For an outline of a book idea, with the title Evangelical Mysticism, the table of contents (tentative) would be a profile of chapters on certain evangelical mystics and their own particular brand of mysticism. I put the qualifier of “mysticism” after each name, because these are not merely profiles or biographies of these men’s lives; they will be studies of their mystical theology: on subjects such as meditation, contemplation, visions, dreams, the voice of God, the presence of God, ecstasy, spiritual discernment, healing, prophecy, deliverance, etc.

EVANGELICAL MYSTICISM:
DEFINED AND TAUGHT BY VARIOUS PROTESTANT SAINTS

1. Isaac Ambrose’s Mysticism (Tom Schwanda’s Soul Recreation)
2. John Wesley’s Mysticism (Robert Tuttle’s Mysticism in the Wesleyan Tradition)
3. A. B. Simpson’s Mysticism (Clyde McLean Glass, “Mysticism and contemplation in the life and teaching of Albert Benjamin Simpson”)
4. William J. Seymour’s Mysticism (Vinson Synan’s William J. Seymour)
5. Smith Wigglesworth’s Mysticism (Stanley Frodsham’s Smith Wigglesworth)
6. A. W. Tozer’s Mysticism (E. Lynn Harris’ The Mystic Spirituality of A. W. Tozer)
7. John Wimber’s Mysticism (Carol Wimber’s The Way It Was)

My Mysticism: Preserving the Gold, Rejecting the Dross
Bibliography

—
1/11/14 UPDATE: After finishing chapter 6 of Robert Tuttle’s Mysticism in the Wesleyan Tradition (1989), I have a clear idea of Wesley’s “ascetical-mystical theology,” which were highly regarded in his old age, as exemplary works for cultivating Christian perfection and holy living. This was Wesley’s “mystical gold,” by the 1780s:–the last decade of his life.

1. The Life of Monsieur De Renty
2. The Life of Gregory Lopez
3. Francois Fenelon’s Letters (or Let Go; or The Complete Fenelon)
4. The Life of Madame Guyon (or Jeanne Guyon: An Autobiography)
5. Thomas à Kempis’ The Imitation of Christ (Ignatius Press, 2005; Hardcover)
6. Brother Lawrence’s The Practice of the Presence of God

In light of this discovery:–John Wesley was surprisingly not very interested in the prophetic. He was an evangelist at heart, and nearly came towards such a restrictive view of miraculous gifts, that he was almost a cessationist. Of course, he was always “open but cautious,” and that small gleam of faith in mystical experience was evidenced in his Journal many times (see Daniel Jennings’ The Supernatural Occurrences of John Wesley).

Originally from here.

August 29, 2012

Justin Taylor recently revived Mark Dever’s 2007 series of articles titled “Where’d All These New Calvinists Come From?” This was a ten-part series that looked to the rise of New Calvinism and sought to discover the sources of a theological resurgence. Dever said,

Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth.  –1 Corinthians 13:6

In this article, I am going to draw from four different sources. Because there is no subject in the Christian life more important than love, I feel a strong sense of responsibility to get the doctrine right; and to not water it down, or modernize it, by popular definitions. The four sources I will turn to, are what are called in Wesleyan theology, the “Wesleyan Quadrilateral” of Scripture, Tradition, Reason, and Experience. Although Scripture trumps all the rest, my hermeneutic, or method of Biblical interpretation, will be guided and informed by the other three.

In the Tradition category, I will draw mainly from John Wesley, some of his creation-centered expressions of love from William Law’s A Serious Call to a Devout and Holy Life, chs. 20-21, Reformed theologian J. I. Packer, Martin Luther’s “A Sermon on Christian Love,” Hugh Binning’s A Treatise of Christian Love (who was a Reformed Arminian Puritan), and John Brown of Edinburgh’s Keeping Christ’s Commandments: A True Manifestation of Love to Him (a nineteenth century Reformed Arminian Presbyterian preacher):–these last two men are interesting, because they both held the view of unlimited atonement, over and against the Calvinist tradition, believing that it is possible to love all men, because God loves all men, and sent His Son into the world to die for all men, not only the “elect.”

In the Reason category, I will appeal to the sound Biblical arguments, or the reasons that these theologians and preachers had given, for why Christians should love their neighbors, and with a particular view in mind.

In the Experience category, I will appeal to my own personal experience with divine love operating in my heart since my conversion, and my gradual or not-so-gradual, growth into a more loving Christian.

Scripture, Tradition, Reason, and Experience may guide the article, but the structure of the article is going to be based on what I feel is the most logical progression of subjects related to love for man operating in the Christian life. This article will not touch so much on God’s love for man, Christ’s love for man, or the world’s love for man or things; nor will we be taking up the subject so much of a Christian’s love for God (although we will have to necessarily touch on that briefly); rather, we will be taking up the subject of a Christian’s love for all mankind or for his neighbor.

Christian Love Fulfills the Moral Law

Jesus, Paul, and John are the three greatest teachers of Christian love (agape) in the New Testament; and it is worthy of noting in the beginning, that all three of them agreed on the view that Christian love fulfills all the moral requirements of God’s law in the Scriptures.

Jesus said, “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’ This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments” (Matt. 22:37-40). From the outset, we should not interpret Jesus as meaning that a simplistic “loving the Lord” and “loving your neighbor” replaces all the Law and the Prophets, as if we can basically ignore the Ten Commandments (Exod. 20:1-17), the sayings of the prophets, and all the moral directions in Leviticus and Deuteronomy. No, Jesus is saying that these two Mosaic commandments, to love the Lord, which the Jews called the shema (it was a very important devotional Scripture to them, Deut. 6:5); and to love your neighbor (Lev. 19:18), were the most important commandments in all the laws that were given by God to Moses, because it is in these two commandments that all the Ten Commandments, and all the other moral commandments in the Bible are obeyed exactly in the way they were intended. Jesus was not an antinomian (a teacher against the Law of Moses), although the Pharisees accused him of this, Jesus was careful to clarify Himself, “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law and the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them,” etc (Matt. 5:17). Jesus had to say this, because all His teaching on grace, mercy, love, and forgiveness were even during His days on earth, coming to be misinterpreted by His disciples and the Pharisees, as a “cheap grace” or morally lax antinomian teaching. While it is clear that Jesus taught flexibility about the ceremonial law, such as how to observe the Sabbath (Matt. 12:1-14), there is not one occasion in the Gospels where He taught laxity with the moral law. And even in Jesus’ teaching on Sabbath observance, He was not breaking any Old Testament regulations, but only the teachings of the rabbis, the “tradition of the elders” (Matt. 15:2), or their interpretations of how to keep the Sabbath, and various rituals. (These teachings were later compiled into the Mishnah.) Jesus closely tied love with keeping God’s law; and that when transgression of the law or sin, increased, when iniquity is said to abound, then “the love of most will grow cold” (Matt. 24:12).

