The song had not been heard before.  Heard before was only a question: Who is worthy?

            An important question indeed!  At the center of the question is a book.  Not just any book.  This is the book that is held in the right hand of Him that sitteth upon the throne.  It is the possession of the almighty God.  He is its sole author.  This book is comprehensive.  It contains all the events of the universe.  It is about the stars in the heavens above.  It is about the mountains, the forests, and rivers.  It is about men and nations.  It is about angels and devils.  It concerns judgment and mercy.  This book is powerful.  It is not a record.  It is not a history.  It is not even a foretelling of things that are to come.  The book, written within and on the backside, is the counsel of God, His wisdom ordaining all things from the foundation of the world.  The loosing of its seals brings all things written therein to their execution and completion.

            But this book is closed in the hand of Him that sits on the throne.  It is sealed with seven seals.  It must be received from the hand of Him that sits on the throne.  It must be opened.  Its seven seals, one after another, must be loosed.  Only then will its events come to pass.  Only then will the glory of God be vindicated.  Only then will the redemption of the elect be accomplished.

            Who is worthy?  A great question!

            A search is undertaken.  A mighty angel asks the great question with a mighty voice.  Who is worthy?  Who is worthy to open the book, and to loose the seals thereof?

            To this question there is no answer.  There is only silence.  For there is none worthy. None worthy in heaven.  None worthy in earth.  None worthy under the earth.  None is found able to open the book, neither to look thereon.  No one steps forward to take the book, to loose its seven seals, to open it, and to look upon it.

            In the silence following the question, one voice is heard.  Not a voice offering to take the book from the right hand of Him that sat on the throne.  Not a voice proclaiming its owner’s worth or merit.  But a voice of unworthiness.  The voice belongs to one who knows his unworthiness.  It belongs to a child of God, the apostle beloved of the Lord.

            The voice is the voice of weeping, even of much weeping.

            The voice weeps much because of the silence.  It weeps because none was found worthy to open and to read the book, neither to look thereon.  It weeps because this child of God longs for the vindication of God’s glory.  It weeps in longing for the redemption of the elect of God.

            But that weeping must fall silent.  In its place must come instead laughter.  The mourning must be changed to gladness and joy.  The voice must be lifted up with shouts of acclamation and praise.

            For there is one that is worthy.  Not one in heaven, nor in the earth, nor under the earth.  This one is in the midst of the throne of God.  In the midst of the four beasts and in the midst of the elders He stands.  He is the Lion of Judah’s tribe.  He is the Root of David.  He is the Lamb that was slain.

            He is the one that stands forth in the midst of the silence.  He is the one that must still the weeping voice of the apostle.  Having stood forth in the midst of the silence, He proceeds to the throne.  He takes the book out of the right hand of Him that sits upon the throne.

            This Lion of Judah has prevailed!  The Lamb that was slain is worthy to take the book.  He is worthy to loose its seven seals, worthy to open it, and to look thereon.

            How?  How is He worthy?  How has He prevailed?

            Hearken to the new song.  Hear the words that now fill the silence and take away the weeping.  The new song is glorious, its words exalted:  Worthy is the Lamb that was slain!

            Hear the new song as sung by the four beasts and the four and twenty elders about the throne of God.  “Thou art worthy...for thou wast slain, and hast redeemed us to God by thy blood….”

            He is worthy!

            Worthy not by fortune, not by riches measured by silver or gold or precious stones.  Worthy not by earthly conquest or dominion, the gathering of nations into a mighty empire.  Worthy not by fame given by adoring multitudes.

            Worthy He is by His blood.  Worthy He is by being slain.  Worthy by sacrifice, making redemption by His blood, laying down His life unto death.  This lamb is accounted foolish and weak by men.  But He is accounted worthy before God.

            Worthy for us!  Hear the joyous tidings of the gospel in this new song.  “Thou hast redeemed us to God by thy blood ... and hast made us unto our God kings and priests: and we shall reign on the earth.”  His worthiness is our worthiness.  His blood is the full price of our redemption.  By His blood we are made kings and priests unto our God. By His death we shall reign on the earth.

            Worthy is the Lamb!

            Hear the new song as sung by the voice of many angels, the mighty host numbering ten thousand times ten thousand, and thousands of thousands.  “Worthy is the Lamb that was slain to receive power and riches, and wisdom, and strength, and honor, and glory, and blessing.”

            He is worthy!  Worthy of all this glory — for all things in all the creation, of heaven and earth and the sea, are His.  Even as He spoke upon earth, “All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth,” so is it in heaven, before the throne of the Almighty, and at His right hand.

            Worthy is the Lamb that was slain!

            Along that deepest, darkest way He went.  The Lamb bore the shame and reproach of men.  Their scorn and mockery filled His ears.  Accursed of God in the shedding of His blood, slain was He on the wood of the cross.  To the depths of hell He went.  There is His worth!

            Worthy is the Lamb, worthy of power and riches.  By His blood, He is worthy of wisdom and strength.  Slain, He is worthy of honor, and glory, and blessing.  To the Lamb, who has emptied Himself, must be given all fullness.

            Worthy is the Lamb!

            Hear the new song as sung by all creatures in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and such as are in the sea, and all that are in them.  “Blessing, and honor, and glory, and power, be unto him that sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb for ever and ever.”

            He is worthy!  Worthy of all this praise and all this exaltation.  Worthy that every creature should have these high words of adoration in their mouths and upon their tongues.  No glory may be held for the creature.  All glory for the Lamb, to be given unto Him who alone is worthy.

            That praise belongs first to Him that sitteth upon the throne.  He is the thrice-Holy One, the Lord God almighty.  He created all things.  For His pleasure they are and were created.  Before Him the four and twenty elders have fallen down.  To Him they give their worship.  To Him they say, “Thou art worthy to receive glory and honor and power.”

            Now that same praise must be given to the Lamb.  To the Lamb be blessing.  To Him be honor, and glory, and power.  For He Himself is of God, the only-begotten Son, the one that stands in the midst of God’s throne.

