Crossroads Conference

Dr. Les Ollila

Topics:

• A Good Legacy Does Not Guarantee a Good Future
• Avoiding Pragmatism

Dear Friend –
Pastor Rick Arrowood and I would like to invite you to a very special morning with Dr. Les Ollila on Monday, June 17, 2013 at Colonial Hills Baptist Church.

“Doc O” has been uniquely used of God to impact thousands of lives during his 40 years of faithful service as youth pastor, evangelist, teacher, and President of Northland Baptist Bible College. Pastor Arrowood yielded to live a separated life in 1976 under Les’ preaching. My philosophy of ministry was directed under Les’ teaching over 30 years ago.

So you can understand that for us it’s a thrill to host this conference. Dr. Ollila will bring two messages, A Good Legacy Does Not Guarantee a Good Future and Avoiding Pragmatism. Our schedule also includes what will no doubt be a very interesting Q&A.

Let me encourage you to invite others to join you and bring your staff members. This will be a historic morning!

When I was a boy, I had a dog named Prince. He was a funny-looking critter. Half greyhound and half St. Bernard, he wasn’t just big—he was huge! He had one brown eye and one white eye; the epicanthic fold on his white eye was a brilliant pink. People who had never seen him before invariably did a double-take and then made some comment such as, “He’s so ugly he’s cute” or, “Does he always look like he has the pink eye?”

In five months Prince was the best-trained dog my neighbors had ever seen. He could heel, stay, sit, lie down, play dead, fetch, speak, and jump over sticks and through hoops. He didn’t just do the stunts, he did them with such a flare, with so much joy, that it was a delight to watch. He clearly loved the opportunity to display his love and adoration for me by responding instantly and totally to my every command. I often held a “circus” for the neighborhood kids to watch me put Prince through his repertoire.

My dad was a firm believer that dogs should never inhabit the same space as humans. They must stay outdoors at all times and in all seasons. Somewhere I had heard about a boy whose dog slept on the foot of his bed, and I wanted Prince to sleep on my bed. My dad compromised a bit and agreed that Prince could come in at night and sleep on the back porch. I decided that if I couldn’t bring Prince to my bed, I would take my bed to Prince. I moved my bed to the back porch. When the temperatures got down below zero in the winter, my dad thought I would give it up and move my bed back inside. Instead I would bring Prince under the covers with me, and we would snuggle and keep each other warm.

I could tell you dozens more anecdotes to illustrate the deep two-way love that developed between Prince and me, but I will let one more suffice. Prince had an incredible sense of time. My school was just across the street from our house, and I always came home for lunch. Every day Prince would meet me at the schoolhouse door at lunch time and again when school was out at 3:00, and we would romp home together. I never had the problems some kids experience from older bullies making their lives miserable on the way home from school. Prince would have torn them to pieces, and they knew it.

Wednesday, the day before Thanksgiving in 1935, when I came out of the schoolhouse door, Prince was not there waiting for me. First I was disappointed, then alarmed. When I got home and he wasn’t there, either, I was devastated. I went around the neighborhood whistling and calling for him. Some of the other neighborhood kids helped me hunt. When it got dark, my mom said I had to come in for supper. I was so upset I could hardly eat.

Just as supper was ending I heard Prince whimper out back. I rushed to his side, my dad right behind me. Prince’s hind legs seemed to be paralyzed. He was dragging himself through the dirt with his front legs. “Don’t get too close. He might bite you. He’s been poisoned,” my dad said.

Prince went into convulsions, twisting in pain and agony. I longed to hold him in my arms, to tell him how sorry I was, to show him one more time how much I loved him, but Dad said I mustn’t. Then he was still. I ran to my bed on the back porch and cried my heart out.

The next morning we held a funeral service, and then we buried him. I was grateful that I didn’t have to return to school until Monday. By that time I had begun to get my emotions under control so that I didn’t burst out crying every time I thought about him.

Later I heard a rumor that a sheep farmer had poisoned Prince because he thought Prince was the dog who killed one of his sheep a few days prior. Possibly he was right, but I doubt it. Prince was never gone from home long, and never came home bloody.

What if I could have been present when Prince saw the poisoned food and started to eat it. What if I had said, “Prince, don’t eat that. It has poison in it.”

What if Prince could talk and tell me what he was thinking? “Why not, Master? Just look at all that nice, wholesome, fresh food. Why, there is hardly any poison there at all. There is a hundred times more good, wholesome meat than there is poison.”

I frequently hear people offering that kind of logic to justify their choice in reading material, in TV programs, in movies, even in the schools they choose to attend. First John 1:5 says, “God is light, and in him is no darkness at all.” Bible reading, good preaching, good Bible teaching—these things will not poison your mind. You can’t say that, however, about a multitude of other things. Every book, article, story, movie, and TV program has a theme, an essence, or you might call it a spirit. Some of these come straight from the pits of hell. Like the sheep farmer who wrapped his poison in good food, Satan always wraps his poison in something pleasant, interesting, humorous, attractive, or entertaining. John tells us that we should try (test) the spirits to see whether they are of God (1 John 4:1). If they come from God they are healthful; if not, they very well might contain that little dab of poison. If you love them, you wouldn’t poison your dog, or your family, or yourself.

Here is another “what if.” What if Prince had somehow conducted himself in such a way that the sheep farmer would never think that he was a sheep killer? The sheep farmer would have taken his poison elsewhere, wouldn’t he? Maybe that’s why the apostle Paul told us, “Abstain from all appearance of evil” (1 Thess 5:22).

At the time of original publication, Frank Hall was a freelance writer living in Greenville, South Carolina.

(Originally published in FrontLine • January/February 2002. Click here to subscribe to the magazine.)