Paul wrote, “Let no debt remain outstanding, except the continuing debt to love one another, for he who loves his fellowman has fulfilled the law. The commandments, ‘Do not commit adultery,’ ‘Do not murder,’ ‘Do not steal,’ ‘Do not covet,’ and whatever other commandment there may be, are summed up in this one rule: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ Love does no harm to its neighbor. Therefore love is the fulfillment of the law” (Rom. 13:8-10). Many carnal, morally lax, and antinomian teachers over the centuries have taken the writings of the Apostle Paul, namely Galatians, and have twisted them to their own destruction (2 Pet. 3:16). Taking Paul’s teachings out of their original context, whenever they see in his letters something that says Christians are saved by grace and not by works (Eph. 2:8-9) or when Paul says, “We’re not under law, but under grace” (Rom. 6:14). These people don’t realize that Christian freedom does not mean license to sin (Rom. 6:1-2); it means liberation from the ceremonial law of Judaism as the way of salvation. The Christian way of salvation is much easier: the cross of Christ (Isa. 53), brings immediate forgiveness of sins, by living a life of repentant faith (Rom. 3-8). Paul agrees with Christ: “Love is the fulfillment of the law” (Rom. 13:10; cp. Matt. 22:37-40). But love is not the abolition of the law, as carnal and unstable people teach. Jesus said, “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law” (Matt. 5:17). Abolish means to demolish or overthrow; fulfill means to fill up, perfect, or complete. Jesus was not anti-commandments; He was pro-commandments (and even more so; His teaching was so exacting and heart-searching, that anyone who follows them will obey God’s commandments just as they were originally intended.) And Paul, the once zealous Pharisee, when he came to understand the spiritual nature of Jesus’ teaching, was able to write, “Through Christ Jesus the law of the Spirit of life set me free from the law of sin and death…in order that the righteous requirements of the law might be fully met in us, who do not live according to the sinful nature but according to the Spirit” (Rom. 8:2, 4). Through faith in the cross, we receive the Holy Spirit, which gives us supernatural love, and supernatural obedience to God. Romans 5:5: “God has poured out His love into our hearts by the Holy Spirit, whom He has given us.” Galatians 5:22: “The fruit of the Spirit is love.”

John also carries on the theme of how love fulfills the moral law in the Christian life; and he goes so far to say, that if someone does not have this Spirit of commandment-keeping love in their life, then they are not saved. But first, John quotes Jesus as saying, “He who has My commandments and keeps them, it is he who loves Me…If anyone loves Me, he will keep My Word; and My Father will love him, and We will come to him and make Our home with him. He who does not love Me does not keep My Words” (John 14:21, 23-24, NKJV). This from the “disciple whom Jesus loved,” the “apostle of love,” as a close brother and friend of Christ, also later wrote, fending off a group of Gnostic antinomians, “We know that we have come to know Him (Jesus) if we obey His commands. The man who says, ‘I know Him,’ but does not do what He commands is a liar, and the truth is not in him. But if anyone obeys His Word, God’s love is truly made complete in him” (1 John 2:3-5). “Knowing God” is another Biblical expression for being saved; those who do not “know God” are spoken of as going to Hell: Christ “will punish those who do not know God and do not obey the Gospel of our Lord Jesus. They will be punished with everlasting destruction and shut out from the presence of the Lord and from the majesty of His power” (2 Thess. 1:8-9). “This is love for God: to obey His commands. And His commands are not burdensome” (1 John 5:3). And John agrees with Paul, that the indwelling presence of the Holy Spirit in a Christian, produces divine love for other people: “If we love one another, God lives in us and His love is made complete in us…God is love. Whoever lives in love lives in God, and God in him” (1 John 4:12, 16).

Commandment-Keeping and Christian Contemplation:
Ways of Experiencing More of God’s Love

Dwelling in God and in His love is a continual spiritual discipline, no doubt cultivated by keeping God’s commandments; and also by silent prayer. Harald Lindström, the Wesley scholar, states that John Wesley believed contemplative prayer was a means by which to be filled with more of the love of the Holy Spirit: “If the eye of faith is steadily fixed on God’s love in Christ man is filled with ever greater love to God and man. Love to God can also be regarded as a direct result of the contemplation of God;” and quoting Wesley: “Now, if God should ever open the eyes of your understanding, must not the love of God be the immediate consequence? Do you imagine you can see God without loving Him?”[1] I have had personal experience of this! I remember in 2006 I was on a mountain retreat with a Christian friend, and I stole away into the woods for solitude and prayer. I was fixing my eyes on Jesus, the author and perfecter of my faith (Heb. 12:2), and I experienced a kind of inner vision, and I had a sudden flash of understanding come into my heart and mind:–that God loves all of the creatures that He has made, animate and inanimate—stars, dolphins, trees, animals, plants, men, women, and children…because He made them, He designed them, and He loves them. And this Spirit and revelation was in my understanding for some time; because the vision was amazing. I came out of prayer, and went to the Bible study session, only discover that the theme the retreat leaders had chosen was love! And do I try to keep God’s commandments? Ever since I got saved in 2000—Jesus has been my Lord first, and Savior second. Almost legalistically, I try to keep the law of Christ, reforming my old ways, and striving for purity of thought every single moment. There is no other way to see the Lord (Heb. 12:14). Repentance from sin is a continual walk of faith, hope, and love; and I have no other view of how to be a Christian, but by exacting obedience to God in every Biblical way; yet sometimes, my focus gets off balance, I’ll get distracted, and I will focus on this or that thing in the Word, and forget that the main point of everything is to love God and neighbor (Matt. 22:37-40).

Christian Love Offers Charity to All

It’s one thing to say you feel pure and holy, divine love for all people; it’s quite another to act on it and offer proof that it is there. “Charity” in the KJV is a fitting translation of the Greek word agape in 1 Corinthians 13:1-13. If you were to look at all the uses of the word agape in the New Testament with Strong’s concordance, you would find it being used in the sense of an act of charity. Of course, it is a fruit of the Spirit (Gal. 5:22); charity is a Spirit of Generosity; but it finds its expression in works of charity, charitable activities, or “mercy ministries,” such as feeding the hungry, showing hospitality to strangers, clothing the poor, visiting the sick, or those in prison (Matt. 25:35-36). Jesus illustrated agape in His parable of the Good Samaritan (Luke 10:25-37). This agape, this charitable love, this love of neighbor is profiled in positive and negative descriptions by Paul: “Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres” (1 Cor. 13:4-7). Lindström summarizes Wesley’s understanding of the Spirit of Love: “It is a ‘universal, disinterested love,’ ‘a sincere, tender, disinterested love for all mankind,’ ‘universal benevolence; tender good-will to all men.’ It is described as a ‘tender good-will to all the souls that God has made’ or as ‘benevolence to our fellow creatures’…a ‘real, disinterested benevolence to all mankind,’…he says that neighborly love is a ‘pure, disinterested good-will to every child of man.’”[2]

But universal Christian charity is not the only meaning of agape in the New Testament. Although the word agape literally means “affection or benevolence; charity; charitable” (charitable love):–the word is also used in reference to church members loving one another as brothers and sisters. Those in pastoral ministry must see such a need for this! Backbiting, talebearing, and all kinds of divisive and malicious behavior occur among church members. But Christ and the apostles will not allow it! Jesus; and especially the apostles repeatedly tell the churches to “agape one another” (John 13:34-35; 15:12, 17; Gal. 5:13; Eph. 4:2; Col. 1:4; 1 Thess. 3:12; 1 John 4:11-12):–which implies it must require the Holy Spirit to show charitable love to such hard to love, oftentimes mean, unloving, unlovable people, who are, as Hugh Binning said, “worthy of hatred.”[3] In a way, it’s a renewal of Jesus’ teaching to love your enemies (Matt. 5:44), but taking it further, to love them as brothers and sisters, self-sacrificially, and as Wesley said, “disinterested”: expecting no love in return. Showing them the same kind of love Christ did, when He willingly offered up His life on the cross, for the sins of the whole world: friends, enemies, and everyone.