            Worthy is the Lamb!

            A new song!

            He is worthy to take the book.  By that worthiness, He came to the throne, to receive the book from the right hand of Him that sat on the throne.  The Lamb looses its seven seals.  The Slain opens the book.  Worthy by His blood, He looks thereon.  Exalted to the highest glory, He has the power and authority to execute what is written within and on the backside. It belongs to Him to vindicate the glory of God, to accomplish the full redemption of the elect He purchased with His blood.

            All that work He does in the midst of this new song: Thou art worthy!

            That new song is given to the church.  It is given to him that hath an ear to hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches.  It is given to us who are the redeemed, who are made by His blood kings and priests unto our God.  It is given to us who shall reign on the earth.

            The new song is given to us, to fill the silence of our wondering hearts, our questioning minds.  It is given to us in our mourning, when we see God’s glory trampled underfoot.  It is given us in our weeping, as we long and groan in hope for our promised redemption.

            This new song we keep in our hearts as a most precious treasure.  To it we tune our voices.  With our tongues we echo its words.  To Him we sing, “Thou art worthy!”

            Worthy is the Lamb!

            Worthy is the Lamb that was slain!

Editorial:

Prof. Barrett Gritters

The Churches’ Need for Preachers  (3):

Preachers and the Judgment of God
Previous article in this series:  April 15, 2005, p. 316.

            Lack of preachers in the church world, felt also in the PRC, motivates God’s people to pray more fervently:  “Lord of the harvest, thrust out (see previous editorial) laborers into the harvest….  Graciously move men to prepare for the gospel ministry….  Provide us pastors after Thine Own heart (Jer. 3:15)….  Ride forth, victorious White Horse of the gospel!!”

            Especially vacant churches feel this lack.  Some feel it more keenly than others.  Churches with regular preaching from retired ministers or the seminary do not experience the lack as a great hardship.  Where elders must read sermons, or run a tape recorder twice on Sunday, they do.  But even those who have regular supply on the Lord’s Day are aware of all the catechism students who need their own pastor.  And how many merely plod along in their personal or family troubles because no pastor is aware to assist them with the Word?

            Along with the problem of the lack of ministers is a lack in ministers.  There are preachers, but without the graces that make their work edifying.  The gospel is heard, but barely.  The people are fed, but in meager portions.  Then the difficulty is not the absence, but the presence of the preacher.

            The churches need preachers.  Soon.  Always.  Who of the young (or older) men will take up the preparation for the rewarding work of a lifetime labor in the gospel?

            The explanations commonly given for the lack of ministers are unsatisfactory.  They range from the mundane and prosaic (baby-boomers are retiring and not enough are alive to take their place, or churches neglect to encourage their young men to enter the ministry), to the humbling (men are leaving the ministry on account of the increasing expectations, high pressures, or for disqualifying sins).  Pollsters query active ministers and men who have left the ministry for explanation.  They present statistics, offer solutions.  If the churches follow the suggestions, they ought to get their ministers.  So they think.

            With regard to the lack in ministers, the explanations are often as unsatisfactory. 

God’s Judgment

            But who will ask God for His explanation for this lack?  And who will dare ask whether God may withhold  preachers in His judgment upon churches?

            God may well withhold, remove, or give unqualified preachers in judgment (or chastisement) upon churches.

            This is implied in the reality that ministers are God’s gift (Jer. 3:15).  Lack of ministers is God withholding His gifts.  When Jesus taught the church to pray for laborers, He said, Ask my Father that He would send out laborers (Matt. 9:37,38; Luke 10:2).  Unless the Lord sends ministers, there will be none.

            But Scripture is explicit in indicating that God sometimes judges (or chastens) a people by withholding His Word.  That may be why churches lack preachers.  It may be why a church suffers from weak preaching.  In His displeasure, God allows the people to suffer spiritual hunger.  Calvin recognized this: “Nothing is more ruinous for the church than for God to take away faithful pastors” (emphasis mine:  BLG).

            In Amos’ days, God warned Israel of an impending famine.  No ordinary famine, this would be a famine of the Word.  God would withhold the refreshing and life-giving Word (Amos 8:11).  During this famine, the people would feel as though God had turned their “feasts into mourning, and all (their) songs into lamentation … as the mourning of an only son” (v. 10).  God would no longer send His Word.  And they were “the church.”

            In the book of Revelation, God’s first warning to the churches was to Ephesus.  Ephesus’ sin is familiar: they were leaving (or had already forsaken) their “first love” (Rev. 2:4).  Even the warning is well-known: If they did not repent and “do the first works,” God would come to them “quickly, and… remove (their) candlestick out of his place” (v. 5).  That is, they would cease to be a true church of Christ.

            What is not so familiar is the description of the one who issues this warning.  He is the one who “holdeth the seven stars in his right hand, who walketh in the midst of the seven golden candlesticks” (v. 1).  This description may well indicate one way in which He would bring about their judgment.  The seven stars are “angels” or “messengers,” that is, the pastors of the seven churches (Rev. 1:20).  The declining church at Ephesus is reminded first to see Jesus as the one who provides these “angels” for the churches.  His judgment (chastisement) upon a falling church may be to remove these “angels,” or allow unfaithful men to occupy pulpits.  In this way, He removes their candlestick, that is, their place as a true church.

            God judges churches, denominations or congregations, by not giving them pastors.  And sometimes by giving pastors not according to his heart.

“Self-examination”

            If there is a lack of preachers, or weak preaching, or bad preaching, churches—including the Protestant Reformed Churches—must examine themselves.  God does.  God examines them.

            This is not often the response to a lack in preachers.  Usually, one looks at the minister: “If the minister would work harder, we would have sermons that feed us.”  Or the elders are faulted: “If the elders would take better oversight of the minister, we would see improvements.”  Or they examine the seminary:  “The seminary must do more to train the men and recruit more and better students.”  Or they take polls to explain the absence of ministers:  then it’s the pressure, the workload, the long hours, the thankless labor….

