would be repeated in the Fourth Great Awakening as, once again, an “old light” fundamentalist Christian Evangelist, Billy Graham (186), would arise to proclaim the message of salvation.

McLoughlin’s conclusion that revival is “by definition syncretic” (215) does not take into account the biblical definition of revival. Revival is a returning to God’s way by turning from one’s own selfish ways. The whole concept implies some absolute to which one must return. Syncretism is the opposite of revival in that it is the adding of one or more idols to those already accumulated by a person attempting to live without God. Revival is ridding the heart, home and society of all idols and returning to the one true God.

Revival and awakening are foremost spiritual acts of a sovereign God. Therefore, they cannot be understood thoroughly apart from God’s revelation to man and man’s need for reconciliation to God in the person of Jesus Christ.

McLoughlin is arguing for a position which suggests that we should not seek to deny a spiritual role in awakening and revival unless we insist on being so closed minded as to persist on defining spirituality in strictly Biblical or Evangelical terms (7). Evangelical Christians must wholly dispute his argument. For the Christian, the spiritual can only be defined as God has defined it in his revelation to us — Holy Scripture. To do otherwise is to accept the lie with which Satan first led mankind astray in the garden: “hath God really said?” Awakening cannot be divorced from the reconciliation of sinful man to holy God. To attempt an understanding in merely cultural means suggest, that a cultures need to survive change (8), supersedes those within the cultures need for reconciliation to God.

In the final analysis the subject of awakening must be defined in theological terms. Even McLoughlin unwittingly admits as much when he quotes the anthropologist David Buchdahl: “One can deny the god of the bible, . . . but in order to think about ‘reality’ completely, some sort of ‘god-term’ is still required for a coherent symbol system” (215). America’s culture has experienced different upheavals, but an awakening of the kind which evangelical’s understand to be taught in Scripture still awaits us.

End Notes

1. William McLoughlin, Revivals, Awakenings and Reform. Chicago:University of Chicago Press, 1978. 239 pp.

Posted in Book Reviews, Revival - Tagged ,

Book Review: Pilgrims In Their Own Land

Apr26
2012 Written by Warner Smith

In Pilgrims in Their Own Land 1 Martin Marty catalogs the history of religion in the United States. Marty traces the pilgrimage of immigrants to American soil while paying close attention to their religious beliefs and practices. After examining each group’s religious beliefs, he then explores the interplay between new beliefs and those that were previously existing. Marty also observes the various new ideas and aberrations which Americans have contributed to religion.

As a professor of the History of Modern Christianity at the University of Chicago and the author of numerous books, Martin Marty is very qualified to write on the subject of religion in America. He views the population of the United States to be on a continuous religious pilgrimage, in which potential religious choices increase with the arrival of each new immigrant. Although Marty seems to conclude that these religious choices will continuously increase, he offers four broad categories under which the history of most religious expression in America may be placed. While these four categories are by no means exhaustive, they provide the necessary handles one requires in order to grasp the rich tapestry of America’s religious identity. These four categories are Protestantism, Catholicism, Judaism, and secular humanism.

The major player in the religious history of America is Protestantism. The profound and lasting influence the Puritans have had on all those who have followed is difficult to overstate. While American Protestants have all acknowledged a regard for the Holy Scriptures, they have differed widely in practice and their allowance for diversity of viewpoints. This has caused many new sects to form as new opinions have advanced and new practices have gained credence. This fragmentation is exemplified by the Disciples of Christ who, in their search for primitive Christianity, effectively divided the church more by providing yet another choice from which religious pilgrims might choose. There were others who initially sought to return to the primitive roots of Christianity but founded whole new faiths instead which were unrecognizable to orthodox Christians. Among those claiming revelations equal or superior to the Christian scriptures were the Mormons, Adventists, and Christian Scientists. Also, Transcendentalists like Thoreau and Emerson who sought to simplify religion created their own (262).

Throughout his book Marty conveys two themes regarding American Protestantism. First, he shows how Protestantism has been dominant in shaping religious thought since the beginning of the United States. Second, he reveals how American Protestantism has constantly been required to reevaluate itself as it has been forced to deal with the new notions of immigrants from without and innovators from within American society. According to Marty, America has said, in effect, to immigrants, “Well, we guess you are going to stay and we guess you are more or less welcome — but you have to change” (271).