Sweet fellowship of brotherly and sisterly love (more comparable to phileo) can be experienced between saints, but this is rare. This, it seems, when given its sanctifying parameters, is a mixture of agape and phileo (a holy brotherly or sisterly love between Christian friends—a love with godly interest and godly reciprocation; a love that gives as well as receives; and is more of a blessing than a cross). This is a heightened, and dare I say, rare form of godly love, rarely spoken of in the New Testament. But if the Christian will pursue self-sacrificing charity (agape) to those that do not love him, the Holy Spirit will come alongside, and help; enabling him to see and know that love which Christ had in Him when He offered Himself up on the cross. “God demonstrates His own love for us in this: While we were yet sinners, Christ died for us” (Rom. 5:8). What an act of charity! To die on a cross in order to satisfy God’s wrath at us, so that all who repentantly believe, will be saved from eternal damnation! This is the sort of love (agape) that Christians are to demonstrate to all men, if they intend on imitating Christ; and being Christian disciples. Sure, it doesn’t literally mean dying for someone (although in some cases it might come to that):–but overall there is the concept of sacrificing yourself to show Christ’s charity to other people; as did the Good Samaritan (Luke 10:25-37).

The Golden Rule, however, puts a simple parameter on the exercise of charity, lest those charitable Christians be taken advantage of, and allow themselves to be made into doormats, for abusive people to walk all over: “In everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this is the sum of the Law and the Prophets”; and “love your neighbor as yourself” (Matt. 7:12; 22:39). Lindström said of Wesley, “In the exposition of the commandment to love one’s neighbour as oneself, self-love is regarded as an obvious pre-requisite”; and quoting Wesley, “We would that all men should love and esteem us, and behave towards us according to justice, mercy, and truth…let us walk by the same rule: let us do unto all as we would they should do to us. Let us love and honour all men.”[4] This allows for some measure of self-protection from unjust, unmerciful, liars who would seek to take opportunity of a charitable Christian, and really cause him harm. If we are to love others as we love ourselves; then that means we should obviously, really in fact love ourselves (only not in an overly selfish, egotistic, or self-centered way).

Christian Love Is Not Carnal Tolerance

In my personal experience of being a member or participant in various Christian ministry groups, I have repeatedly come across the concept that Christian love is nothing more than a we-can-all-get-along kind of tolerance. Forgetting all the Biblical descriptions of love, such as fulfilling the moral law, or giving prominence to charitable activities, or loving all of God’s creatures, the word “love,” it seems to me has been very misused by modern-day Christians, and still is. I suspect that this counterfeit teaching on love is influenced both by pop psychology and hippie ethos, filtering down to us through the Baby Boomers and the Jesus Movement of the 60s and 70s. Thomas Harris’ I’m OK—You’re OK (1967) idea seems to have prevailed upon the liberal mainline as well as the evangelical churches. “Judge not lest ye be judged” (Matt. 7:1), along with the understanding, that it is itself a sin to speak out or preach against sin, to expose the fruitless deeds of darkness (Eph. 5:11). We are told by prominent Christian leaders that Jesus means for us to tolerate sin, not expose it; that being non-judgmental is the highest, most “loving” road to take; that love is basically defined, or understood to mean, over-simplistically, nothing more than accepting everyone just the way they are; showing off a kind, friendly demeanor (usually fake, with an empty naturally-based sentiment in the heart), regardless of harmful vices and sins that could be obviously crowding their lives, and bringing destruction and despair to them, their friends, family, and relatives. We are told to leave them in the darkness, in so many words; and “just as I am” to receive God’s forgiveness, I am also to remain just as I am, knowing I’ll always be forgiven automatically of whatever I do. Christ Jesus is no longer in the ethical transformation business. Jesus is a hippie; “Jesus is My Homeboy” as one recent sexually charged girls t-shirt came out years ago. There is no fear of God before their eyes. This is a carnal, antinomian form of Jesus, in fact “another Jesus,” of which many have no comparison to the real Jesus described in the Bible, because Biblical illiteracy is at an all-time high. People simply seem to assume that Jesus was a loving, non-judgmental, tolerant hippie, who offers easy forgiveness to everyone, and does not expect the smallest measure of repentance from personal sin.

I have had a concern about this ever since I got saved and tried to live by the Bible in 2000. And for the longest time, I’ve had nothing but the Bible and my personal experience to bolster my conviction against this false, sin-accommodating idea of love. As I learned theology, I eventually found some corroborating evidence among godly theologians, that this is a type of heresy called antinomianism (anti-law-ism), and although “love” is in this case the concept used to excuse obedience to God’s commandments, there are other forms of it as well. What peace it brought to my heart to know for sure that Christ is not a minster of sin; but that He has come to deliver us from its power over our lives! (Romans 8). Wesley agreed: love is not “a love of esteem or of complacence” (man-pleasing); “it does not mean latitudinarianism” (religious tolerance);[5] love is not “an empty and vain sentimentality” (sentimental, natural favoritism without any spiritual depth).[6] Love is not political correctness, or man-pleasing, just to get people to “like” you in a social manner; as churches are often seen as any other social club in the community. Paul wrote, “Am I now trying to win the approval of men, or of God? Or am I trying to please men? If I were still trying to please men, I would not be a servant of Christ” (Gal. 1:10). Man-pleasing is not the love of God; it is a self-centered, cowardly “seeker-friendly” approach to “not offending” people, so that you don’t “hurt their feelings”—and here’s the catch—even if your godly, mild, temperate rebuke could save their souls. It’s a humanist understanding of love, not Biblical, and not Christian. And often, this sort of “tolerant love” leads to the idolatry of interfaith activities with people of non-Christian religions. That is not the power of God unto salvation! They say, “Love the sinner; hate the sin,” but in practice they love the sin too, because they never take a stand against it, even in a proper, meek spirit. As for the Pharisees: “they loved praise from men more than praise from God” (John 12:43). J. I. Packer defines this kind of “love”-centered antinomianism:

Situationist antinomianism says that a motive and intention of love is all that God now requires of Christians, and the commands of the Ten Commandments and other ethical parts of Scripture, for all that they are ascribed to God directly, are mere rules of thumb for loving, rules that love may at any time disregard. But Romans 13:8-10, to which this view appeals, teaches that without love as a motive these specific commands cannot be fulfilled. Once more an unacceptably weak view of Scripture surfaces.[7]

Dr. Joel Beeke, a well-known Reformed theologian and Puritan scholar, active in today’s New Calvinist movement, says:

“Popular media often present love as feelings of attraction and pleasure, but such feelings rise and fall like mercury in a thermometer. We need love that is less like a thermometer and more like a thermostat—controlling our reactions rather than being controlled by them.

“Others speak of love as non-judgmental, unconditional acceptance, derived from the psychological concept of unconditional positive regard.[8] But this overly-simplistic approach is confusing and leaves us powerless in the face of malice and evil. How do you unconditionally and non-judgmentally accept a terrorist or a serial killer?