            But how often do members examine themselves?  God’s people must look within.  In humility, they must ask: “Lord, why this lack of ones to bring the life-giving word?  And if there is a lack in the preachers, why this lack?  Show us, O great Lord of the harvest!  Try us, and examine us, and see if there be any wicked way in us!”

            To refuse to ask that question would be like Israel—after their stunning and humbling defeat at little Ai for the sin of Achan—to examine everything but whether God was judging (chastening) them.  “Were our soldiers not rested well?  Has their training been insufficient?  Was the number of warriors too low?”  Whereas they ought to have asked:  “Lord, why art Thou not giving us victory?”  Our response today must be that of Joshua at that time:

And Joshua rent his clothes, and fell to the earth upon his face before the ark of the Lord… he and the elders of Israel, and put dust upon their heads.  And Joshua said, Alas, O Lord God….  For the Canaanites and all the inhabitants of the land shall hear of it, and shall environ us round, and cut off our name from the earth: and what wilt thou do unto thy great name?  (Joshua 7:6, 7)

            God’s great name!

            Indeed, the pressures are high enough to keep some away; the minister may lack important gifts; the seminary may be at fault; the elders lax.  But that all begs the question:  “Why, Lord?”  Why would the Lord withhold His blessings, permitting the seminary to slip, the elders to be asleep at the switch, the minister to be interested in many things besides making solid sermons?  Why?  Is God chastening a declining church?  Is God judging a falling church?

What is it, Lord?

            The year the famine (of the Word) came to Israel was a sad year.  It should not have been a surprise.  Through Prophet Amos, God explained: judgment comes because the people, smug in their wealth, cannot wait for Sabbath to end so they may get on with commerce.  They mistreat the needy for selfish gain.  They practice business deceitfully, driven as they are by greed (Amos 8:4-6).  “As my judgment upon your impenitence, I send a famine of the Word.”

            Judgment on Ephesus, however, was surprising, at least from one perspective.  Ephesus maintained right doctrine (Rev. 2:2).  The church exercised discipline (2:2, 6).  She was even active in her proper work (2:3): preaching, catechism instruction, missions.  But God may still remove her candlestick!  Why?  All her activity was not rooted in love for God in Jesus Christ.

            There are other reasons the Lord may deny a church preachers.  Maybe she falls into the sin Ezekiel warned of:

And they come unto thee as the people cometh, and they sit before thee as my people, and they hear thy words, but they will not do them:  for with their mouth they shew much love, but their heart goeth after their covetousness.  And, lo, thou art unto them as a very lovely song of one that hath a pleasant voice, and can play well on an instrument: for they hear thy words, but they do them not (Ezek. 33:31-32).

            Woe to them that are at ease in Zion (Amos 6:1).

            Or the church members are busy criticizing the preachers, blatantly or, what is sometimes worse, more “carefully.”  Some take the attitude that there are really only one or two preachers worth listening to or having.  A “Corinthian” party-spirit prevails that says, “We’ll listen to Rev. So-and-So; but when Rev. Such-and-Such comes, we’ll be visiting elsewhere.  You’re fans of Prof. X; but we like Prof. Y.”  Surprisingly, the apostle Paul himself suffered this treatment, as one Corinthian faction preferred Rev. Apollos over him.  Ministers themselves can be guilty of this.  The Lord judges such carnal folly (I Cor. 3:1-5).

            Or the people are guilty of Israel’s sin in Isaiah’s day, when the proud people said to others, “Stand by thyself, come not near to me; for I am holier than thou” (Is. 65:5).  Then my haughty pride attempts to remove the motes from everyone else’s eyes, while the beam remains in my own.

            Or the church members gradually come to love many things besides the things of the kingdom.  Their confession, if asked, is: “I seek first the kingdom.”  But the time has come that the people of God are tempted to be busy with almost anything except the labors of the church:  Bible studies and catechism and good reading and visiting the needy and other activities that constitute “pure religion” (James 1:27).  As in another day, what most makes the people happy is “bread and circuses,” that is, fine food, entertainment, and the money to get both.

The Lord’s call

            To these the Lord says, “Repent, and remember from whence thou art fallen, and do the first works” (Rev. 2:5).

            For believers, the judgment is chastisement—loving chastisement.

            The warning is not intended to cause believers to despair, but to repent.  The proper response is not wringing of hands or lamenting “good old days.”  The proper response is (united) godly sorrow that leads to repentance.  Cry to God for an end to the famine.  Cry that the famine not become worse.

            Believers will seek God in the sorrow that trusts His Son for mercy—mercy upon the churches.  Mercy that forgives follies.  Mercy that delivers from follies.  Mercy that sends pastors.

            Believers seek Him for the grace to stand together in genuine support of the God-appointed servants who stand in the front lines of the battle.  Even in earthly battles, how few are on the front lines, and how many thousands are needed as support, behind the lines.  Pray for the leaders in the heat of the battle.  They are weak and sinful.

            Lord of the harvest, care for the preachers.  Care for Thy dear church, precious blood-bought heritage!  Humble us.  And for Thy name’s sake (Josh. 7:7), do not withhold the gift of pastors … according to Thine heart.   

Letters:

 Keepers at Home

           Having followed the articles by Rev. Bruinsma in the rubric “When Thou Sittest in Thine House,” I was concerned with some things said in the last article on this in the February 1, 2005 issue.

            God, right after the fall, judged the man to earn his and his family’s bread in the sweat of his face.  To the woman God said that in sorrow she shall bring forth children (Gen 3:16-19).  It is this present world’s folly, especially of the women, that in addition to their own sorrow they want to take upon themselves the curse placed on man.  God commanded the man, not the woman, to work to sustain his family.

            While this is not censurable sin, and in that sense it is a matter of Christian liberty, yet God’s commandments do have a bearing on this issue.  The effect of ignoring it can and does lead to discipline issues, because of the effect and results of not being a keeper at home — on marriage and on the family in the generations.

