In the report of the Archbishop’s Committee on Evangelism, published in 1945 under the title: Towards the Conversion of England, the work of evangelism is conveniently defined as follows: “so to present Christ Jesus in the power of the Holy Spirit, that men shall come to put their trust in God through Him, to accept Him as their Savior, and serve Him as their King in fellowship of His Church.”

Did the Puritans tackle the task of evangelism at all? At first sight, it might seem not. They agreed with Calvin in regarding the “evangelists” mentioned in the New Testament as an order of assistants to the apostles, now extinct; and as for “missions,” “crusades” and “campaigns,” they knew neither the name nor the thing. But we must not be misled into supposing that evangelism was not one of their chief concerns. It was. Many of them were outstandingly successful as preachers to the unconverted. Richard Baxter, the apostle of Kidderminster, is perhaps the only one of these that is widely remembered today; but in contemporary records it is common to read statements like this, of Hugh Clark: “he begat many Sons and Daughters unto God;” or this, of John Cotton, “the presence of the Lord…crowning his labors with the Conversion of many Souls” (S. Clarke, Lives of 52…Divines, pp.131, 222, etc.) Moreover, it was the Puritans who invented evangelistic literature. One has only to think of Baxter’s classic Call to the Unconverted, and Alleine’s Alarm to the Unconverted, which were pioneer works in this class of writing. And the elaborate practical “handling” of the subject of conversion in Puritan books was regarded by the rest of the seventeenth-century Protestant world as something of unique value. “It hath been one of the glories of the Protestant religion that it revived the doctrine of Saving Conversion, and of the New Creature brought forth thereby…But in a more eminent manner, God hath cast the honor hereof upon the Ministers and Preachers of this Nation, who are renowned abroad for their more accurate search into and discoveries hereof.” (T. Goodwin and P. Nye, Preface to T. Hooker, The Application of Redemption, 1656). Read the rest of this entry »

Tags: J.I. Packer

Jay Dharan is the theological editor at ROE, and also the founding contributor at Beacon of Truth, an Evangelical ministry aimed at promoting the supremacy and sufficiency of the gospel.

On one morning, while having my breakfast, my eyes caught sight of a feature article in the newspaper on a famous Indian mystic from a bygone age.  What interested me was the fact that the mystic claimed to have read not just the Indian scriptures, but even the Christian and the Islamic ones too. It dawned on me that the little booklet I used to carry in my pocket, while in my high school, containing the sayings of Jesus was published by the organization this mystic later founded. My mind was set to think on how this man could study the Bible and see them as only one among the many scriptures dearly held by mankind. Reading further the newspaper article, the author explained the turning point in the life of this mystic. At one point of his life, it became clear to him that every scripture – whether Indian or Christian or Islamic, is basically saying the same message. In a mystical experience, he saw how everything blended so beautifully, creating for him a new worldview, in which he felt so one with every human being despite their religious beliefs. What followed was a life-long labor of a philanthropist mystic in teaching human beings to love one another. This partly answered my question as to how he could read the Bible the way he did. He read the Bible’s message of love and equated it with the message of love in other religions. However upon further thinking, I came across an interesting aspect of how people who come to these kind of conclusions, read the Bible. They read only the Gospels. They never quote what Paul or Peter wrote in the New Testament. If ever they do, it would again be some apostolic imperative to love one another. Thus the didactical core of the New Testament is largely ignored by these people. When that is done, it is so easy to turn the Gospels and the teachings of Jesus into a moral science text book.

Read the rest of this entry »

Tags: Jay Dharan, Jay M Nair

“I know Whom I have believed, and am persuaded that He is able to keep that which I have committed unto Him against that day.” 2 Timothy 1:12.

In the style of these apostolic words there is a positiveness most refreshing in this age of doubt. In certain circles of society it is rare nowadays to meet with anybody who believes anything. It is the philosophical, the right, the fashionable thing, nowadays, to doubt everything which is generally received. Indeed, those who have any creed whatever are by the liberal school set down as old-fashioned dogmatists, persons of shallow minds, deficient in intellect, and far behind their age. The great men, the men of thought, the men of high culture and refined taste consider it wisdom to cast suspicion upon Revelation, and sneer at all definiteness of belief.