“Love does not behave indecently (1 Cor. 13:5)…This statement disqualifies any antinomian view of love; love extends to God’s law (Ps. 119:97) and strives to fulfill it (Rom. 13:8-10).

“Love does not rejoice in injustice, but it rejoices in the truth (1 Cor. 13:6). Love is jubilant whenever it encounters righteousness and faithfulness. Yet love grieves over news that someone has fallen into sin and paid a heavy price for it; thus, love does not regard such news as a tasty morsel for gossip. Such love does good, even to enemies.

“Verse 6 (1 Cor. 13:6) rebukes the idol of relativistic tolerance that often passes for love in our culture; sincere love includes hatred for evil (Rom. 12:9). The greatest display of God’s love was also the greatest demonstration of His righteousness, as His Son satisfied God’s justice by bearing the penalty for our sins (Rom. 3:25-26). So 1 Corinthians 13:6 corrects the popular Christian notion that love has nothing to do with feelings. Love has strong feelings against sin and for righteousness.”[9]

Christian Love Is Not Universalism

When a tolerant “loving” antinomian Christian thinks about Hell, it does not usually produce good theological results. In this mentality, there is an aversion to the attributes of God’s holiness, justice, and omnipotence. God is no longer seen as a Judge, but only as a tender Father over all mankind: including “good” people in non-Christian religions. This results either in an allegorizing of the New Testament passages of Hell, fire, torment of the wicked, and/or a reevaluation of the doctrine of eternal punishment:–the Biblical teaching that the wicked will suffer in the fire of Hell for all eternity (Matt. 25:46; Rev. 14:11; 20:10, 15). As this doctrine naturally makes a tender-hearted Christian to cringe, we cannot ignore it, because it is Biblical revelation: it is the Word of God. Traditional Reformed Protestant theology has taught that God’s love was manifested in the cross of Christ, so that sins could be freely forgiven, and sinners reconciled to a holy God. The universalists, which are heretical Christians filtered throughout many denominations today, maintain that there is either no Hell, or that Hell is like Purgatory, where in the end God will talk all the damned out of their sinful addictions, and by His infinite compassion, and mercy, let them all into Heaven.[10] This idea was expressed in Rob Bell’s Love Wins (2012). This begs the question, however, “Will Satan and his demons be saved by God’s infinite love too?” But the universalist squirms at such thoughts. And usually retracts by attacking the traditional Biblical view of God as a Judge and as an avenger of the righteous, who are the only true children of the Father.

A Summary of Christian Love (Agape)

I have not surveyed the entire Bible on love. Maybe I will do that one day in the future. But in this article, I have attempted to provide a Biblical, Wesleyan, and somewhat Puritan view of the Christian’s love that he should have towards his neighbor, as it is taught in the New Testament. I have focused on the New Testament Greek word agape as the normative concept for love in the Christian life. We have found that agape is morally righteous, it keeps God’s commandments; and is a supernaturally given fruit of the Holy Spirit, received by repentant faith in Christ’s atoning work on the cross. Further, New Testament love is a charity-love or charitable love that reaches out with arms of divine generosity to all of mankind, to all of the creatures that God has made. Although this love is universal or all-encompassing in its outreach, with regard to death and the afterlife, it does not embrace universalism (or the idea that God’s love will save damned people out of Hell).

Listen to Martin Luther. To be without agape in our lives is a horrible curse:

“We have seen what abominations ensue where love is lacking; such individuals are proud, envious, puffed up, impatient, unstable, false, venomous, suspicious, malicious, disdainful, bitter, disinclined to service, distrustful, selfish, ambitious, and haughty.”[11]

I pray that the love of God would be shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Ghost!

I pray that we would dwell in God; and dwell in love!

I pray that we would always seek to be law-abiding and pure!

I pray that we would be the body of Christ; and His hands of charity in this world!

PRE-CONVERSION. I was born in Arlington Heights, IL into a nominally Catholic family. We went to services, called Mass, but there was no real practice of piety in daily life. My parents were good American citizens; it was a decent way of living; a middle class home. Both of my parents were of a conservative political, mainly Republican persuasion. They were decent, clean-cut, athletic, financially responsible citizens, who had successfully achieved the American Dream, my dad having a career as a mechanical engineer. We moved to Lexington, KY where my dad’s Presbyterian brother convinced him to leave Catholicism and where my parents agreed to attend United Methodist services; then we moved to West Bend, WI and to Raleigh, NC because of needed job transfers. Incidentally, my view of God was deistic; I believed in God, but not that He intervened personally into peoples lives.

CONVERSION. When I was 14 years old, the summer of 1999, I was buddies with a friend who was prone to get into trouble for fun. The idea came up that we should break into my Middle School at night time, because I lived so close to it. We thought it would be really fun to have the whole school to ourselves at night, when nobody was there. We really had nothing more than some “harmless” fun in mind, playing a sort of spy game. When we broke in, it was fun. It was such a rush. I had unlatched the window of one of my classes on the first floor. So, by the time of our little adventure, we simply opened up the window, and crawled inside. We ran all over the school halls in our sock feet, goofing around. It was then that I saw a little red light flashing over one of the doorways; and a feeling of fear came over me. I realized we had triggered some kind of motion sensor. Perhaps someone knew we were in the school; perhaps it was like an ADT system for burglars. (And that’s exactly what it was.) Not really fully sure what the light was, the fear remained in me, as I urged my friend and I to get out of the building; my friend was slow to get out, and was not at all worried, but I was. After slowly making our way down to the window from which we entered, and crawling out:–we had a snack of granola bars. As we were eating in the darkness, a group of men came around the corner with flashlights. At first I thought it was a bunch of young guys like us, but rough, and up to no good. I thought they were gangsters or something. “Hey! You! Stop!” And they ran after us. Were they gangsters looking for trouble? We split up and hid under some classroom trailers nearby. They were a group of police; the silent alarm in the school had alerted them. Eventually, they found us and put us in the back of a police car. We waited until our dads came to pick us up. It was so embarrassing and humiliating.

Shortly after this, a clerk of the Wake County Courthouse in Raleigh, NC gave me the option of going before a judge, and possibly going to Juvenile Hall; or doing 24 hours of community service. I chose community service as a janitor’s assistant at Lake Lynn Community Center.

After this, a different friend invited me to “Hellfighter”:–its full name was Hellfighter Youth Church, a youth ministry of Living Word Family Church in Wake Forest, NC. I didn’t really know that though. I was under the impression it was a secular “youth club” or something for grunge culture, skaters, and “freaks” (which it was). But it was still a youth ministry. Still under the weight of my guilt from my foolish and dangerous action with the school, the word “Hell” was pressing on my mind, and my heart was soft to hear what I believe was the Gospel of Jesus Christ for the first time. Up until then, I went to Catholic and United Methodist church services on Sundays with my family, but I had never heard the Gospel as a message of repentant faith in the cross that saves from Hell. Nobody had ever told me that; and it was perfect timing that I heard that message when I did. It was a short and to-the-point altar call at the end of the youth sermon. I raised my head at the pastor’s request to confess my commitment to live my life for Jesus as Lord, so my sins could be forgiven, and I would not have to go to Hell. It was at that moment of faith, that my life was changed; and I was born again to a new life of faith and growth in holiness (obedience to God’s Word; living by the Bible).
 