             I believe that Scripture plainly teaches that the woman must be a keeper at home, not merely a keeper of the home.  It is so often the worldly woman’s discontent with the position in which God has placed her that causes her to seek work outside the home.  Thus she scorns the authority of her husband (sin against the 5^th commandment), and desires what the world has to offer (sin against the 8^th commandment), in her coveting that which is not hers (the 10^th commandment).  This is one of the great curses of today’s society.  It is gradually taking away any remnants of a Christian family life.  And it is very hard for anyone, man or woman, to hold down two jobs and do justice to both.

            Let us not be deceived into thinking that we, as Protestant Reformed believers, are immune to the spirit of the age we live in.  

            Is there no room for a Christian wife and mother to work outside the home?  Yes, a wife may help her husband in his earthly occupation, just as many farmers’ wives do.  But she in those cases is not seeking her own vocation, but is helping her husband in his.

            What is phariseeism?  As Christ says in Matthew 23:15, “Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites.”  In this, as well as many other places in Scripture, the Word plainly teaches that phari–seeism is living the life of the hypocrite.  If we live an outwardly godly life, but do not have the new life living inside us, or take a holier than thou attitude, then it would be phariseeism.  Christian liberty, however, is the liberty that we are set free from the slavery in the house of bondage of sin — free to start to live, not only according to some, but according to all the commandments of God.  We have to be obedient to what God’s Word and our own conscience dictates for our family.  The accusation of phariseeism will often come in the false charge, “They want to take away our Christian liberty.”  Let us not call God’s people hypocrites.

            It is the husband’s godly calling to earn a living for his family.  God does not, however, require husbands to work so many hours at their calling to the detriment of their responsibilities not only to church, but also to home and family.  God has provided His church with a diaconate.  Both the father of the family earning his daily bread, and the aid of the deacons, are equally good gifts of God through which God provides for us.

            Let us live in Christian love with each other, not resorting to name-calling, but each esteeming the other better than ourselves.  Let us build up each other in the faith.

Bert Mulder

Sherwood Park, Alberta, Canada

 RESPONSE:

            I have been responding to people individually as they have written to me personally with questions and comments about my four Standard Bearer articles on the place of the woman in the home.  But since this one is written directly to the Standard Bearer and seeks a public response I will attempt to answer it briefly.

            I appreciate the concern that Brother Mulder expresses:  “Let us not be deceived into thinking that we as Protestant Reformed believers are immune to the spirit of the age we live in.”  It was for this reason I wrote the articles in the first place.  I share his concern.  We must indeed not allow the “the spirit of the age” to influence us to think that the place of the mother is in the work force together with the father who is the provider for the home and family.  This was expressly the point of all of my articles, not only on the place of the mother but also of the father in the home. 

            A complicating factor, perhaps, is that the articles, five of them altogether, appeared in the Standard Bearer spread out over a long period of time.  The result of this, I fear, is that the brother’s comments are made only in response to the last article.  In the article “God’s Command to Mothers” (SB, March 1, 2004, Volume 80, Number 11) I laid out the biblical principles of the place of the mother in the home “looking well to the ways of her household.”  In the article “Working Mothers” (SB, April 1, 2004, Volume 80, Number 13) I state forthrightly:  “How can a mother look well to the ways of her household and work full time outside of the home and family?  Impossible!”  But in this same article I also emphasized that we can maintain this without making it a law.  We need not declare:  “It is a sin for mothers to do any kind of work outside of the home.”  The fact that it is a matter of Christian liberty is what I defended also in the final article I wrote.

            Brother Mulder responds by agreeing with my position.  He writes:  “While this is no censurable sin and in that sense it is a matter of Christian liberty, yet God’s commandments do have a bearing on the issue.”  I am in complete agreement with him.  He himself proves this point by coming up with a possible scenario of a mother working outside of the home.

            It is exactly because of this that I brought up the whole matter of Phariseeism.  The brother’s conclusion that, in so doing, I became guilty of name calling puzzles me.  But let me clarify once again what I meant by Phariseeism.  The Pharisees taught work righteousness.  They believed that a man earned his righteousness before God by the keeping of the law.  In connection with this, the Pharisees made up a whole list of laws that, they believed, further defined and fine-tuned the laws of Moses.  These were known as the “tradition of the elders” (Mark 7:1-13).  Jesus says in Matthew 23:4 that these “traditions” were heavy burdens and grievous to be borne, which the Pharisees laid upon men’s shoulders.  It is this Phariseeism, or legalism, that we must be very careful to avoid in the church. 

            What is it that motivates a godly mother in Zion to be a keeper in the home?  Is it a law?  Does she do it because it makes her look good?  No.  A believing mother does it because she reads God’s Word and understands its wisdom.  She with a believing heart sees how her place in the family is going to affect the spiritual welfare of that family, and by God’s grace she gladly takes up her labors in the home.  A law in this matter is not going to convict anyone.

            This is where the whole idea of Christian liberty enters in.  I agree with Brother Mulder: “we are set free from the slavery in the house of the bondage of sin — free to start to live, not only according to some, but according to all the commands of God.”  We must allow God’s people to walk in that liberty.  Christian liberty is further defined for us in several chapters of Scripture, a good one being Romans 14.  It is good for all to read this chapter.  In the area of Christian liberty, there is given to the saints the right to walk in the liberty of their salvation without enslaving them to man-made laws.  This does not mean that this liberty gives a person the right to walk in the way of sin by satisfying his flesh.  Liberty simply gives Christians the right, in areas where God’s Word gives no specific command, to determine for themselves (prayerfully and with diligent use of the principles of God’s Word) how to serve God in a way that is pleasing to Him.  This can and may vary from one family to the next.

            May God preserve us that we not give in to the temptations of this world.  And may He give us the grace and the wisdom to be able to put to practical use in our homes what He teaches us in His Word.

Rev. W. Bruinsma

Go Ye Into All the World:

Rev. Jaikishin Mahtani

Equipping Our People for Personal Evangelism (2)

Rev. Mahtani is eastern home missionary of the Protestant Reformed Churches.