While continual fragmentation of American Protestantism has made it hard to follow each variant, three general trends can be discerned. First, American Evangelical beliefs have remained remarkably close to their Puritan forefathers. Second, liberal theologies within mainline Protestantism have produced a type of religious expression that, from time to time, is not only different from its ancestor but openly hostile to it. Third, American Protestantism has produced a wide panoply of cults whose claims have led many away from Christian faith and practice.

The second broad category of American religious history is Catholicism. Catholicism was the first form of Christianity to be introduced on American soil. After Columbus and the Conquistadores came Jesuits who were genuinely interested in the salvation of the native Americans. Due to political differences and competition between the Spanish and French Catholics, an adequate window of opportunity was created which English Protestants seized. Because of these events, with the exception of pockets of missionary activity in the American southwest Catholic influences had to await the immigrants of the eighteenth century to gain a significant foothold in American religious thought. This foothold grew, and by the twentieth century Catholicism could boast of having elected one of their own as President of the United States. From after, Vatican II relations with the old established sects of Protestantism continued to improve. In 1958 Jacques Martian offered a revealing look at the religious landscape of America which apparently significantly affected the author giving him one of his major themes. Martian wrote “Americans seem to be in their own land as pilgrims, prodded by a dream. They are always on the move . . . , not settled, installed” (431).

The third broad category of American religious history is Judaism. Having been practiced in America since colonial times, American Jews have enjoyed a tolerance previously unknown among the nations of the world. With one exception in 1658 America, Marty records that no Jewish believer has had to stand trial for blasphemy (84). In fact, America’s tolerance fostered the atmosphere in which Isaac Mayer Wise and his Reform party of Judaism could speak of “the American way” (288), stifling for some time visions of Jewish Zionism among American Jews. Wise’s message, nurtured by his optimism in America was that “Reform Judaism was not just a faith for Jews but was the faith for moderns, the fulfillment for Americans” (290).

The fourth broad category of American religious history is secular humanism. The beginnings of secular humanism can be traced to the founding father’s desire to create a religion from the state. Prior to the constitution’s ratification, “Benjamin Franklin called for a ‘public religion,’” (154). This religion denied the divinity of Christ while agreeing with the moral code that Jesus advanced (157). George Washington, through his ambiguous statements about religion, also further advanced the idea of a secular religion (158). This public religion became rooted in America’s legal, educational, and political systems. This new secular, or public religion, had “Its creed in the Declaration (of Independence), its prophecies in the most compelling lines of presidential addresses, its psalms in some American poetry” (165). Marty writes that by eighteen hundred this secular religion was strong enough that it was a rival to the traditional church (169). Prior to the War Between the States in 1838, Abraham Lincoln was able to clearly articulate what Franklin had earlier voiced. Lincoln said that “reverence for laws must produce ‘the political religion of the nation,’ and this religion . . . should call forth unceasing sacrifice on its altar” (222). This strain of secularism found a strong advocate in the theories of Darwin which, when combined with the shift away from biblical Christianity within the academy, provided another secular voice with which the churches must vie.

Several apparent biases appear throughout this book. As Marty attempts to explain Queen Isabella’s of Spain inner war, he lists revulsion for the “cocksureness, even fanaticism with which believers felt that God chartered their version of faith as being alone the pure and true one” (16).

Another example of bias is evident in Marty’s discussion of the Great Awakening. Marty is not certain that there was a significant declension preceding the revivals (108). Furthermore, he engages in the historians’ fallacy of insinuating motivation to the revivalists during this awakening. He writes that “to get the revival off the ground, the pioneers . . . had to demonstrate a need in the colonies. Never trust a revivalist preacher for a fully accurate picture of how bad the times were spiritually” (109). Not only does Marty have a bias against the revivalists’ trustworthiness in accurately portraying the times preceding the revival, he also implies that there possibly were problems with Edwards’ motivation in four areas of this revival. First, Marty implies that Edwards studied crowd psychology in the conversions occurring in other towns (114), possibly suggesting causation in the revival of Northampton. Second, he attributes an impure motive to Edwards’ in rewriting history with Northampton as its climax for the purpose of increasing the peoples’ reaction to the revival. Third, Marty states that Edwards placed the “Made in America” stamp on the revival even though he knew there were similar revivals breaking out on the European continent (115). Fourth, Marty’s bias against Edwards is further revealed in his description of Edwards’ book on the revival as “six quaint pages in a book rarely read about an awakening most Americans never heard of” (116).