FILLING OF THE SPIRIT. Both Hellfighter Youth Church and Lamb’s Christian Center (which is where one of my new friends’ dad was pastor; and where I would choose to go to church freely) were nondenominational Charismatic churches. I remember one time when my new friend Luke and I were at a prayer meeting in Living Word Family Church (next to Hellfighter), and I saw Luke praying with fervency and emotion, his eyes closed, his hands raised in a kind of ecstasy, swaying back and forth, having some kind of deep experience of God. I didn’t understand it, but I knew I wanted it. I saw that he was making a strange sound with his mouth as he was praying. I had never heard anything like it. Eventually I came to understand this as the spiritual gift of tongues. Following his example, I just made this my regular way of worshiping. As I continued to seek God’s face, I discovered He had given me the gift as well. Closing my eyes, focusing on the Lord, raising my hands, swaying, dancing, as I felt led, and praising and worshiping God with all my heart to English worship songs, and with the sounds. Another phenomenon happened as I worshiped and prayed with the sounds; although it didn’t always happen, but gradually more and more, when I worshiped this way, focusing on the Lord and speaking in tongues:–I would feel a tangible manifest presence of the Holy Spirit surround me and comfort me with holy reverence and adoration of our great God and King. This feeling of the Spirit in worship I understand is called the baptism in the Holy Spirit. And I believe I can be re-baptized in the Spirit with fresh fillings every time I choose to worship God in this manner. (However, I believe godly behavior, visions, dreams, prophecy, and healing are also signs of Spirit-baptism; though, I prefer speaking in tongues.)
 
SUBSEQUENT GROWTH UP TO THE PRESENT. From 1999 to 2005, I grew in Bible knowledge by reading the NIV from Genesis to Revelation; and then studying the NASB Ryrie Study Bible. These formative years, I practiced very legalistically, not knowing much of Reformation theology, or the doctrines of salvation, and the dynamics of Law and Gospel. My execution of the moral law in daily life was very conscientious, but my fear of Hell, unbalanced by a weak view of grace:–drove me to evangelize my family, friends, etc. as zealously and as strictly as possible. I had experienced a genuine conversion, but my mind was intellectually legalistic in its daily Christian application. When I sinned, I repented and asked for forgiveness by faith in the cross of Jesus, and I kept on trying to live holy; but I did not see why other people in my family who went to church did not try to live holy as well; and I tried very hard to show them that in God’s Book, the message is “without holiness no one will see the Lord” (Hebrews 12:14). God has given us rules in the Bible, moral principles, that He commands all Christians to obey; and I was very forceful about many things during these years. Partly out of fighting to preserve my own purity of mind from the ungodly pressures of others; partly out of a strong love for family and friends, to not want them to die without salvation. I strongly felt this way; but others did not have the strong consciousness of Hell that I did. I kept on hearing, “Judge not lest ye be judged” (Matthew 7:1) over and over; I was told that being non-judgmental was the spiritual, Christ-like thing to do. That Jesus never judged anybody, and so I should not either; the only thing I should do is show tolerance and love everyone the way they are, and not try to change them. If they are in sin, then God will judge them one day. Most of the time this pitch just sounded like a sinner’s excuse; and had no power over my conscience to steer me away from my divine mandate to warn the world of God’s commands to obey His Law! (Misguided, and graceless zeal that it was, I was an evangelist at heart.) Although I had the Holy Spirit in me, empowering me to fulfill many of His commandments in daily life, on an intellectual level, I was probably a Pelagian (a do-it-yourselfer Christian); and just couldn’t see why so many other “Christians” were not doing what the Bible plainly says to do. (Looking back, I think many of those people never had a genuine experience of the Holy Spirit during those times, which would have rendered them incapable of hearing or obeying the Word of God. But I didn’t know about things such as “regeneration” and “sanctification”; I just saw two categories: the obedient and the disobedient.) Eventually, I became exhausted by a kind of Romans 7 flesh war. I prayed, “Lord! I can’t be a Christian anymore! It’s just too hard; there are too many rules in the Bible to obey! I want to be a Christian; I don’t want to go to Hell; oh! Please help me God!” And I heard a still, small voice immediately reply, “That’s why I died on the cross.” And I began to understand that the death of Christ was necessary, because it is impossible for man to keep the Law perfectly.

2006 was a very prophetic year for me; I was in the middle of my Philosophy and Religion program at UNC Pembroke; it’s when my views of salvation gradually started to develop; and when I started to receive divine dreams, and experience more signs and wonders. I kept a journal called “Supernatural Experiences” and had it in 4 hardback journal volumes, which are now gone. I learned about sermonindex.net and listened to many audio sermons by Leonard Ravenhill, David Wilkerson, and A. W. Tozer. I practiced contemplative prayer a lot; and was excited to experience direct revelations from God through dreams, visions, voices, impressions, and signs. The whole revelatory dimension of the Spirit was opening up to me; and it was so amazing; miracles of physical rain would happen on occasion in answer to faith-filled prayer, as God was building up my inner man! I wanted to experience the amazing things of God that the prophets in the Bible did; I didn’t think there was anything arrogant in this, I just thought, as a Charismatic, this is what God has to offer the body of Christ! I read James Goll and Julia Loren’s Shifting Shadows of Supernatural Experiences (2007), which my dad bought for me one Christmas; and it really confirmed in my heart that all these things I was experiencing were for real! I also learned that the devil is in the details, when you open yourself up to these realms, and you have to practice Biblical discernment in order to sort out God’s voice from the devil’s; and especially be on guard against New Age deceptions and teachings.
 
In the Summer of 2007, when I was working as a camp counselor at Hickory Cove Bible Camp in Taylorsville, NC, I read several Christian books that helped me to grow tremendously. The following is one of my journal entries, from August 2, 2007:

After reading a series of books during this summer, I noticed that they all magnified the topic of divine love. These books were Leonard Ravenhill’s Why Revival Tarries (1959), John Wesley’s A Plain Account of Christian Perfection (1777), Hannah Whitall Smith’s The Christian’s Secret of a Happy Life (1875), Richard Foster’s Streams of Living Water (2001), and finally Os Guinness’ The Call (2003), and when I reached page 14 of this last book—I came to conclude that divine love is the highest good. After coming to this conclusion through a revelatory impression, I chose to sit still and meditate on it. As I sat still with my earmuffs meditating on the common teaching of divine love in this succession of books, I heard a quiet mental voice say, “There is nothing more important than love.”

God had made it clear to me that obedience to the moral commandments of God is to love God and man: that “Love does no harm to a neighbor; therefore love is the fulfillment of the Law” (Romans 13:10). That “this is the love of God, that we keep His commandments: and His commandments are not grievous” (1 John 5:3).

2008 is when I got married; and times were tough for several reasons. The recession had just hit; and although I had graduated, it was hard for many graduates to find a decent job. Both of our families did not want us to get married, because of our economic situation, and for other personal family issues going on. Rebekah and I had come to accept “house church” teachings from one of her professors, who got her converted, but had also taught her to distrust the organized church. He was influenced by the Jesus Movement; and since the 1980s was involved in the House Church Movement, heavily influenced by Watchman Nee, Gene Edwards, and Frank Viola’s teachings. There was some Biblical purity in the teachings; the main idea was to focus on developing Christian friendships, and not get lost in the “bigness” of the institutional church. Yet there were many other anti-clerical ideas he taught us. Over time, God showed us that “godliness with contentment is great gain” (1 Timothy 6:6); and that whether it is in the institutional church or in a house church, it doesn’t matter. I also struggled with my call to the ministry; and denominational guidance. I had seen a “prosperity gospel” being pushed in certain Pentecostal churches that I did not want any part of; and I just did not know where to go. This went on for 5 years; so I found work as a security guard until 2012. God was really testing my heart and my motives for ministry at this time; and I believe it was a necessary, prophetically-led purification process.