      Previous article in this series:  April 15, 2005, p. 331.

            Preachers can help a great deal to equip the saints by the preaching itself.

            Believing that the best way to equip our people for personal evangelism is by the lively preaching of the gospel, I wish to return to the subject of preaching and discuss some of its finer points as it relates to evangelism.  I think we need to remember a few things about preaching.

            First of all, let us not forget that the lively preaching of the gospel goes on not only from the pulpit on Sunday and during a formal worship service, but also from house to house through necessary pastoral calls or via regular family visitation.  It also goes on in the catechism room among the children and young people.

            Preachers can give much aid to God’s people in personal evangelism.  Recognizing differences in personalities, abiding weaknesses, feelings of inadequacy, fears, etc. in Christ’s sheep, preachers must strive to give help to God’s people and seek to equip them to this task.

            Allow me to be specific without sounding critical in any sense, for I know I have a long ways to go in the blessed work of preaching.  Questions should not be limited to: “Do you know the comfort of this truth?” or “What does this mean for you?”  Rather, God’s people must constantly be placed before their God-given task to do personal evangelism with questions such as these:  “Does this truth mean something to you so that you are excited enough to talk about it at work tomorrow?” or, “How is this reality going to affect the way you live so that others can see Christ in you?” or, “Does your hope in the coming of Christ manifest itself in the way you think, talk, and live?”  We might imagine that these questions are easy, or that they come readily to mind.  Truth is, God’s people do not always think in those terms.  Often these questions are considered more in connection with the teaching of children.  I am in no way minimizing that aspect of our calling.  But I am saying that our preachers can help equip our people to do personal evangelism by asking pointed questions that will help God’s people remember this important calling.

            But preachers too are different, and so it will come across in their preaching in different ways.  I often hear the comment that because I was brought out of heathendom I naturally ask these questions.  I think that this is true.  But I was humbled and encouraged by an elder out west who responded to a sermon I preached there not too long ago by saying: “You know, I thought that with your background, you were going to pound us with guilt about not being mission minded enough.  But you did not!  You called us to be faithful to the truth!”  I was humbly thankful for that observation and encouragement.  Those of us who are given to talk about missions should temper it with solid doctrinal teaching that will persuade our people that evangelism and contending for the faith are not opposites.  Hopefully, those of us preachers who are not as ready to emphasize missions will also be willing to inject a dose of mission zeal in our sermons.  A balance of this sort will help our people not to say: “I am of Mahtani, he is mission-minded; or, I am of Engelsma, he is doctrinal; or I am of Haak, of the Reformed Witness Hour, he is brief!”  We are of Christ, and let us as ambassadors of Christ bring the whole counsel of God’s Word, and that includes the emphasis to be busy in personal evangelism.  I think this balance will help our people tremendously.  For as the leaders, so the people; if our people need help in evangelism, let us preachers examine ourselves and be willing to develop and improve. 

            In that regard, a personal comment and request: please do not feel that every time you ask a missionary to preach or write an article it should be about missions. This is a mistake. Our people want to hear our missionaries preach the same truths they hear at home. I am glad that at the YP’s Convention this year I have been asked to preach on “The Worship of the King!”  Now what in the world does a missionary have to say about worship?!   Everything!  If he has nothing to say about worship and everything to say only about evangelism, he had better not be a missionary!

            Let us remember too that we promote personal evangelism not only through the choice of texts and themes, but by the attitude that we portray in our preaching.  We must be polemical; we must condemn error.  But we must do so in such a way that the people of God do not become lopsided in their thinking, for then we are in danger of begetting a bunch of haughty minded people who think that to behave in a condescending and unfriendly manner towards unbelievers is to be commended in us.  We may not intend it, but somehow God’s people might take that with them to the workbench and classroom in a totally wrong way.  To avoid this, if we temper our polemics with a mission zeal, pointing out the urgency of the gospel as the only power that can turn a man from such lies, and pointing out that only by grace have we ourselves had our blindness removed, and urging the saints to be ready to speak of that hope to all around them with meekness and fear, then we are doing a good service to the cause of personal evangelism. 

            To defend our hope, to give an apologia instead of apologizing for our faith or becoming brash about our convictions — this is not an easy task.  It is a spiritual toil.  God’s people must see in our preaching that we toil in prayer to be faithful instruments on the pulpit, and then, taking heed to our instruction, they too, by the grace of God, will seek that wisdom to save souls.  Proverbs 11:30:  “The fruit of the righteous is a tree of life; and he that winneth souls is wise.”

Not only the preacher but also the elders and deacons must work to equip the saints.

            It is not only the minister’s duty to equip the saints for evangelism but also the calling of the other officebearers.  It is, after all, the church that is called to evangelize.  That is why I would like to focus now on the work of elders and deacons in helping to equip our people for personal evangelism.  The Form for the Ordination of Elders and Deacons mandates the elders “to look diligently whether every one deports himself in his confession and conversation.”  It instructs the elders “to serve all Christians with advice and consolation.”  In the oversight of the congregation, the elders ought to be mindful of this their duty to equip the saints for personal evangelism. By their instruction and warning, they must instruct God’s people of the importance of giving a good witness so that the Word of God is never blasphemed on account of the sins of the saints.  By their own godly example, they must show the saints the way to make a good confession.  Looking to them, and thus looking to Christ Himself, the saints will know that personal evangelism is part and parcel of their Christian calling in the midst of a sinful world.