A preacher never should settle intentionally for an imperfect sermon. He is responsible to “rightly divide” – that is, exposit - the Word of God (2 Tim. 2:15). Yet, what preacher can say that he has ever delivered a perfect sermon? Mistaken exegesis, inaccurate illustrations, mispronounced or mistaken word choices, unrelated or neglected application, wrong verse references, not to mention preaching with pride and reliance upon human strength, personal intellect, or emotional appeals – this is a short list of possible pitfalls in preaching, but it could certainly be much longer.

It is important to maintain a high standard for “preaching the Word,” very important indeed. Yet, we must also be charitable towards other preachers and their sermons whenever they fall short of perfection itself. A survey of history will reveal that God has employed a multiplicity of instruments to convey his message to the church. Whitefield and Wesley, Edwards and Freylinghausen, Spurgeon and Moody, Lloyd-Jones and Tozer, the variations are stunning. Difference between any of these men – theologically, practically, and personally – certainly abound. Yet, Calvinist or Arminian, stoic or emotional, intellectual or uneducated, each mouthpiece finds its own unique place in God’s symphony of preaching.

The standard by which all preaching should be judged is the Word of God itself, both written and incarnate. Consider the Bereans (Acts 17:10-11), who checked the preaching they heard with the written Word. As the messenger and the message agree with scripture in content and spirit, the sermon serves God’s purpose. Rather than looking for the perfect sermon, it would be good ask “what is true?” in regard to God’s Word. If any imperfections exist, we should be careful not to disregard what is true nonetheless. With this in mind, it is possible to receive greater blessing and benefit from a broader range of God’s servants – even though there are some imperfections in their sermons – with the Word of God, written and incarnate, as our only perfect model for a perfect sermon.

Thomas Overmiller serves as a Bible professor at Baptist College of Ministry in Menomonee Falls, Wisconsin.

Biblical separation” is a phrase that often evokes a demonstrative response from the individual who hears it. Those who are opposed to the concept of a distinctive Christianity are prone to get their dander up when they hear the phrase. Believers who are committed to faithfulness to Christ and His Word rally around the concept with an evident zeal.

As is true of most words, the idea of “separation” takes on a different meaning depending on the person who is using the term. Even among those who are committed to the practice of biblical separation, there are differing views of how it should play out. Our Lord gives wonderful guidance to us in His intercessory prayer in John 17, directing us to understand that biblical separation is not isolation, but insulation.

What do I mean by “not isolation, but insulation”? Some who seek to genuinely honor the Lord believe that the proper application of separation involves removing themselves from any contact with the world. A few years ago, a man told me that he was leaving our church because he did not want his children to be tainted by contact with the bus kids who came to our church. Though a motive of purity is a necessary and honorable one, that purity is not to be exercised in a vacuum, but in the midst of ministry to a lost world.

In John 17, our Lord used several phrases that point out that we are not to isolate ourselves from the world, but rather to insulate ourselves in distinctive Christianity. Notice the relationship of the believer with the world in His prayer, “[11] these are in the world … [14] they are not of the world, even as I am not of the world…. [15] I pray not that thou shouldest take them out of the world, but that thou shouldest keep them from the evil…. [18] As thou hast sent me into the world, even so have I also sent them into the world.”

Perhaps an illustration will help us understand that our Lord is teaching insulation, not isolation. Electricity is a wonderfully protective energy source that has been designed by God for our good. When a generator produces electricity, the current is sent from the generator to the object of the power’s application through an insulated wire. If the wire loses its insulation, the power is shorted out and lost, rendering the object of the energy without benefit. If the insulation is maintained, the application of the power is dynamic.

Jesus Christ has given us spiritual power for ministry, but that power flows through us effectively and efficiently only as we are insulated from the world and its draining influence. The object of Christ’s power is ministry to a lost and dying world, that men might be saved and discipled. A biblical practice of separation is a major part of that insulation.

Isolation means shutting ourselves off from the world in which we live. Insulation means having the power of Christ flow through us to the lost around us. The first is a clear violation of John 17. The latter is Christ’s model for ministry. Let’s commit ourselves afresh to purity and holy living, to biblical separation and distinctiveness from the world system, in order that the power of Christ may rest upon us and that we might be conduits of His salvation to those to whom we aggressively reach out with the Gospel.

Dr. Bud Steadman is the Executive Director of Baptist World Mission.

(First published in Baptist World Mission’s “The Messenger”, Spring 2013. Used by permission.)

“One is your Teacher, the Christ, and you are all brethren” (Matthew 23.9).

It is interesting that the Pharisees seemed to be quite accurate in their teaching. Jesus told His disciples that they should observe and do what the Pharisees told them (23.3). It’s just that the works of the Pharisees did not line up with the teaching of the Pharisees.

First, they had great expectations for others but not for themselves (23.4). Second, they did what they did in order to be seen by men not God – to be fawned over by these men (23.5-7). Third, they liked positions and titles along with places of preeminence and power.

So the problem was not so much the message or content of the Pharisees as much as it was the way they delivered and lived that message. Only One is the Teacher. Only One is the Christ. The rest of us are on a level playing field as brethren. The Lord Jesus communicates through the Holy Spirit and the Scriptures. He is our authority.

I may expect obedience from my boys because I have authority as their Father. My wife respects my authority in the home and lovingly submits to God’s plan. As a pastor, it’s my task to watch out for the souls of people in our local church as one who will be held accountable. But all of these roles must be carried out with great compassion, mercy, and love. What is demanded or expected of others must be demanded or expected in my own life first. The final sum of it is that all of us are brethren bought by the sacrificial blood of the Lamb.

Two Important Prohibitions for Spiritual Leadership

1. Do not demand the respect the Lord Jesus deserves. To be called ‘Rabbi’ was to convey a very high form of respect. The Scribes and Pharisees relished the title and the attention that came along with it. The Rabbi was wise. He felt very free about vaunting himself up over others and telling them what to do. But from where does wisdom come? Who gives authority to the spiritual leader? Everyone must look to the Lord Jesus for that which relates to the doctrine we believe and the faith we practice.
2. Do not usurp the authority the Lord Jesus has. He is the only One who will sit upon the throne of David forever. He is the only One who will rule with an iron scepter. We are simply fellow-servants and brethren. It is clear that the Lord Jesus taught that those with the most authority are those who serve and condescend to the needs of others. “The greatest among you shall be your servant” (23.11). Jesus illustrated this truth by washing the feet of His disciples on the evening of His arrest.