On July 14, 2011, I had a dream that revolutionized my spiritual life. Being a firm believer that God speaks through dreams (Acts 2:17), I dreamed that my wife and I were at a Methodist summer camp I worked at for several summers. I had my NIV Study Bible and Steve Harper’s The Way to Heaven: The Gospel According to John Wesley (2003). As I came out of the car in the dream (at night), I saw the camp director and someone else looking out the office window at me. (In real life, this camp director was eventually fired for misusing the camp’s money to start his own private sports camp.) I felt the dream meant the body of Christ is desperately in need of hearing the Gospel that Wesley and the Puritan reformers preached during the Great Awakening. Eventually I studied a series of Wesleyan books on soteriology, and developed a good understanding of repentance, faith, justification, regeneration, judgment, eternal punishment:–and generally the “order of salvation.” I also went street preaching in Raleigh, NC whenever I could. As I embarked on my evangelistic quest, I got connected with another street preacher whom I will call George. He leaned more to the Calvinist (George Whitefield) view; and I more to the Arminian (John Wesley) view; but we balanced each other out by mid-2012; and decided that predestination is a doctrine that can be set aside for the common cause of evangelism. God made it clear to us that repentant faith in the cross saves from Hell and empowers holy living; and on this Gospel we could agree. Influenced by “New Calvinists” like John MacArthur, John Piper, and Mark Driscoll; and his passion for apologetics, eventually George balanced me out, and enabled me to develop a respect for aspects of Reformed and Puritan theology. But I am still very Arminian; and he’s not a “card-carrying Calvinist”; and we give each other brotherly gibes; and still joke about it on occasion.

George also balanced me out about ecclesiology. He had tried the house church thing too; and concluded it was not the will of God, because it lacked consistent fellowship, and led too often to isolation with family on Sunday mornings. He started attending an Elim Fellowship church in Garner, NC regularly; and started exhorting me to find a local body too. Our Bible studies in his house were no replacement for being plugged in to a local church. This was his stance; and since I had felt dissatisfied with the results of the house church approach, felt called to ministry, and that in this new light, and with these new evangelistic views, and that God had prophetically led me to meet George, I felt that he was speaking from the Holy Spirit. I felt that I should read the newly released book: Mack Tomlinson’s In Light of Eternity: The Life of Leonard Ravenhill (2010), because I was trying to perfect myself as a street preacher, and was just looking for spiritual guidance. This book answered a lot of my questions. One of which was, “What denominations did Ravenhill respect enough to associate with?” One that stood out to me was the Christian & Missionary Alliance, because of his friendship with A. W. Tozer. We were living in Durham, NC at the time; and I felt settled for us to attend a C&MA church; this restored my faith in the efficacy of the organized church and the organized ministry, when it is done the right way. However, we couldn’t stay there for long, because my security job was making my schedule erratic; eventually we felt the Lord give us permission to quit that job and move to Dunn, NC closer to my wife’s family. After finding a job and getting settled in Dunn, we received an e-mail from the old pastor that said he missed us, but knew a Pastor _____ at a nearby C&MA church, very close to where we ended up moving! And God has been knitting me together with Pastor _____ recently, teaching me various things about shepherding. I feel I have a “new hope” to pursue a godly ministry calling at last!

Article from here.

The term “easy-believism” is a usually derogatory label, used to characterize the faulty understanding of the nature of saving faith adhered to by much of contemporary Evangelicalism, most notably (and extremely) by such Dispensational authors as Charles Ryrie and Zane Hodges. The term was popularized in an ongoing debate between Hodges, to whose theology the label “easy-believism” was affixed, and John MacArthur, to whom the term “lordship salvation” came to be applied.

Essentially, the teaching of “easy-believism” (which proponents prefer to call “free grace,” or some similar term), asserts that the faith which saves is mere intellectual assent to the truths of the gospel, accompanied by an appeal to Christ for salvation (at the end of his life, Hodges embraced the even more extreme position that salvation requires only an appeal to Christ, even by one who does not believe the most basic truths of the gospel, such as his death, burial, and resurrection [which he clearly taught, for example, in “The Hydra’s Other Head: Theological Legalism,” printed in the Grace In Focus Newsletter]). According to proponents of the “free grace” movement (i.e. “easy-believism”), it is not required of the one appealing for salvation that he be willing to submit to the Lordship of Christ. In fact, at least according to some proponents, the person appealing for salvation may at the same time be willfully refusing to obey the commands of Christ; but because he has intellectual faith, he will still be saved, in spite of his ongoing rebellion.

“Easy-believism” is usually connected with Dispensationalism, which serves as a foundational theological support for it. According to classic Dispensationalism, the gospel which Jesus proclaimed on earth was a gospel for the ethnic Jews alone, promising them earthly rewards in the Jewish millennium for their works of submitting to and following Christ; and this “gospel of the Kingdom” is categorically different from the Gospel of salvation by grace alone through faith alone which Paul later proclaimed. In this way, all of Jesus’ teachings that, if anyone is not willing to leave father and mother and take up his cross and follow him, he cannot be his disciple, do not apply to the gospel of grace, but only to the gospel of the Kingdom. But contrary to this flawed method of interpretation, there is only one gospel in the New Testament, which Jesus proclaimed on earth, and which his apostles likewise proclaimed throughout the whole world after his ascension. And this gospel declares that all who repent (that is turn from sin and rebellion to Christ the Lord) and call upon the Name of Christ in true faith will be saved. Even in Paul’s writings, moreover, it is clear that anyone who perverts the gospel of grace alone, and uses it to continue presumptuously in sin, is bringing just damnation upon himself (Romans 3:8).

In much of Evangelicalism, the flippant sort of “once saved, always saved” mentality, which denies that true grace will always prove itself in faith and works, is closely related to an “easy-believism” mindset, which suggests that intellectual belief alone, which does not go on to pursue a life of true holiness, is the kind of faith that saves (see questions 66-68 above). When the gospel is understood biblically, it becomes clear that both faith and obedience assume the prior existence of spiritual life. As J.I. Packer wisely commented, “sinners cannot obey the gospel, any more than the law, without renewal of heart.” Understanding this as foundational biblical truth, we know that salvation not only saves us from the guilt of sin but from its power.

——————–

Modern Antinomians Exposed! – Mainly INDEPENDENT FUNDAMENTALISTS

I have found the following men, movements, and churches to maintain a consistent stance against lordship salvation; and instead of that preach a false grace gospel of “faith alone” and antinomianism.