Again evidence of an anti-evangelical bias by Marty is revealed when he writes that George Whitfield, following his conversion, engaged in “spreading the charge revivalists like to make: that one may go to church and say prayers but still not be a Christian without a specific experience” (118).

Yet another example of bias on Marty’s part is apparent when, in his discussion of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary professor Crawford H. Toy, he writes that “Toy unfortunately had to test his ideas . . . in the Southern Baptist Convention”(304). Toy agreed with the new theory which German scholars taught: that when studying the Scripture, “the kernel of truth” must be separated “from its outer covering of myth” (305). These views were discussed within the Southern Baptist Convention leading Toy to resign.

A more remarkable occurrence of bias is Marty’s statement that Mary Baker Eddy’s Christian Science movement “was one of the most impressive visions and achievements on the American spiritual landscape” (331). Once more Marty shows his liberal bias over and against current conservative views when he counts as one of the most vital signs of mainline church strengthening “the efforts to break two-thousand-year-old patterns of male dominance in religion” (438).

Overall, this is a helpful edition which provides a thorough treatment of the diverse religious background of America’s people. Marty’s treatment is, in the main, as balanced as modern evangelicals may expect from any but their own writers. There is a rich collection of historic information contained in this volume which makes it profitable for anyone seeking to begin to gain an understanding of America’s religious heritage.

End Notes

1. Marty, Martin. Pilgrims in Their Own Land. New York: Penguin Books, 1984. 488 pp.

Posted in Book Reviews, Revival - Tagged , , , , ,

40 Days of Preparation Day 40

Apr04
2012 Leave a Comment Written by Warner Smith

Today, Wednesday April 4, 2012, is the fortieth day of preparing our hearts, souls and minds for the most high of all Christian holy days, Easter Sunday. Today I need to “put off” anger and “put on”self control. When I speak of putting off anger I do not mean that you and I will never have anger or show anger again but that what causes us to become angry and how we behave when angered will change from our pre-Christian lives.

Jesus shows us the distinction between righteous indignation and selfish anger when He cleansed the Temple in Jerusalem.

13 When it was almost time for the Jewish Passover, Jesus went up to Jerusalem. 14 In the temple courts he found men selling cattle, sheep and doves, and others sitting at tables exchanging money. 15 So he made a whip out of cords, and drove all from the temple area, both sheep and cattle; he scattered the coins of the money changers and overturned their tables. 16 To those who sold doves he said, “Get these out of here! How dare you turn my Father’s house into a market!” 17 His disciples remembered that it is written: “Zeal for your house will consume me.” 18 Then the Jews demanded of him, “What miraculous sign can you show us to prove your authority to do all this?” 19 Jesus answered them, “Destroy this temple, and I will raise it again in three days.” 20 The Jews replied, “It has taken forty-six years to build this temple, and you are going to raise it in three days?” 21 But the temple he had spoken of was his body. 22 After he was raised from the dead, his disciples recalled what he had said. Then they believed the Scripture and the words that Jesus had spoken. John 2:13–22 (NIV)

Zeal for God’s house ignited Jesus’ anger and not His own sense of being personally wronged. When you or I become angry it is for our own self interests. It is this form of selfish anger that I am suggesting you and I need to “put off.” It is selfish anger to which the writer of Proverbs refers when he writes:

22 An angry man stirs up dissension, and a hot-tempered one commits many sins. Proverbs 29:22 (NIV)

Whenever we become converted the fruits of the Spirit begin to manifest themselves in us. As we mature in Christ these fruits grow and become manifest more and more. If you are a Christian you need to compare your spiritual maturity by the presence of the fruits of the Spirit in your own personal life.

22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, 23 gentleness and self-control. Against such things there is no law. Galatians 5:22 – 23

It is by putting on self control that you and I are able to allow God the Holy Spirit to control our natural flesh’s tendency to lash out when wronged or when we perceive we have been wronged. The practical reason why you and I need to “put off” anger and “put on” self control is that to fail to do so causes us to live our lives preoccupied by defending our own honor and being offended whenever our defenses prove unsuccessful. If, however, we are able to “put off” anger and “put on” self control we will live our lives for God’s glory and count it all joy whenever we are offended for His great names sake, and the sake of His gospel. I believe the world needs more mature Christians who have “put off” anger and “put on” self control! Do you agree or disagree?

 

Posted in Daily Devotions - Tagged , , , , , , , ,
← Older Entries