“One Is Your Teacher, the Christ”

We have many people pushing us in many directions during any given day. It’s amazing how we so freely accept the authority of others who hold temporal sway over our lives and neglect the authority of the Lord Jesus Christ. He has given you a task, namely to go into the world and preach the Gospel …also to love God supremely and then love others as you love yourself.

If we would all do the will of our Master each day, we would sleep much better each evening. How important it is to reach the end of a day and say, “Heavenly Father, I’ve done what you’ve demanded of me today. Help me now to rest in order to build on what has been done today when and if I reach tomorrow.”

“You Are All Brethren”

All fellow-believers in the body are brethren. Some might be referred to as Pastor or Father or Mother or even Sir. Jesus is not forbidding such titles in this passage. But He does forbid that titles become marks of high distinction and great authority. The Lord prefers the broken and contrite heart. This is the mark of truly great leaders. Good fathers make great sacrifices. As do good pastors and spiritual leaders within a church congregation. You are all brothers and sisters.

Therefore, outward conduct cannot be so readily dispatched. But it must be governed by humility and love within. Our world must see a church filled with people who love and respect one another …who pay deference to one another … who are kind and tenderhearted toward one another. This happened in the early church to be sure:

“Now all who believed were together, and had all things in common, and sold their possessions and goods, and divided them among all, as anyone had need. So continuing daily with one accord in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house, they ate their food with gladness and simplicity of heart, praising God and having favor with all the people. And the Lord added to the church daily those who were being saved.” (Acts 2:44–47)

Our salt has lost its savor. Our light has been greatly diminished in the world at large. Now is the time to lead by serving not expecting anything in return.

Jim Oesterwind is the pastor of Heritage Baptist Church in Antioch, CA. He blogs at Sun and Shield.

I was born in Manhattan and spent my childhood growing up in the Bronx and Queens. As I grew older I became more and more antagonistic toward religion because of the blatant hypocrisy I saw in religious people. This hypocrisy was not limited to the rabbis, but was prevalent among “Christians” as well. I had no desire to follow these people and therefore wholeheartedly accepted the evolutionary worldview as I set my sights on building a career in law. For the sake of tradition, however, I did make bar mitzvah when I was 13, and I observed some of the Jewish holidays.

During college, I enrolled in a number of courses in American and English literature and was intrigued by the number of references to Bible characters and concepts. As a result I purposed in my heart to read the Bible someday to better understand those references. I shared these thoughts with my girlfriend, Lauri, who agreed that the idea was sensible—especially since discussions about marriage had begun and, as a result, religion was becoming an important issue in our lives. Lauri was reared in a Roman Catholic home, and we knew that tensions would eventually arise because of our different backgrounds. Consequently, we thought we should be better equipped to deal with them. We reasoned that studying the Bible and our respective faiths more carefully would enable us to be more knowledgeable about religious matters. We further concluded that this analysis would also make us better parents because we could be an information source for our children someday.

In time, we did marry, and after completing law school I began my career with a large firm in New York. Things changed shortly thereafter when I met a man named Mark. He was also an attorney and had recently joined the firm. Mark worked on another floor, so I didn’t have much contact with him, but I made sure to avoid him completely because he was one of those “Jesus people.” Although my family was not Orthodox, we were taught that Jesus was for the Gentiles and that we should avoid Him completely since He and His followers were against the Jews.

A few months later the offices were restructured, and I inherited a new officemate—Mark. I was upset at the time and even went to the personnel department to have it changed, but I was unsuccessful. There I was, trapped with a Jesus nut! Since I had no choice, I tried to make the best of it by being pleasant toward him. In time we became friendly, and as I got to know him I was impressed by the lack of hypocrisy in his life. He was different.

I soon found out that Mark had been a Roman Catholic, so I was able to learn a great deal about Romanism from him. He also knew the Tanach (Old Testament) quite well. Consequently, the things of God dominated our discussions, and I began bringing home all of the information that I was learning. By this time Lauri and I were expecting our first son, so we were especially focused on the “being good parents so let’s study the Bible” idea. After Grant was born we began attending a Bible study at Mark’s home, and Lauri and I started an intense independent study that lasted approximately a year and a half.

The reality of God became clear through the study of fulfilled prophecy, and I was amazed by the proofs for the scientific impossibility of evolution. After carefully considering the life and conversion of Paul, I then turned my attention to the claim that Jesus of Nazareth is the Messiah. I subjected the claims of Christ and the resurrection accounts to evidentiary standards and was left with no conclusion but that Jesus truly is the Messiah of Israel and the Savior of the world. In the privacy of my own living room on an October day in 1989, I confessed my sin before Him and became a child of the King, recognizing that my only claim to heaven was by His shed blood for my sins. Lauri was saved three months later, and we were baptized together.

As I continued to grow in my knowledge of the Scriptures I became increasingly burdened to reach the Jewish people with the gospel. In addition, I soon came to the unfortunate realization that the lost sheep of the house of Israel were often overlooked by Gentile believers in their evangelistic outreach. This is not to say that I found an intentional or inappropriate motive, but there was certainly much more that the church could do. I found that some people felt intimidated by the prospect of speaking with Jews about the Bible; in other cases there was simply a lack of understanding regarding the Biblical mandate to reach these special people.

This weighed heavily on my heart as I began to offer assistance to churches in our area to help them better understand the Jewishness of the Bible and to be better equipped to witness to the Jewish people. I didn’t realize it at the time, but through all of this God was beginning to redirect my life. After some time, some pastors I knew began to suggest that God might be pleased to see a Jewish work established in New York City and that it could very well be His will that I lead it. After much prayer and seeking input from many wise counselors, we all became convinced that the suggestion was correct and Shalom Ministries was born.