1. Zane Hodges
2. Charles Ryrie
3. Grace Evangelical Society (faithalone.org)
4. Ralph “Yankee” Arnold – Calvary Community Church – Baptist
5. John Ricci – Grace Christian Fellowship – Fundamentalist
6. Ryan Price – Fort Lauderdale Baptist Church – Independent Fundamentalist Baptist!
7. Steven Anderson – Faithful Word Baptist Church – Independent Fundamentalist Baptist!
8. KJV Only – Independent Fundamentalist Baptists – street preachers and “soulwinners”

On the Hebrides Revival, Leonard Ravenhill said: “The children had to memorize the Shorter Catechism [The Westminster Shorter Catechism]…Did you know Isaac Watts had a catechism for children under seven years of age!? [Dr. Watts’s Plain and Easy Catechisms]…And you couldn’t move up in a class in Sunday School until you memorized it. Then you had another catechism for children from seven to fourteen years of age. Then you had another catechism for people fourteen and up! What does the Good Book say? “Thy Word have I hid in mine heart, that I might not sin against Thee” (Ps. 119:11). And so, I said, “Brother, you’ve given me THE SECRET OF REVIVAL.” The seed had been in the hearts of those children for ten and fifteen years. Then the Holy Ghost comes and sends somebody along [evangelist; revivalist]; and that seed begins to germinate!” (“Powerful Staggering Interview with Leonard Ravenhill,” Revival Forum 89, 37:50-38:47).

——————————————————————————————-

The following is an extract from Mary Peckham’s “The Lewis Revival” (1950).

The Seed-Planting Stage

In school we would start out each day with the Lord’s prayer, and then went on to Bible stories and the Presbyterian Shorter Catechism. On most days, we would come home from school with a verse from the Psalms to learn.

So you can see that our people were well-versed in the Scriptures. We knew the Ten Commandments by heart. We also knew Isaiah 53 and 55, the Beatitudes, I Corinthians 13, and many others. Even though an unconverted people, we were not strangers to the Word of God. When the Spirit of God fell on our island, there was fuel there to burn.

There were also those among the people of God there who were dissatisfied, and who were craving and longing for a moving of God on the island. The people of God were hungry.

I was on the mainland of Scotland when revival broke out on the Island of Lewis. At that time, I wasn’t particularly interested in church. I only went once to Sunday School in Scotland, and the elder prayed too long for my liking, so I didn’t go back again. When I learned of the revival on my island, my immediate reaction was, ‘I am not going back to Lewis until this revival is over. They were religious enough already, and I don’t want to be involved.’ I had my own life and my own ambition–singing at Gaelic concerts. My world was full of pleasure, and it didn’t include God or the church. I knew that I was going to Hell, but there were so many people going to Hell with me that it didn’t concern me too much. If God wanted to come at some time or another into my life and save me, that was His business. But as far as I was concerned I had no desire for the things of God.

A phone call changed all that. I was informed that my parents were ill and that I must return immediately to Lewis. So I went out of concern for them.

Revival Meeting Stage (Spiritual Plants Starting to Sprout)

They were soon better and began going to church. It seemed that the whole conversation of the village revolved around what was happening in these revival meetings. I hated it. I didn’t want anything to do with it. I felt inwardly disturbed when talk turned to the meetings, and to the conversions of people who had been drunkards, and who were now joining in the prayer meetings. I resisted and I resented because I was afraid.

So there I was, afraid that God would come to my life, that He would speak to me. I didn’t want to have anything to do with the things of God. I hoped that maybe at the end of life I might be saved, but not now. I had too much going on.

My parents found me out, and one evening they told me they weren’t going to the meeting unless I would go too. So I went – in a rage.

The church was crowded, and the atmosphere was indescribable. One sensed as one came in the drive toward the church that a silence was falling upon people. And as they went into the church, they moved slowly to their pews, and they sat. Before the service had begun, the tears were flowing. For a person who is unconverted to be in such a situation was not a very comfortable thing!

But as I listened to the singing of the Psalms–that was all they sang–the people sang the Word of God as if their hearts would burst. Such singing sent shivers down my spine. I felt I was being, as it were, hounded into a corner. When the preacher got up-the late Duncan Campbell-I knew beyond a shadow of a doubt that this man was in earnest. He didn’t preach a soft gospel. Hell was made real to us, and sin was made a reality. Our condition out of Christ was such a thought to make us fear. And we did fear.
…
I looked at one girl in particular, and I saw something that I desired more than anything in my life. I felt, ‘You’ve got something that I haven’t got and I can never be at rest until I find it’. I saw the beauty of the Lord in the face of that young girl. Three o’clock that morning, I was on my knees by the old stove in the kitchen praying, ‘Oh God, (and I meant it) be merciful to me, the sinner’, as if there were no other sinner in the world. the sinner. I didn’t feel that anything happened. I went up to my bed and wept myself to sleep. I was lost, lost, lost. I didn’t know how to get saved, and I didn’t feel that God was under any obligation to save me. I had left Him out of my life all my days. How could I now ask God to give me a ticket to heaven, to save my soul?

For three months I struggled. I saw some wonderful sights. I heard some wonderful prayers. I met some wonderful people, the people of God. Still I had no assurance of salvation. I believed that anybody and everybody could get saved, but there was some kind of something in me whereby I couldn’t get the assurance of salvation. But one night, at the end of my tether, on the 24th of August, 1950, I was sitting as usual in the prayer meeting, and the men were praying one after the other, and the minister got up to close in prayer. I prayed in my heart, ‘O God, I love Your people, I can’t explain it, but I love Your people, and I want to be in their company. And, Lord, I want to stay in their company for the rest of my life, and then send me to Hell, for that’s what I deserve.’

Salvation Stage

The conviction of sin in a season of revival is too terrible for words. Here I was, brought up in a society that was moral and religious, and yet I felt such a sinner in the sight of God that I couldn’t see how He could save me. But that night, after the minister closed in a prayer, he quoted a verse, Isaiah 53:5. Suddenly it seemed as if I were transported from that prayer meeting to that place called Calvary, and I was there alone:

But He was wounded for our transgressions, He was bruised for our iniquities; the chastisement for our peace was upon Him; and with His stripes we are healed.

And I felt healed. Nobody needed to tell me. The Spirit of God through His Word witnessed with my spirit that, miracle of miracles, I was a child of God!

It’s amazing how we can be married ten, twenty, thirty, forty, or even fifty plus years and still find there is much we don’t know about each other. Some experts say it’s because we’ve lost the art of conversation. Others say it’s because we don’t allow it to continue after we marry —we allow everyday living to separate and distance us instead.

Whatever the case, it’s none-the-less important to keep the lines of communication and conversation open so you grow together rather than apart. Don’t allow yourself to get into the situation like Pat Williams describes:

“The trouble in our marriage wasn’t infidelity, it was fidelity with fatigue, a marriage gone soft and sour due to lack of attention. It was the lack of communication that nearly killed us.”

Be intentional. Look, find, figure out, MAKE the time to converse and connect with each other in meaningful ways.

“Dialog is to love what blood is to the body.”

So, to help you in this mission for your marriage, we have provided some “Conversation Starters” from various resources to help you get started.

Keep in mind that these questions are not meant to cause division between you but rather to help you to better understand and know each other. If the conversation starts to go in a negative direction, stop and start again. If you need to revisit a particular question at another time to bridge your differences, then set a time to do so. But aim to do it in a way that is respectful of each other’s character and feelings.

During this time, however, keep the conversation going in a less confrontational direction.

Below you will find a sampling of several questions from the book titled, Creative Conversation Starters for Couples, written by Robert and Pamela Crosby, published by Honor Books. Unfortunately, this resource is no longer in print. (But if you can find a copy of the book somewhere in the future, you may find it helpful).