            As the elders go in and out among the saints, both from week to week in informal settings and from house to house in official family visitation, they can help equip the saints by prodding them with questions on evangelism such as the following:  What is your example in this neighborhood?  At work?  In school?  At college?  Do your neighbors and colleagues know you?  Why not?  How about your children?  Are they known to be rowdy and lazy, or godly and hardworking?  What kind of friends do you have?  Are you giving a good testimony in your neighborhood and at work?  Is your lawn such that you are not ashamed to be called a Christian?  Is your desk at work a reflection of your Christianity?  And addressing young people, they could ask: Is it the love of God, or the love of the world, that drives you in your life?  Are you giving in to the pressures of the world, or are you instead giving a good witness to all those around you?  They can remind the saints of the calling to love the neighbor, whoever that person is that God has put on their pathway, with questions such as these:  Is there a need at work or in school that you can meet that will show Christ’s love?  Will your neighbor come to you in time of need?  Why not?  And the elders, in taking heed to the flock, can surely help the saints to be alert to their calling to give a good witness to what is happening in the world, with questions such as:  Are you conscious of what is happening around the world?  If not, why not?  Did 9/11 affect you in any way?  How about the recent tsunami in Asia, have you had occasion to talk about the judgment of God to come?  As Christians, do you speak of your blessed hope of the coming of our great God and Savior?  Do you speak of your covenant life with others outside the church so that they know why the gospel is so precious to you?

            Another practical way by which the elders might equip the saints for personal evangelism is by leading the way to show how every visitor God brings is welcomed in an appropriate way.  Considering all the advertising we do, and all the planning and expenses that go into evangelism, no one can justifiably say we are not involved in evangelism.  But it is the personal touch that is often missing.  A new person comes into our midst, and perhaps such a one has no clue of what a Psalter is, or where to turn to in the Bible, etc.  Here is an opportunity for the elders to help our people learn to show godly concern for the stranger.  I am not talking about walking across the sanctuary to reach the visitor — that can be rather distracting for others and even embarrassing to the visitor.  But if the visitor is sitting nearby, walking up quietly to help the visitor, or simply nudging someone else to pass on an open Bible to the page where Scripture is being read, or turning to the Psalter number to be sung, are things that can help the visitor feel at home. 

            Making it a point to shake hands with every visitor (and yes, it will not hurt to walk across the hallway to meet and greet) will show our people that this is important.  God shows us His love by inviting us into His house where we taste His covenant mercies in fellowship with Him and with His people.  Making a newcomer feel at home at church is a wonderful way to show our concern and love, and it can serve as an excellent opportunity to open the door to talk about the faith.  When our people see our elders do that kind of thing, hopefully they will be encouraged to do the same.

            What all has been said with regards to elders can surely also be applied to the deacons.  They, too, are in an excellent position to help equip the saints for personal evangelism.  Since the office of the deacon (again according to the Form of Ordination) is “to assist the poor with compassion and hearty affection, as the apostle requires in Romans 12 and 2 Corinthians 9,” they can by their example show the saints the way to do good to all men; yes, especially to those of the household of faith, but also to all men (Gal. 6:10).

            As the deacons administer relief to the poor not only with external gifts “but also with comfortable words from Scripture,” so they can teach the saints a vital lesson:  God’s people must not only be a witness by their life and by what they do for the neighbor, but also by the choice of words they employ when they speak to the neighbor.  It is not enough that I bring a plate of cookies to my neighbor to welcome a new family to the neighborhood.  I ought to be willing and ready to speak of my hope and to invite such a new family to church.  It is not enough that I keep my yard neat and tidy so that the neighborhood looks decent, I should make an effort to get to know the neighbor and explain why I live the way I do.  Does this mean that we must necessarily go door to door, knocking on everybody’s door, or that each time I see my neighbor coming out of his driveway I bang his head with the Bible?  Of course not!  But to go to the other extreme is also inexcusable.  “I don’t know my neighbors; I never talk with them!”  Please, brethren, why would we spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on missions and evangelism and neglect to do personal evangelism with our neighbors?

            Clearly, the preaching and teaching and godly example of the minister and the other officebearers will be effective means in the equipping of the saints for personal evangelism.  God’s people are not blind; our children, and our young people especially, are watching, and although they insist they want to go their own way, ultimately they do follow.  If our people are not interested in evangelism, the next generation is going to be even more close-minded to the work of missions; if our people are busy and lively and zealous in giving a personal witness to all those around them, our children are going to follow their godly example.

... to be continued.

All Around Us:

Rev. Michael DeVries

Rev. DeVries is pastor of the ProtestantReformed Church in Wingham, Ontario, Canada

Another Nail

            It would seem that the Liberal Party-controlled Federal Government of Canada is determined to pound another nail into the coffin of the institution of the family as we have always known it.  As if same-sex marriage legislation is not enough, now they plan to spend billions on universal day care for children.

            In a timely article in the January 26, 2005 issue of Christian Renewal, entitled “The State as Mother — From the cradle to the grave,” Hermina Dykxhoorn writes:

   The Liberal Government has, for more than a decade, been toying with the idea of establishing a universal childcare across Canada.  Now it appears they are ready to foist this program on the country in the next year….

   Sympathetic MPs [Ministers of Parliament, MDV] tell us that they have never had even one ordinary Canadian woman ask for a fully funded government daycare program.  This idea is not coming from grassroots Canadians.  The pressure has largely come from the civil service unions who see this as a way of increasing wages for daycare workers and increasing their own membership and influence.  It’s coming from daycare operators who see government tax money as more reliable than having to do their own collections and from radical feminists, particularly in the Liberal caucus, who see this as a way to liberate even more women from the drudgery of home and children.

   The government can never replace Mom and Dad and has no business meddling in the parental right to determine who will look after children.  Neither should the state promote and finance one childcare choice over any other.  This obviously has nothing to do with what’s in the best interest of children.  It is an ideologically driven plan to control Canadian families, literally from the cradle.     

            Christian Heritage Party National Leader, Ron Gray, comments in the CHP Communique, Vol. 12, No. 10:

   The Federal Government has begun foisting its unnecessary, overly-expensive, and destructive plan for a national daycare scheme on Canada.

   Their policy — dishonestly presented in terms of “children’s needs” — is really a massive giveaway of taxpayers’ money to a self-serving education lobby that generally supports the liberals.  It’s Adscam on steroids.  But it will be harmful to children and families, it will increase social service costs, and it will burden the average Canadian family with about $1,500 or more of additional taxes every year….