One of the clear burdens that we have is to excite believers regarding reaching out to the Jewish people. One way we seek to do this is by encouraging people to consider the important place that the Jewish people hold in God’s heart and plan. In Jeremiah 31 we read about the prophecy of the coming New Covenant that God would make with the Jewish people. It was this very covenant that Jesus confirmed at the Last Supper and which Gentile believers partake of spiritually through their grafting in (Rom. 11:17–24). In this context, God makes His permanent love and commitment very clear. In the beginning of the chapter He says that He loves Israel with an everlasting love (v. 3), and He indicates that Israel will be a special people before Him continually (vv. 35–37).

This concept of God’s permanent love for the Jewish people can be seen in many places in the Bible. Another wonderful example can be found in Isaiah 49. Here, God, through the prophet, encourages the people in exile by telling them that God has not forgotten or forsaken them. This is particularly interesting since the fact that they were in captivity was, itself, a fulfillment of prophecy. God had warned the Jewish people of this fate if they were not faithful, and He kept His promise. In verses 14 through 16 God tells them that a nursing mother is more likely to forsake her helpless infant than He is to forsake them for all of their misdeeds. He even emphasizes the point by saying that He has “graven them upon the palms of His hands.” Here the word for “graven” is a word that means “to cut into.” God is saying, as it were, that the Jewish people are etched permanently into His hands.

Jesus Himself expressed amazing love and devotion toward the Jewish people. Again, the Bible has many examples, but one is particularly moving to me. In Luke 19:41 we are told that Jesus, nearing the end of His earthly ministry, beheld the city of Jerusalem and wept. Here, the Holy Spirit led Luke to use a particular word that does not mean simply to shed a tear, but rather to weep with loud emotion and lamentation. Our Lord, knowing all that would soon take place in Jerusalem at the hand of the Jewish people, was so moved with compassion that his body shook with emotion. This highlights the tragedy of the nation’s rejection, but also underscores the depth of His love for them.

Turning to a mere human we need look no further than the great rabbi of Tarsus to see the results of a deep concern for the Jewish people. In Romans 10:1, Paul states that his heart’s desire and prayer to God is that Israel be saved. This is particularly noteworthy since Paul was the apostle to the Gentiles.

As compelling as that may be, however, in the mind of this writer few portions of Scripture have the power of Paul’s words in the first three verses of Romans 9. Paul begins the chapter by confirming to the recipients of the epistle that what he is about to say is true, as Christ and the Holy Spirit can attest. He then goes on to say that he has a continual grief and sorrow in his heart. One might say that he is constantly feeling the spiritual and emotional equivalent of a heart attack. Why does Paul feel this way? The answer is given in verse 3. The reason is that he is concerned for the salvation of the Jews. He is so concerned for their salvation that he says that, if it were possible, he would give up heaven if that would mean the salvation of Israel in return. Paul, the apostle to the Gentiles, who had been repeatedly beaten and nearly killed by the Jewish people, was willing to go to hell for them if that would result in their salvation. The only explanation for this is that Paul had a supernatural understanding of the depth of God’s love for this people and their intense need of salvation.

What should this mean to us as today? My sincere prayer is that fundamental believers throughout the world will stop and consider the Jew. In Romans 11:11 we are told that salvation has come to the Gentile as a result of the “stumbling” of the Jew. The verse then goes on to describe the responsibility that the Gentile has to provoke the Jew to jealousy for that salvation. God promises blessing on those that are a blessing to the Jews (Gen. 12:3) and spiritual prosperity for those who pray for the peace of Jerusalem (Ps. 122:6), yet these people often remain overlooked.

My consuming desire is to motivate my Gentile brethren to take God at His Word and be a blessing to the Jewish people, thereby honoring the Biblical mandate to bring the gospel to them. Remember, a Gentile led me to the Lord, and He just might use you to bring another lost Jewish soul to a saving knowledge of Himself.

Craig Hartman is the founder and Director of Shalom Ministries, Inc.

(Originally published in FrontLine • November/December 2000. Click here to subscribe to the magazine.)

R. A. Torrey called the resurrection of Jesus Christ “the cornerstone of Christian doctrine, the Gibraltar of Christian evidence, the Waterloo of liberalism.” And so it is. There are 11 recorded physical appearances of the risen Christ, making the Resurrection a well-established fact of history. Those who hold to the idea that He was merely a good man, martyred by jealous religious leaders who could not command His popularity, are hard pressed to explain the Resurrection. Was he raised to show how proud the Heavenly Father was of His noble martyrdom? Was it a statement that here was a man who was too good to leave in the grave? Failure to recognize the meaning of His death means failure to understand the meaning of His Resurrection. He died to pay the penalty of our sin; He was raised to prove that He did.

The Resurrection of Jesus Christ is fundamental to Christianity; its acceptance is part of saving faith. “That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved” (Rom. 10:9). This requires no blind faith, but honest acknowledgement of fact. The credibility of the witnesses to the Resurrection of Christ is seen not only “in their number and variety but also (in) the essential harmony of their reports, the absence of all motive to falsehood, and their self-sacrificing devotion to the gospel that based itself upon the resurrection.”^[1]

The risen Lord appeared first to Mary (Mark 16:9–11) to introduce Himself to one receptive heart. He appeared next to the two Marys (Matt. 28:1–10) who were then sent by an angel to report to the disciples, but met by the Lord, to confirm by two witnesses this supernatural event. Then He appeared to Peter (Luke 24:34, 1 Cor. 15:5), we are not told where, to provide a single, expert witness. Above the desk where I study is a print of the beloved painting of Christ on the road to Emmaus, opening the Scriptures to two of the disciples— His fourth appearance to witnesses (Luke 24:13–31).