During your time together ask each other as many of the questions below as you decide to do at one sitting (and ask additional questions during other times you set aside):

• If you could store up only one hour’s worth of memory in your mind, which hour of our marriage would you want to remember?

• If you could have witnessed any biblical event, which one would you choose?

• When do you feel most loved?

• Which strengths in your life bring you the greatest satisfaction?

• What is the best way for me to encourage you?

• What time of day is best for us to talk?

• If we could just drop what we’re doing and go do something fun, what would it be?

• What is one of the most adventurous things you’ve ever done?

• In your opinion, what makes a great parent?

• What are five essential values we want our children to embrace above all others?

• What can we do as a couple to change the world in which we live?

• What goals would you like us to accomplish in our marriage in the next year? … five years? … ten years?

Below are several questions from the book 201 Great Questions, written by Jerry Jones, published by NavPress. (To obtain more questions you’ll need to obtain the book —which we recommend! And/or you may want to obtain the book 201 Great Questions for Married Couples. To begin your time together, ask the following questions:

• What is your earliest memory?

• If you could live in any other time period, past or future, what period would you choose? Why?

• What movie or television program have you seen in the last year that you wish all your friends could see?

• If someone gave you enough money to start a business of your own, what kind of business would you start?

• If you didn’t have to worry about making a living, what would you most like to do for the rest of your life?

• When making decisions, do you put more trust in facts or in feelings? Are you pleased with most of your decisions?

• What do you consider to be your greatest strengths? Your greatest weaknesses?

• What is usually the first thing that comes to your mind when you think about God?

• What would you most like people to remember you for after you die?

• What are the five things you are most thankful for in your life right now? What are some of the things you do to show this thankfulness?

• Whose marriage do you most consider to be a model marriage? What is it about their marriage that you most admire?

• Has there been a time in the past year or two when God seemed especially real or close to you? If so, explain.

If it’s possible, you may try (because it’s no longer being published) to find the book, Now We’re Talking, by Robert and Pamela Crosby, published by Focus on the Family. Below are a few sample questions you can ask each other (which will hopefully inspire you to obtain the book, if you can find it, to continue building your intimacy):

• What’s the best book you’ve read recently? Tell me about it. What did you like about it?

• Which holiday do you enjoy the most? Why that one?

• If you could possess any extraordinary talent in one of the arts, what would you choose?

• If you could bring any former leader from the past back to run our country today, who would it be?

• What makes a married relationship distinctively Christian? How is a Christian couple different from a non-Christian one?

• In what ways do you think the marriages of our parents affect the marriage you and I share today? Be honest with me.

• Are there some times when a disagreement needs to be postponed? if so, when? How can we discern those kinds of times?

• When have you felt the most loved by me?

• What fears do you wrestle with the most? How do you manage them?

• What practical steps can we take as a couple to “affair-proof” our marriage?

• With so many marriages falling apart around us today, what steps can you and I take to ensure that we stay close as a couple, emotionally and spiritually?

For additional questions you can use as conversation starters as a married couple, please click onto the web site links provided below:

• DATE NIGHT CONVERSATION STARTERS

• 30 WAYS TO START A CONVERSATION WITH YOUR SPOUSE

• CONVERSATION FUN FOR COUPLES

•  MORE CONVERSATION FUN FOR COUPLES

And then below are questions that are recommended to ask each other every year:

•  10 QUESTIONS Every Woman Should Ask Her Husband Every Year

•  10 QUESTIONS Every Husband Should Ask His Wife Annually

This resource was put together by Cindy Wright of Marriage Missions.

This article was originally called “Emotional Adultery: Unfaithfulness of the Heart” by Dennis Rainey. It sounds a clear warning to married men and women to not let themselves become emotionally attached to members of the opposite sex, friends, or otherwise, outside of the marriage relationship with one’s spouse. Emotional adultery is a very insidious, hard to recognize sin; so, hopefully this article can help godly spouses to set some boundary lines about how to relate or converse with members of the opposite sex.

——-

Taken from a course syllabus.

POSSESSION & EXORCISM: England, France & Italy

See D.P. Walker, Unclean Spirits:
                           Possession and Exorcism in France & England

I. EXORCISM: CATHOLIC RITUAL
            source is New Testament exorcisms by Christ & Apostles
            exorcism as a “sacramental,” not a sacrament
            sacramental: ritual ordained by authority of church not by Christ
            efficacy depends on moral state of the priest, prayers of audience

Assaults by devil on energumen (= human victim)
possession: internal assault by demon vs
obsession: external assault (see Salem trials)

Ritual of exorcism: exorcist speaks directly to devil
“I conjure you…in the name of God and by the authority
vested in me by the Church.”

Reformation rejects exorcism as semi-magical, superstitious, “conjuring”

II. REFORMATION ENGLAND:
1534 Anglican Church separates from Rome
1559 Elizabethan Settlement: religious moderation
Puritanism grows under Elizabeth
possession cases continue, despite Anglican Church’s
rejection of Catholic ritual of exorcism

   PURITAN EXORCISM:
New Testament model — “by prayer & fasting”
1586-1597: career of John Darrell, Puritan exorcist
       1598: tried as impostor by Anglican High Commission
1604: Anglican Church prohibits all forms of exorcism
reply to Puritans: “age of miracles is past”

   CATHOLIC CAMPAIGN TO CONVERT ENGLAND
(approx 500 converts)
1586 Jesuits launch exorcist campaign in England

III. FRANCE

    1562-1589: French Wars of Religion (religious/civil war)
Catholics vs Huguenots (French Calvinists)
 1582 St. Bartholomew’s Day Massacre in Paris
Catholic massacre of Huguenots
    1598 Edict of Nantes: toleration of Huguenots by Henry IV
Henry IV former head of Huguenot armym victor in wars
newly converted Catholic “Paris is worth a Mass.”

    ANTI-HUGUENOT PUBLIC EXORCISMS

       1) 1566: NICOLE OBRY: the “miracle of Laon”
Beelzebub expelled after two month exorcism
Catholic Eucharist doctrine (real presence)

       2) 1599: MARTHE BROSSIER, PARIS
           reaction against 1598 Edict of Nantes (toleration of Huguenots)
  PIERRE BERULLE, Treatise on Energumens
(= possessed persons)

MERGER OF POSSESSION & WITCHCRAFT CASES

       1611 Ursuline nuns: Aix en Provence
Sister Madeleine and Father Gaufridi
       1620 University of Paris rejects testimony of demons
speaking through possessed person
       1634 LOUDON:
during exorcism, possessed nuns accuse their confessor
Father Urban Grandier, who is then  burned as witch

IV. ITALY: Will return to this during later lecture on Italy
EXORCISM AS POPULAR REMEDY FOR MALEFICIUM
(see O’Neil article on remedies in xerox packet, Wk 7)

GIROLAMO MENGHI, Franciscan exorcist and theorist

1598: Flagellum Daemonum (Whip of Demons)
describes exorcism as “ecclesiastical medicine”
useful against demons and maleficium

Inquisition trials for superstitious exorcism:
popular recourse to exorcists against maleficium

Implications for Keith Thomas’ argument on remedies:
did prevalence of “ecclesiastical remedies” in
16th-17th C, Italy help prevent Italian witch panic?