   What will we get for it?  Our children will be brainwashed in political correctness at ever-younger ages.  Their ability to form psychological attachments will be impaired, so social services costs — corrections and psychological remediation — will balloon, possibly for generations.  The social engineers don’t care; they’re after the children.  They want to alienate them from their parents and — most particularly — from any residual morality with which parents might ‘contaminate’ young Canadians….

   It should be noted that the Harvard Longitudinal Study shows that daycare children are significantly disadvantaged in later life by the inability to form psychological attachments.  The younger the age of which children are put in daycare, the worse is this effect.  And a Guelph University study of daycare in Canada found that most daycare centers merely “warehouse.”  That’s a far cry from the “early childhood development” label being slapped onto the proposed federal largesse to the day-care industry.

            In an insightful commentary, veteran Canadian journalist Ted Byfield writes in the March 14, 2005 issue of Western Standard magazine, in an article entitled, “Hurting Family”:

   All these people [Prime Minister Paul Martin and other liberal Party officials, MDV] have fundamentally written off the family as it has existed for countless generations.  We must face the fact, they would say, that the traditional arrangement  — father working, mother at home — is doomed.  In order to ease the burden upon those parents who cannot afford adequate day care, the government must step in.

   This argument is both false and hypocritical.  It’s false because it ignores the fact that for most families, the second income does little more than pay the taxes.  With the new program, more than ever, the mother will have to work to pay the government to do the work of the mother.  It’s hypocritical because the federal subsidy could be paid directly to the family, allowing the family to decide whether to spend it on day care, or let the mother stay home.  But this very suggestion causes the social bureaucrats to become apoplectic.

   Why?  Because it would strengthen, rather than weaken, the traditional family, which is the greatest obstacle they face in creating their New Canada.  To these “nation builders,” children learn from their parents all sorts of unsavoury things that do not accord with the values New Canada seeks to impose. Parents induce in their children things like belief in God, and the belief that God, not government, should be the chief source of their security.  Parents implant definite rules of right and wrong.  It is from parents that children acquire deep prejudices against  such things as abortion and sodomy.  The present schools work hard, of course, to relieve children of all this “intolerance” and “bigotry,” but the schools get them too late.  However, if the state can get hold of the child from infancy onward, then great strides could be made.

   That’s why the New Canada wants state day care.  But it’s also why it favours gay marriage.  Obviously, if any combination of people living together in one household can be described in law as a “marriage,” the institution of the family will have lost all legal meaning.  Let’s hope that Harper [Conservative Party Leader, Stephen Harper, MDV] becomes even more “obsessed” with the government’s plan to take over the raising of our children.  Both poisonous flowers spring from the same poisonous root. 

            Surely we understand, do we not, that there is no real substitute for a loving mother.  And Baby Gap clothing and other “name brand” fashions, family vacations to Disney World, fancy houses, snowmobiles, boats, and whatever other “advantages” or other forms of luxury you wish to mention do not make up for mother’s care, correction, and comfort.

            How thankful we must be for mothers of Zion, “keepers at home”  (Titus 2:5), women who, by the grace of God, dedicate themselves to the well-being of their families.  Such is a truly virtuous woman!  “Her children arise up, and call her blessed; her husband also, and he praiseth her”  (Prov. 31:28).

How Low Can You Go?

      That is, how low can you go into the pit of immorality and corruption that is sanctioned and promoted by the government?  Canada, among other countries, is rapidly attempting to rival the cesspool of iniquity that was ancient Rome.

            In the March 23, 2005 issue of Christian Renewal, Hermina Dykxhoorn presents a shocking article entitled, “The next frontier in the Europeization of Canada.”  The article concerns the possible legalization of prostitution.  She writes:

   No sooner is one sexual taboo legitimized, the Liberals look for a new sexual frontier to conquer.  Liberal Senator Mac Harb thinks removing Section 213 of the Criminal Code, the section that prohibits prostitution, would be a “great idea” that would promote Canadian tourism just as Amsterdam’s red-light district has done for the Netherlands.

   Harb obviously hasn’t spent a great deal of time in the heart of Amsterdam lately.  It is one of the dirtiest capital cities in the world.  What legalized prostitution, marijuana and hashish bars and widespread drug use have done for Amsterdam could only be matched by a hurricane.  Sure there are loads of sex tourists and drug addicts from around the world frequenting the city, but, legitimate tour operators are increasingly giving it a wide berth.  And Canada needs this?…

   The Law Commission [of Canada, MDV] conducted  a major study culminating with its recommendations in February last year.  This study, done by interviewing what they now call “sex  trade workers, consider sex work within the theoretical framework of the sociology of labour.”  Rather than endorsing the “traditional moral condemnation” they “affirm a growing trend that sees ‘prostitution’ and erotic dance as professions and choices.”

   The study concluded that “work in erotic establishments and strip bars is similar to that of a number of jobs in the service sector.”  For example, claims the Law Commission, “women choose various professions for very similar reasons:  they want to earn a living, they want to meet people and they prefer work activities that are compatible with their personalities and interests.”…  “The organization of work also has a number of points in common with other jobs, including hair stylist, real estate agent with respect to, for example, shifts, duties and income structure.”  That’ll be news to Canada’s hairdressers.  This was endorsed and written by educated legal experts for advice to the government….

   Also, the reports adds, “the stigmatization of these jobs conceals the many competencies required in these occupations.”  Imagine the hurt of not being able to boast publicly about “competencies” as a sex trade worker.  The report continues, “Their choice of profession may be a source of rejection in intimate relationships as well as generally in civil society.”

   But the paper does suggest remedies for these problems.  It notes, predictably, that “decriminalization of sex workers activities is necessary” but, that “decriminalization alone does not ensure a safe working place for women, nor does it guarantee the protection of their rights as workers.”  The Commission suggests “training and activities by sex workers’ associations should be encouraged” as well as “mechanisms for cooperation with various relevant organizations should be implemented.”  Can a promotional tour of Canadian schools be far behind?  Perhaps a booth at the high school career day?