“Ifs” and “buts,” and “perhaps” are the supreme delight of this period. What wonder if men find everything uncertain – when they refuse to bow their intellects to the declarations of the God of Truth? Note then, with admiration, the refreshing and even startling positiveness of the Apostle—“I know,” says he. And that is not enough—“I am persuaded.” He speaks like one who cannot tolerate a doubt. There is no question about whether he has believed or not. “I know Whom I have believed.” There is no question as to whether he was right in so believing. “I am persuaded that He is able to keep that which I have committed to Him.” There is no suspicion as to the future. He is as positive for years to come as he is for this present moment. “He is able to keep that which I have committed to Him against that day.”

Read the rest of this entry »

Tags: C.H. Spurgeon, Charles Spurgeon, Spurgeon

II. WHAT IT IS TO PRAY WITH MY SPIRIT

1. I will pray with my spirit.

There is no man nor church in the world that can come to God in prayer, but by the assistance of the Holy Spirit. “For through Christ we have access to the Father by one Spirit” (Ephesians 2:18). Therefore Paul said, “We do not know what we ought to pray for, but the Spirit himself intercedes for us with groans that words cannot express. And he who searches our hearts knows the mind of the Spirit, because the Spirit intercedes for the saints in accordance with God’s will” (Romans 8:26, 27). And because there is in this scripture a complete discovery of the spirit of prayer, and of man’s inability to pray without it; therefore I will in a few words comment on it.

“We.” Consider the person speaking, Paul, an apostle, the extraordinary elder, the wise master-builder, he that was taken up into paradise (2 Cor 12:4). “We do not know what we ought to pray for.” Surely everyone will admit, that Paul and his fellow apostles were able to have done any mighty work for God, yet, he says, “We do not know what we ought to pray for,” without the help and the assistance of the Spirit. Should we pray for communion with God through Christ? Should we pray for faith, for justification by grace, and a truly sanctified heart? We do not know the answer to any of these things. “For who among men knows the thoughts of a man except the man’s spirit within him? In the same way no one knows the thoughts of God except the Spirit of God” (1 Corinthians 2:11).

Read the rest of this entry »

Tags: Bunyan, John Bunyan

God’s calling to missions is analogous to the gift of prophecy. * The calling is not authoritative the way the Scriptures are. Your calling is never beyond question. You can’t claim it to others the way you quote scripture to them.

Nevertheless our calling can be profoundly and durably sure in our own heart. It is the work of God to bring our heart to a point of conviction that, all things considered—including Scripture—this path is the path of obedience. The conviction is not infallible. But when it is of God, it brings peace.

How does God waken such a calling? I will suggest ten means that he uses. Only one of these is infallible—the Bible. All the others are relative. They are not absolutely decisive in your leading. They are important. But any of them can be overridden by the others. Various combinations of these are the fuel God uses to drive the engine of his calling in your life.

Read the rest of this entry »

Tags: John Piper, Piper

Many evangelicals (once known for a very prudent and biblical approach to doctrine) are fast becoming as doctrinally clueless as the unchurched people they are so keen to please. At least three decades of deliberately downplaying doctrine and discernment in order to attract the unchurched has filled many once-sound churches with people who utterly lack any ability to differentiate the very worst fast doctrines from truth. I constantly encounter evangelical church members who are at a loss to answer the most profound errors they hear from cultists, unorthodox media preachers, or other sources of false doctrine.

In the church today, there is a growing reluctance to take a definitive stand on any issue. Discernment is frankly not very welcome in a culture like ours. In fact, the postmodern perspective is more than merely hostile to discernment; it is practically the polar opposite. Think about it: pronouncing anything “true” and calling its antithesis “error” is a breach of postmodernism’s one last impregnable dogma. That is why to a postmodernist nothing is more uncouth than voicing strong opinions on spiritual, moral, or ethical matters. People are expected to hold their most important convictions with as much slack as possible. Certainty about anything is out of the question, and all who refuse to equivocate on any point of principle or doctrine are therefore automatically labeled too narrow. Zeal for the truth has become politically incorrect. There is actually zero tolerance for biblical discernment in a “tolerant” climate like that.

Read the rest of this entry »

Tags: John MacArthur