Like Mary, these men were not believed at first (Mark 16:12–13), but the risen Lord laid for them a verifiable, rational basis for belief in the Resurrection from the Scriptures. After this report we no longer have a mere experience; we have a doctrine. The fifth appearance was to the ten disciples (Luke 24:36–48), where the Lord verified the reports they had heard by personal experience. The appearance to the 11, with Thomas then present (John 20:24–31), followed.

These two events confirm the value of a personal experience with Christ. The ten were offered the opportunity to see and touch Him and thought the experience too wonderful to believe (Luke 24:41). Thomas’s insistence on similar personal experience demonstrates the fact that belief in the risen Christ is a function of the will (John 20:25). He next appeared to the disciples by the Sea of Galilee (John 21:1,24) to lay the foundation of the Great Commission.

His eighth recorded appearance was before a congregation of over 500 (1 Cor. 15:6), perhaps to strengthen the assembly. His ninth appearance was to James (1 Cor. 15:7), perhaps to demonstrate that he would lead them thereafter through a pastor. He then appeared to the apostles at His ascension (Acts 1:3–8) to proclaim the Great Commission, and to Paul (1 Cor. 15:8), who revealed the doctrines of the local church and heard Him speak on the road to Damascus (Acts 9:3–4). If we count the appearance in a vision to John on the Isle of Patmos (Revelation 1:9ff), there are 12.

In the chapter that lists the qualifications for its leaders, 1 Timothy 3 records the truth of which the local church is the “pillar and ground.” “God was manifest in the flesh (the incarnation), justified in the Spirit (the Resurrection), seen of angels (witnesses!), preached unto the Gentiles (through the Great Commission), believed on in the world (as He will be today when this doctrine is preached), received up into glory (from whence He appeared to John, who told us what is ahead).

From His first appearance to one receptive heart, through increasingly credible and larger groups of witnesses, explaining from the Old Testament the Scriptural basis for the credibility of the Resurrection, the Lord Jesus clearly is seen to have been physically raised from the dead. These eyewitness accounts are recorded in more verifiable ancient manuscripts than are other accepted facts of history, and are available for critique and comparison in the preserved Word of God we hold in our hands. The Resurrection may be rejected by an evil heart of unbelief, but not through a lack of credible evidence.

John Vaughn is the President of the Fundamental Baptist Fellowship International.

(Originally published in FrontLine • March/April 2001. Click here to subscribe to the magazine.)

1. From the New Unger’s Bible Dictionary, Moody Press, 1988.

This article follows on an article “That Glorious Company: The Commentators!” published in three parts, here, here and here.

This article is likewise published in three parts. This is part three, part one is here, part two is here.

Dr. Minnick began this article by telling the story of George Whitfield’s discovery of commentaries and the training they offered him. He used this to continue a discussion of commentaries and their value. The first point he considered was the value of Contextual Analysis. The second value of commentaries was their Historical Analysis. Part threefollows.

Grammatical Analysis

This is the commenting that answers our questions as to what the text actually says. For instance, does what God breathed out actually say, “thou wilt not leave my soul in hell?” (Ps. 16:10; Acts 2:27). If it does, then exegetical honesty compels me to grapple with the almost unthinkable theological implications of the Messiah’s going to hell, but before I commit myself to trying to defend that position to my people, I want to know if the Hebrew text of Psalm 16 actually says this. Here, then, is a sample of the kind of commentating I find valuable.

He does not say “leave in” but “to”, i.e. abandon to, give up to the dominion or possession of another. The same Hebrew phrase occurs, with the same sense, in Lev. xix.10, Job xxxix. 14, and in Ps. xlix. 11 (10) below.—“Hell” is here to be taken in its wide old English sense, as corresponding to the Hebrew “Sheol” and the Greek “Hades,” the invisible world or state of the dead (Joseph Addison Alexander).

I like the way he distinguishes things from one another. I like his resort to the original Hebrew and Greek terms. I especially like the cross-references. This is an example of a commentator’s helpfully clarifying the meaning of words.

But in the New Testament, especially, getting an answer as to what the text actually says requires a commentator who discusses the inspired connections between those words. That is, he discusses syntax, or grammar if you will. Please don’t be offended at what I’m about to say, but it must be pressed upon those of us who handle the sacred text. No one can be completely accurate in his interpretation if he does not inform himself on the grammatical issues in the text.

It’s hard enough to be accurate, even after the most painstaking grammatical analysis. In many things we offend all. But the preacher who takes no trouble whatsoever on this point is unwittingly inaccurate. At the very least, he perpetuates generalities that obscure the precision with which the text speaks. At the very worst he does the kind of thing a student once did with that great text of Hebrews 2:3, “How shall we escape if we neglect so great salvation.” His homiletics professor asked, “How did you treat that text?”

The student replied, “I took the two obvious points. First, the greatness of our salvation. Second, a little advice on how to escape if we neglect it.”

What I find myself needing in a commentator is the careful analysis of all the grammatical possibilities. For instance, when our Lord commanded “Abide in me and I in you” (John 15:4), what is the connection between the two clauses? There is only one verb, abide, for both of them, but it seems nonsensical to us for the Lord to command, “abide … I in you.” A good commentator, such as D. A. Carson, will discuss the three grammatical possibilities too involved to repeat here.

Some of my favorite New Testament commentators who have given us this kind of analysis on more than one book are R. C. H. Lenski (whose Lutheran bias shines but whose grammatical discussions are often unexcelled), William Hendriksen, John Eadie (Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, and Thessalonians), B. F. Westcott (John, Hebrews, and the Johannine epistles; G. Campbell Morgan said he would rather have Westcott’s work on John than a whole shelf full of devotional works on the same book), Frederic Louis Godet (Luke, Romans, and the Corinthians), Charles Hodge (Romans, Corinthians, Ephesians), John Brown of Edinburgh (Discourses and Sayings of our Lord, John 17, Romans, Galatians, Hebrews, 1 Peter; of Brown Spurgeon said, “Everything he has left us is massive gold.”), and, more recently, D. Edmond Hiebert (Mark, Thessalonians, James, the Petrine epistles, and Jude).