   It’s obvious that having sex with a stranger is no different to the modern Liberal than shaking hands, going to the movies or sharing a meal.  It’s a values-free pastime, pure entertainment for the man and a career option for the woman or young boy he’s hired for pay.

   The young Liberals’ policy motion was amended to only study the issue.  But that won’t be the end.  The process is relentless.

   Canada spans two beautiful ocean coastlines.  It has the Rocky Mountains.  Saskatchewan’s waving wheat fields, Ontario’s Great Lakes, Niagara Falls, numerous National and Provincial Parks and so much more to attract tourists.  But to our liberal government that’s not enough.  Canada needs legalized prostitution. 

            Anything for a tourism dollar — magnificent casinos for gambling, world-renowned “Gay Pride” festivities, now the possibility of legalized prostitution.  Whatever is deemed politically correct, whatever the people want — or the powers that be determine they need, as long as no one’s “rights” are infringed upon, is promoted.

            Yes, how low can you go when standards of right and wrong are abandoned and all moral ties have been cut?  Very low, very swiftly!  But God will not be mocked!  His Word is, “Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!”  (Is. 5:20). 

            “Marriage is honourable in all, and the bed undefiled; but whore–mongers and adulterers God will judge” (Heb. 13:4).

In His Fear:

Rev Garry Eriks  

 Making Decisions According to God’s Will (2)

Rev. Eriks is pastor of the Protestant Reformed Church of Loveland, Colorado.
Previous article in this series:  November 1, 2004, p. 68.

            In the first article on this subject, we distinguished between the two aspects of God’s one will: the will of God’s decree and the will of God’s precept.  God sovereignly determines all things that happen in our lives.  In all the events of this world and in our lives God sovereignly accomplishes His will.  This is the will of God’s decree, which is a great comfort for us in life and in death.  Yet, we have important decisions to make in our everyday lives according to the will of God’s precept.  God’s sovereign government of all things does not dismiss our responsibility to choose the way of righteousness daily.  We answer to God for everything we do.  God has not made us puppets that accomplish His will only as He pulls the strings.  He created us to be rational, moral creatures able to make decisions.  Under the bondage of sin, we are able only to choose the way of sin.  But as those recreated in the image of Jesus Christ we now have the ability to choose obedience to God’s Word.  This is possible only because God works “in us both to will and to do of his good pleasure” (Phil. 2:13).     

            As those who belong to our faithful Savior Jesus Christ, we confess with the psalmist in Psalm 40:8, “I desire to do thy will, O my God….”  We desire to do the will of God from the heart (Eph. 6:6).  This is the inclination of all those who belong to Jesus Christ.  In all of life we request, “Lord, what wilt Thou have me to do?” 

            We all must make decisions in our lives.  Some of those decisions are especially difficult and burdensome because of how they will affect our lives.  Pastors must decide between two calls when they receive a call from another congregation.  College graduates who have studied to be teachers must decide which contract to accept.  High school graduates must decide whether or not to go to college and in what vocation they will serve the Lord.  Young people, with their parents, must decide if they will date this person or should keep dating that person.  Decisions must be made concerning medical procedures for loved ones whose health is failing.

            How do we know what God commands us to do every day?  Does God move us by an urge that a certain choice is right and another is wrong?  Does He whisper it in our ears?  Will He interrupt our sub-consciousness with a dream or vision that we might know His will?  God reveals His will to us in Holy Scripture.  The God-ordained way of making decisions is to study the Holy Scriptures prayerfully.  The only trustworthy guide in determining God’s will is the Word of God.

            Recently an article in the “Faith” section of the Loveland Daily Reporter-Herald quoted how a local pastor determined it was God’s will for him to start a Christian school.  The article says,

   And Stocker [the senior pastor of the church — GJE] is thrilled with what is happening.  “This is the best thing I’ve ever done in my entire life,” he said of starting the school.  “For years, I was just not interested in a school,” he said.  But one morning, as he prayed, “I felt God spoke to my heart and gave me my marching orders.”  

            We would agree that it is good for Christians to establish their own Christian schools.  But this man came to the conclusion that he must start the school, not on the principles of Scripture that he had been studying, but as he was moved by a feeling and some mystical voice of God in his heart to embark on this project.  This is not the way to determine God’s will.

            God does not reveal His will by speaking to us directly.  This is the error of continued revelation, which is part of the mysticism of the charismatic movement.  This is the way many today think God’s will is determined, as the newspaper article above reveals.   

            Neither should we make decisions based solely on feelings.  We must be wary of our feelings because our feelings are so heavily influenced by our sinful flesh.  Our feelings and emotions can change as quickly as the wind changes direction.  Emotions themselves are not evil.  But certainly they should not be given preeminence in making decisions where we are seeking God’s will.  When feelings and emotions become the primary thing, then we will find ourselves doing what we want to do.

            Holy Scripture must order our decisions.  Holy Scripture is the only rule for faith and life because it is the Word of God.  This is the testimony of Scripture itself in II Timothy 3:16, 17, which says, “All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: that the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.”  All Scripture is the Word of God because all Scripture is God-breathed.  Through the wonder of organic inspiration, God used sinful men to write down His Word so that every word of Scripture is His Word.  Because Scripture is God’s Word, it is profitable “for instruction in righteousness.”  Therefore, Scripture is our unfailing guide in making correct decisions before the face of God.

            The Belgic Confession, in Article 7, declares Scripture to be our unfailing guide:

We believe that those Holy Scriptures fully contain the will of God, and that whatsoever man ought to believe unto salvation is sufficiently taught therein.  For, since the whole manner of worship which God requires of us is written in them at large, it is unlawful for anyone, though an apostle, to teach otherwise than we are now taught in the Holy Scriptures:  nay, though it were an angel from heaven, as the apostle Paul saith….  Therefore we reject with all our hearts whatsoever doth not agree with this infallible rule which the apostles have taught us, saying, Try the spirits whether they are of God….”