Furthermore, in addition to the word-by-word exegesis, the best commentators continue by relating individual phrases and words back to their sections’ primary themes. Commentators who fail to do this may hand us the fruit of a cluster but not a cluster of fruit. There’s an immense difference.

For instance, compare the opening sentences of these three commentaries on 1 Peter 3:5 and then 3:6—“For after this manner in the old time the holy women also” (vs. 5) … “Even as Sara obeyed Abraham, calling him lord” (vs. 6).

v. 5 The words signify the women who pre-eminently represented the holiness of Israel’s calling, i.e. its “saints,” cf. Matt. xxvii. 52…

v. 6 The mother par excellence of the Hebrew race as a chosen people, cf. Is. li.2, which is perhaps our author’s immediate source. The occasion alluded to here is that described in Gen. xviii. 1–15, when Abraham told her that they were to have a child despite her age (Edward Gordon Selwyn).

v. 5 The appeal for proper adornment is undergirded by the example of godly women in the past… v. 6 From among those holy women Peter singled out one example (D. Edmond Hiebert).

v. 5 The second motive presented by the apostle to Christian wives to stimulate and encourage them in the performance of their conjugal duties is, that in doing so they would follow the example of holy women in former ages… v. 6 Sarah is particularly noticed as having obeyed Abraham, and as having shown her respect for him by calling him lord (John Brown).

In this example, Selwyn’s opening statements offer no explanation of the connections between either verses 5 and 6, or the unit of verses 5–6 and the verses preceding them. Hiebert’s first lines, however, succinctly explain both. Brown does so as well, and perhaps even better, by enumerating (second motive) the relationship of these verses to the entire thrust of the passage (wives performing their conjugal duties) rather than to only the preceding two verses (as Hiebert does).

This kind of help requires more pages from the commentator and thus more expense of the purchaser. Brown’s commentary, for instance, fills three volumes averaging some 450 pages apiece. But just as carpenters have a better chance of doing top quality work if they own the best tools, so preachers put themselves in a better position to clearly explain God’s Word when they put out the money to purchase and the time to read the best books.

To Conclude

What is it, then, that we are looking for in a commentary? We need a commentary that answers our questions about the text. We want it to answer those questions literally, contextually, historically, and grammatically. And if, in addition, it goes the extra mile and tells us what the text means (applicationally) by what it says, that volume would be one in a hundred and, as Spurgeon once said of some books, “worth selling your coat to buy.”

One other mark of a great commentator is his thorough acquaintance with others who have written before him. J. C. Ryle, for instance, gave 12 years to his Expository Thoughts on John. They included, as he himself writes, “a patient study of about seventy Commentators, both ancient and modern, of almost every Church and theological school in Christendom.” It shows. And as I’ve mentioned Ryle, let me conclude with his wise observation.

The conclusion I arrive at, after a diligent examination of many Commentators, is always one and the same. I trust none of them unreservedly, and I expect nowhere to find perfection. All must be read with caution. They are good helps, but they are not infallible. They are useful assistants, but they are not the pillar of cloud and fire. … Use commentaries; but be a slave to none. Call no man master.

Dr. Mark Minnick is the pastor of Mount Calvary Baptist Church in Greenville, South Carolina, and serves as adjunct professor of preaching and exposition at Bob Jones Seminary.

(Originally published in FrontLine • November/December 2001. Click here to subscribe to the magazine.)

The Lord has commanded us to spread the good news from our local area, to our nation, and even to the ends of the earth (Matt. 28:19, 20; Acts 1:8). It is also evident that although most Christians desire to obey in this important area, we are not nearly as effective as we ought to be. Many churches have abandoned weekly soul-winning programs, perhaps believing that door-todoor evangelism is not effective today. After all, it is rightly observed that you can be faithful in soul winning without going door-to-door. Furthermore, a church can have a regular door-to-door soul-winning program and still not be passionate about winning the lost. It is also true that in our culture people are reluctant to open the door to a stranger and that cults have turned many people off to such evangelistic efforts. In spite of these realities, I would encourage a renewed evaluation of the importance of such a program.

I have been active in my local church for the last ten years. During that time I have been consistently exhorted to be faithful to my Biblical responsibility to be a soul winner. A consistent organized outreach program was established more than five years ago, and that program has been a tremendous benefit to helping me be obedient to the command to spread the gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ.

If it is so clear from Scripture that we must go and win the lost, then why abandon door-to-door evangelism? It appears that emphasis on “lifestyle” evangelism, special evangelistic services, and “needs-based” programs for outreach have been determined to be a more expedient means to spread the gospel. I have been involved in various programs specifically targeting children, teens, men, women, singles, college and career age groups, as well as Friend Days, weeks of evangelistic services, telephone campaigns, and many other good programs. I am thankful for these efforts, but I have found that a regular soulwinning program, where a specific time is set aside each week to go out and seek the lost, enhances all of those other means and provides other benefits as well.

Although most Christians intend to share the gospel with their neighbors, co-workers, and acquaintances, good intentions often succumb to the distractions of everyday life. For me, a specific time each week builds in the discipline to ensure that at least once per week I confront someone with the truth of his eternal destiny and his need for salvation by faith alone. Yes, we need to be ready for every divine opportunity, but like prayer and Bible study, without a specific time planned for these vital disciplines, they can get lost in the busyness of our lives.

Many Christians are fearful about what to say or are afraid of facing questions they cannot answer, while many feel they are simply too shy. Teaching and training for personal evangelism can be a great help in overcoming these obstacles and should be a prerequisite to establishing a soul-winning program. However, I have found that soul-winning courses are a great starting place but fall far short of making soul winners. I would expect this could be analogous to the green recruit, fresh out of military boot camp. No one expects him to be as effective as a veteran soldier. The same is true in spiritual warfare. In a local church outreach program, seasoned soul winners can help train others, teaching them the skills and pitfalls that come with experience. This is simply discipleship. What better way for our children, teens, and new converts to learn to present the gospel than by participating in the trenches? Beyond overcoming the fear of how to present the gospel, the reality of the plight of the lost will become much more real seeing people face to face. The Lord had compassion on the lost as He looked on them (Matt. 9:36); do we expect to get a lasting burden for souls in the confines of our church and homes?

Certainly the merit of training in the trenches is important, but the question is, does door-to-door evangelism really work today? That will depend on how you measure results. If the only measure of a soul-winning program is the number of professions tallied on a given night, then you may get discouraged and abandon the program. Exactly how many eternal souls would have to be saved to justify the effort? Any program that does not encourage regular witnessing can allow more lost sinners to slip into eternity.

Furthermore, we must remember no matter what means we use for evangelism, it is the Holy Spirit who provides the harvest. But we must remember our calling. We are called to obey and to bring glory to God. If those who go out each week are moved to higher planes of faithfulness in prayer, in Bible study, and in devotion to the Lord, then certainly we have done a good work! Many of my brothers and sisters in the Lord have been moved to memorize Scripture, to study the Word to answer difficult questions, and to pray for lost sheep they have witnessed to.

In addition, there is confidence that comes with testing. I have found that I am much quicker to spot opportunities to share the gospel in my workplace and neighborhood and even find it much more natural to do so now that I have experience behind me. Often I have been amazed at how the Spirit of the Living God helps my infirmities and gives me the right verse, principle, or illustration to share when I have been standing face to face with a stranger. What an encouragement that the Lord can use “even” me!

Although we are not pragmatists, there are other benefits as well. I realize that there are souls with whom I will come into contact through doorto- door evangelism that I might never otherwise reach. They don’t work with me, live near me, and have no interest in visiting my church. Often I think of my own lost family members; the door I knock on could be your father, mother, aunt, uncle, or unsaved co-worker. On many occasions I have encountered people who told me that someone else has been sharing the gospel with them. I realized that another believer is praying for that soul, and I could be the one who by the grace of God reaps the harvest!

I continue to learn and be encouraged by my soul-winning partners. An honest critique after a call can help hone my approach and presentation. After all, the gospel is an offense to unbelievers, but we don’t want to be offensive because of how we presented that gospel. As iron sharpens iron, a faithful soul-winning partner can encourage me to be more effective. We are driven to pray for each other, and the fellowship enjoyed while doing the Lord’s work is priceless.

I cannot claim that vast multitudes have been saved through our organized soul-winning program, but what if God does pour out a revival? Historically, in revivals God has used long-buried truth to bring lost souls to repentance. Will we ever know the full impact of the seeds we plant this side of heaven? Will God not bless the church that is faithful in carrying the good news to the lost around them?

(Originally published in FrontLine • September/October, 2001. Click here to subscribe to the magazine.)

At the time of original publication, Darryl D. Fournier was a production manager in a manufacturing company residing in Windsor, Connecticut.

One generation shall praise Thy works to another, and shall declare Thy mighty acts. I will speak of the glorious honour of Thy majesty, and of Thy wondrous works” (Ps. 145:4, 5). Thankfully, former generations who experienced God’s mighty acts have spoken of those wondrous works that we might be reminded of the glorious honor of [God’s] majesty. Revival accounts glorify God and stir us to seek God’s face to do it again. Let’s focus on three pages of 20th-century revival history.

We’ll begin with the 1921 East Anglia revival in northeast England. Hugh Ferguson pastored the London Road Baptist Church in the fishing village of Lowestoft. The following is an excerpt of a thrilling move of God:

The outstanding feature in the life of the Baptist Church prior to the revival was the weekly prayer meeting. This was held in the schoolroom on Monday evenings with an attendance of up to ninety people seeking God for a great manifestation of His power, especially among the growing number of young people who were attending the services and Bible classes. The people prayed in this way for two years. One member, who had prayed most fervently, died just before the revival began. Prayer reached a crescendo early in 1921.

God then led Hugh Ferguson to invite Douglas Brown for a “mission” (meeting). Anticipation and crowds grew the first few nights. Regarding the third night, we read the following testimony:

We had the church packed in the evening. When our brother had delivered his message, he told the people he was going into the vestry and would be glad to see any who wanted help or desired to surrender themselves to Jesus Christ. I shall never forget that night as long as I live. Our brother passed through the deacons’ vestry — up a little stairway and into the pastor’s vestry — and he had not been there many minutes when first one came, and then another, and then another. I showed them the way into my little vestry, and then I came down the stairs into the chapel. The people were singing that grand hymn

I hear Thy welcome voice,
That calls me, Lord, to Thee:
For cleansing in the precious blood
That flowed on Calvary.

As I entered the church again and stood looking at the people, brother Edwards paused for a moment and asked if there were any others coming into the inquiry-room. We had been praying for “showers” that night and He gave us a “cloud-burst.” They came from all parts of the building and filled the deacons’ vestry. It was just like waiting outside some theatre; there was one queue down this aisle and another down that. I went to Douglas Brown and said, “What are we to do? You cannot deal with these people one by one!” So we just opened the schoolroom and in they came — fifty or sixty people to start with. Some of the Christians had the good sense to come with the anxious and help them. I got them together in the schoolroom and began to speak to them in a company. I had been speaking for only a few minutes, the door opened and another batch came in, and all was confusion for a few minutes. Then I tried to speak to them again; and again the door opened and another batch came in. It was a wonderful sight. We got those who had definitely surrendered to Christ to keep on one side; and those who had difficulties we put into classrooms with a good Christian worker to help them and deal with them. Presently there was quietness, and that night between sixty and seventy of my dear young people, those we had been praying to God for — young men and women, from the ages of fifteen to twenty — some sixty or seventy of them that night “passed from death to life” (Stanley C. Griffin, A Forgotten Revival [England: Day One Publications, n.d.], pp. 14, 22).

Within three months, a thousand souls were converted! The revival continued well into 1922, affecting northeast England and Scotland, with literally hundreds more converted.

One of my favorite accounts of revival is the Lewis Awakening of December 1949 to 1953 on the Isle of Lewis, off the coast of Scotland. The preparation of the intercessors, a few ladies and men, is most remarkable. The declarer of truth used of God was Duncan Campbell. As the revival continued, Campbell left briefly to Northern Ireland for a conference. The following is one of many glorious accounts of God’s wondrous works, taken from Duncan Campbell’s biography:

“But Duncan, you can’t possibly go! You’re booked to speak at the closing meeting. The people will be disappointed.” It was Easter Monday, 1952. Duncan had just given an address … when he was suddenly arrested by a conviction that he should leave at once and go to Berneray, a small island off the coast of Harris with a population of about 400 people. Sitting in the pulpit he tried to fight off the insistent urge but the urgency only increased. Eventually turning to the chairman he said: “I must leave the Convention and go to Harris immediately.” Objections were valid enough … but Duncan was unrelenting: “I’m sorry, I must obey the promptings of the Spirit and go at once.” He left the pulpit to pack his case and the following morning flew from Belfast to Scotland. On Thursday morning he reached Harris and took the ferry to Berneray. He had never been there before and knew no one on the island. The first person he met was a sixteen-year-old boy. “Could you direct me to the manse, please?” “The manse is vacant,” the lad replied. “We have no minister just now. The men (the elders) take the services,” and pointing to a house on the hill, added, “One lives up there.” Duncan glanced from the hill to his suitcase, then back to the boy. “Could you please go and tell him that Mr. Campbell has arrived on the island. If he asks what Mr. Campbell, tell him it’s the minister who was in Lewis.” Ten minutes later the boy came back to say that the elder was expecting him, accommodation had been arranged and a service already intimated for nine o’clock that night! God had gone before. Three days earlier when Duncan was in the pulpit at Bangor, this man was praying in the barn. He had been there most of the day. God had given him a promise: “I will be as the dew unto Israel,” which he laid hold of in faith, assured that revival was going to sweep the island. More than that, he was confident that God would send Duncan Campbell. His wife could hear him in the barn: “Lord, I don’t know where he is, but You know, and with You all things are possible. You send him to the island.” So convinced was he that God would bring him in three days time that he made the necessary arrangements for a mission [meeting]. The first few services were uninspiring. Duncan felt tired and spiritually out of breath, but the elder adamantly affirmed that revival was at hand. One evening as they were preparing to leave the church the old man suddenly took his hat off, pointing excitedly in the direction of the congregation which had just left the service: “Mr. Campbell, see what’s happening! He has come! He has come!” The Spirit of God had fallen upon the people as they moved down towards the main road and in a few minutes they were so gripped with the subduing presence of God that no one could move any further. Amid sighs and groans from sin-burdened souls prayer ascended to God on the hillside. The entire island was shaken into a new awareness of God as many lives were saved and transformed during the following days. In this movement … the results were … deep and abiding (Andrew A. Woolsey, Channel of Revival: A Biography of Duncan Campbell [reprint, Edinburgh: The Faith Mission, 1982), p. 139-141).

Revival is of God, but God has chosen to work through human agents who come into union with His promises by faith. The following account beautifully illustrates this truth from the life of James A. Stewart, used of God in Eastern Europe just prior to World War II:

One day in a northern city of Eastern Europe … I was concerned because, for no apparent reason, God had suddenly sent revival. In other cities and countries it usually comes after several weeks or even months of throne ministry. But here on the fifth day, the heavens were rent asunder, and we were deluged with heavensent blessing. One thousand believers packed the church building each morning for Bible study. Thousands heard the Gospel in the evening in a larger auditorium. So great was the hunger for the Word among the unsaved that there was no room for the believers in the evening service. I asked them to go to their own churches and pray and not take up the seats which should be occupied with unsaved. The spiritual distress among the unsaved was great, as the Sword of the Spirit stabbed their hearts night after night. It was midnight and after before I could leave the building. I was greatly disturbed in my mind and could not sleep, being at a loss to explain the “open windows” (Mal. 3:10). I had arrived unheralded and unknown, only by the invitation of the Holy Spirit. The meetings had commenced on Friday night with some seven people at a prayer meeting! One evening the Lord very kindly allowed me to discover the secret of the blessing. Being afraid that I would not have sufficient power of the Spirit to proclaim the Evangel to the thousands who had gathered, I made my way to the basement of the auditorium in order to have a few minutes more of prayer. I began to pray in the darkness, but it was not long before I felt an overwhelming sense of the majesty of God. I knew right away there was someone else in the large basement, praying. I quietly put on the light, and there I saw at the extreme end of the basement some twelve sisters, flat on their faces before God! They were totally unaware of my presence. They were “inside the veil,” touching the Throne, by the power of the Spirit, while upstairs God was working mightily among the unsaved. OH, FOR GOD TO RAISE UP A MIGHTY BAND WHO WILL DARE TO BELIEVE GOD FOR REVIVAL (James A. Stewart, Opened Windows [Asheville, N.C.: Revival Literature, 1958], pp. 104-105).

In brief, the accounts given here reveal the ministry of intercession from lives of faith, the preaching of the Word, and the mighty spiritual manifestation of the presence of God, leading the saints to a restoration of spiritual life and the unsaved to a reception of eternal life. Oh how we need true intercession today!

May God use these few pages of revival history to inspire us to seek God’s face to once again reveal His mighty acts so that we might have fresh testimonies of God’s wondrous works to tell to the next generation.

John R.Van Gelderen is a full-time evangelist and president of Revival Focus Ministries.

(Originally published in FrontLine • September / October 2001. Click here to subscribe to the magazine.)